Notebookcheck

华为Mate 20 X智能手机评测

Mike Wobker, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Andrea Grüblinger (translated by Zewei Shen), 02/08/2019
Android ARM Phablet Smartphone Touchscreen

比大更大。 经过多次坎坷,华为宣布将在奥地利和德国发布Mate 20 X。这款7.2英寸的巨型手机现已抵达我们的办公室。请继续阅读,了解这台价值4999元的“巨兽”是否物有所值。

Huawei Mate 20 X (Mate 20 Series)
Processor
HiSilicon Kirin 980
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-G76 MP10
Memory
6144 MB 
Display
7.2 inch 18.7:9, 2244 x 1080 pixel 346 PPI, Capacitive, OLED, glossy: yes
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 110 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: 3.5毫米耳机插孔, Card Reader: 最高256 GB的Nano存储卡, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度计,气压计,指南针,色温传感器,重力传感器,陀螺仪,磁力计,接近传感器
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM: B2, B3, B5, B8; 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. 3G/UMTS/TD-SCDMA: B34, B39. WCDMA: B1, B2, B4, B5, B6, B8, B19. LTE/FDD/TDD: B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B8, B9, B12, B17, B18, B19, B20, B26, B34, B38, B39, B40., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.2 x 174.6 x 85.4
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 40 MPix 后摄像头: 4000万像素徕卡三摄: 4000万像素广角, f1.8光圈; 2000万像素超广角镜头,f / 2.2光圈; 800万像素长焦镜头,f / 2.4光圈,激光对焦,相位对焦,对比度对焦,华为AI图像稳定
Secondary Camera: 24 MPix f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: 立体声扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, Keyboard Light: yes, USB充电器,USB Type-C线,手机壳,耳机,SIM工具, EMUI 9.0, 24 Months Warranty, SAR值:Head - 0.42 W / kg,Body-0.95 W / kg, fanless
Weight
232 g, Power Supply: 97 g
Price
4999元 ~ 900 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X

Size Comparison

200 mm 114 mm 8.65 mm 290 g192 mm 115 mm 9.6 mm 295 g176 mm 87.4 mm 8 mm 221 g174.6 mm 85.4 mm 8.2 mm 232 g162 mm 76.4 mm 8.8 mm 201 g158 mm 76.7 mm 7.9 mm 184 g156.9 mm 72.4 mm 8.6 mm 189 g157.5 mm 77.4 mm 7.7 mm 208 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel 3 XL
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
635 (min: 315, max: 645) MBit/s ∼100% +12%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
624 MBit/s ∼98% +10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼97% +9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼77% -13%
Huawei Mate 20 X
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
566 (min: 514, max: 586) MBit/s ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼76% -14%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
344 (min: 326, max: 350) MBit/s ∼54% -39%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=419)
223 MBit/s ∼35% -61%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
696 (min: 647, max: 714) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +5%
Huawei Mate 20 X
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
633 (min: 564, max: 663) MBit/s ∼91%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
602 MBit/s ∼86% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼70% -23%
Google Pixel 3 XL
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
456 (min: 429, max: 468) MBit/s ∼66% -28%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
265 (min: 253, max: 270) MBit/s ∼38% -58%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=419)
212 MBit/s ∼30% -67%
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Overview
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Overview
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Lake
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Lake
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Loop
GPS test: Huawei Mate 20 X - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
416
cd/m²
424
cd/m²
422
cd/m²
409
cd/m²
421
cd/m²
415
cd/m²
414
cd/m²
422
cd/m²
416
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 424 cd/m² Average: 417.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.78 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 421 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
97.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
Huawei Mate 20 X
OLED, 2244x1080, 7.2
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
IPS, 2160x1080, 6.9
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3
Google Pixel 3 XL
AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3
Apple iPhone Xs Max
OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.4
Screen
-54%
-4%
-60%
1%
-122%
Brightness middle
421
508
21%
576
37%
410
-3%
656
56%
499
19%
Brightness
418
505
21%
582
39%
413
-1%
659
58%
506
21%
Brightness Distribution
96
91
-5%
90
-6%
97
1%
88
-8%
96
0%
Black Level *
0.28
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.1
2.85
-159%
1.3
-18%
3.16
-187%
1.7
-55%
4.62
-320%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.2
6.21
-182%
3.5
-59%
5.5
-150%
2.8
-27%
10.91
-396%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.4
1.7
-21%
1.6
-14%
1.7
-21%
1.7
-21%
2.2
-57%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.226 99%
2.18 101%
2.219 99%
1.998 110%
2.103 105%
CCT
6723 97%
6860 95%
6561 99%
6653 98%
6487 100%
6115 106%
Contrast
1814

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 242.7 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 242.7 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 242.7 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9418 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.1 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40 ms).
Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5759 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4508 Points ∼41% -22%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8938 Points ∼82% +55%
Google Pixel 3 XL
10876 Points ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
9059 Points ∼83% +57%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (5677 - 9870, n=9)
7355 Points ∼68% +28%
Average of class Smartphone (663 - 21070, n=317)
4565 Points ∼42% -21%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
9852 Points ∼88%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4939 Points ∼44% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
10024 Points ∼89% +2%
Google Pixel 3 XL
8292 Points ∼74% -16%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
11244 Points ∼100% +14%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
8874 Points ∼79% -10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (9547 - 10024, n=9)
9838 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1174 - 11598, n=375)
4601 Points ∼41% -53%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3234 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1335 Points ∼28% -59%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
3378 Points ∼71% +4%
Google Pixel 3 XL
2325 Points ∼49% -28%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4774 Points ∼100% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1698 Points ∼36% -47%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3207 - 3378, n=9)
3303 Points ∼69% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (691 - 4824, n=377)
1374 Points ∼29% -58%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
7772 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
9225 Points ∼100% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
9029 Points ∼98% +16%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5184 Points ∼56% -33%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (7567 - 9326, n=9)
8450 Points ∼92% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (3227 - 11440, n=373)
5046 Points ∼55% -35%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
9867 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6040 Points ∼48% -39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
12535 Points ∼100% +27%
Google Pixel 3 XL
11180 Points ∼89% +13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5960 Points ∼48% -40%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (9728 - 13531, n=9)
11270 Points ∼90% +14%
Average of class Smartphone (4096 - 14439, n=541)
5537 Points ∼44% -44%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2517 Points ∼58%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2333 Points ∼53% -7%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4364 Points ∼100% +73%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3676 Points ∼84% +46%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2723 Points ∼62% +8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2613 Points ∼60% +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2227 - 4439, n=9)
3299 Points ∼76% +31%
Average of class Smartphone (573 - 4535, n=387)
1834 Points ∼42% -27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
4103 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
867 Points ∼15% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4250 Points ∼73% +4%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5789 Points ∼100% +41%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4828 Points ∼83% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3797 Points ∼66% -7%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2747 - 4361, n=9)
3868 Points ∼67% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (76 - 8206, n=387)
1602 Points ∼28% -61%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3599 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1008 Points ∼20% -72%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4275 Points ∼83% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5133 Points ∼100% +43%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4121 Points ∼80% +15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3450 Points ∼67% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2611 - 4317, n=9)
3680 Points ∼72% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (94 - 6312, n=390)
1489 Points ∼29% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2488 Points ∼56%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2372 Points ∼54% -5%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4407 Points ∼100% +77%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3280 Points ∼74% +32%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2961 Points ∼67% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2649 Points ∼60% +6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2421 - 4493, n=9)
3422 Points ∼78% +38%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4703, n=402)
1811 Points ∼41% -27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2536 Points ∼24%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1402 Points ∼14% -45%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5854 Points ∼56% +131%
Google Pixel 3 XL
8380 Points ∼81% +230%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
10374 Points ∼100% +309%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4904 Points ∼47% +93%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2536 - 5893, n=9)
4289 Points ∼41% +69%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=402)
2185 Points ∼21% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2525 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1542 Points ∼23% -39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5456 Points ∼82% +116%
Google Pixel 3 XL
6228 Points ∼93% +147%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
6667 Points ∼100% +164%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4124 Points ∼62% +63%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2525 - 5511, n=9)
4053 Points ∼61% +61%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 8141, n=403)
1860 Points ∼28% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3751 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2355 Points ∼56% -37%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4183 Points ∼100% +12%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3605 Points ∼86% -4%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3027 Points ∼72% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2569 Points ∼61% -32%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3380 - 4216, n=9)
3820 Points ∼91% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (486 - 4320, n=463)
1772 Points ∼42% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3528 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
815 Points ∼16% -77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4206 Points ∼83% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5089 Points ∼100% +44%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3726 Points ∼73% +6%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3673 Points ∼72% +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2082 - 4400, n=9)
3851 Points ∼76% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (65 - 6362, n=465)
1334 Points ∼26% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3575 Points ∼77%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
954 Points ∼20% -73%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4201 Points ∼90% +18%
Google Pixel 3 XL
4662 Points ∼100% +30%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3544 Points ∼76% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3353 Points ∼72% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2276 - 4264, n=9)
3828 Points ∼82% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 5734, n=473)
1273 Points ∼27% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3816 Points ∼92%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1349 Points ∼33% -65%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4150 Points ∼100% +9%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3594 Points ∼87% -6%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2713 Points ∼65% -29%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2515 Points ∼61% -34%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3548 - 4215, n=9)
3887 Points ∼94% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (512 - 4454, n=496)
1680 Points ∼40% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2347 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1335 Points ∼17% -43%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5305 Points ∼68% +126%
Google Pixel 3 XL
7780 Points ∼100% +231%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
7055 Points ∼91% +201%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4826 Points ∼62% +106%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2347 - 5431, n=9)
4073 Points ∼52% +74%
Average of class Smartphone (43 - 10008, n=496)
1803 Points ∼23% -23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2567 Points ∼42%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1477 Points ∼24% -42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4996 Points ∼81% +95%
Google Pixel 3 XL
6180 Points ∼100% +141%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
5205 Points ∼84% +103%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4008 Points ∼65% +56%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2567 - 4996, n=9)
3987 Points ∼65% +55%
Average of class Smartphone (55 - 7820, n=504)
1549 Points ∼25% -40%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
19993 Points ∼54%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
17073 Points ∼46% -15%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
36755 Points ∼100% +84%
Google Pixel 3 XL
15614 Points ∼42% -22%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
27717 Points ∼75% +39%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
18756 Points ∼51% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (19993 - 37164, n=9)
27400 Points ∼75% +37%
Average of class Smartphone (4811 - 45072, n=654)
13712 Points ∼37% -31%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
42579 Points ∼27%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
20836 Points ∼13% -51%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
67730 Points ∼42% +59%
Google Pixel 3 XL
53794 Points ∼34% +26%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
159735 Points ∼100% +275%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
36190 Points ∼23% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (42128 - 67956, n=9)
53493 Points ∼33% +26%
Average of class Smartphone (7567 - 162695, n=654)
20179 Points ∼13% -53%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
34035 Points ∼44%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
19863 Points ∼26% -42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
57047 Points ∼74% +68%
Google Pixel 3 XL
34855 Points ∼45% +2%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
77599 Points ∼100% +128%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
29994 Points ∼39% -12%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (34035 - 57073, n=9)
44122 Points ∼57% +30%
Average of class Smartphone (8316 - 83518, n=655)
16716 Points ∼22% -51%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
119 fps ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
36 fps ∼16% -70%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
120 fps ∼53% +1%
Google Pixel 3 XL
140 fps ∼62% +18%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
226 fps ∼100% +90%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
146 fps ∼65% +23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (68 - 138, n=9)
106 fps ∼47% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 251, n=684)
35.2 fps ∼16% -70%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
58 fps ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
34 fps ∼56% -41%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
61 fps ∼100% +5%
Google Pixel 3 XL
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (55 - 62, n=9)
58.6 fps ∼96% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 120, n=687)
27.1 fps ∼44% -53%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
78 fps ∼73%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
16 fps ∼15% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
73 fps ∼68% -6%
Google Pixel 3 XL
56 fps ∼52% -28%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
107 fps ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
76 fps ∼71% -3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (40 - 91, n=9)
68 fps ∼64% -13%
Average of class Smartphone (2.7 - 132, n=603)
19.4 fps ∼18% -75%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
58 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
15 (min: 16) fps ∼25% -74%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
42 fps ∼71% -28%
Google Pixel 3 XL
37 fps ∼63% -36%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
59 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
47 fps ∼80% -19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (37 - 60, n=9)
54.3 fps ∼92% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (5.4 - 115, n=608)
18 fps ∼31% -69%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
53 fps ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
10 fps ∼14% -81%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29 fps ∼42% -45%
Google Pixel 3 XL
45 fps ∼65% -15%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
69.3 fps ∼100% +31%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
45 fps ∼65% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (25 - 56, n=9)
44 fps ∼63% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (1.6 - 88, n=464)
15.9 fps ∼23% -70%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
50 fps ∼85%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
9.8 fps ∼17% -80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
26 fps ∼44% -48%
Google Pixel 3 XL
25 fps ∼42% -50%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
58.9 fps ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
25 fps ∼42% -50%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (24 - 54, n=9)
42.9 fps ∼73% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (3.4 - 110, n=467)
15.3 fps ∼26% -69%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
20 fps ∼62%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
3.6 fps ∼11% -82%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
19 fps ∼59% -5%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
32.1 fps ∼100% +61%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (19 - 21, n=8)
20.3 fps ∼63% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (0.86 - 59, n=167)
8.89 fps ∼28% -56%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
13 fps ∼80%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2.2 fps ∼13% -83%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
13 fps ∼80% 0%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
16.3 fps ∼100% +25%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (13 - 14, n=8)
13.6 fps ∼83% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (0.26 - 31, n=167)
6.16 fps ∼38% -53%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
29 fps ∼62%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5.6 fps ∼12% -81%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
18 fps ∼38% -38%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
47 fps ∼100% +62%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (18 - 32, n=8)
29.4 fps ∼63% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (1.8 - 59, n=168)
13.5 fps ∼29% -53%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
30 fps ∼82%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5.9 fps ∼16% -80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
33 fps ∼90% +10%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
36.8 fps ∼100% +23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (30 - 36, n=8)
32.8 fps ∼89% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (0.94 - 63, n=168)
14.7 fps ∼40% -51%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
28 fps ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6.3 fps ∼16% -77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
31 fps ∼78% +11%
Google Pixel 3 XL
33 fps ∼83% +18%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
40 fps ∼100% +43%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
28 fps ∼70% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (17 - 33, n=9)
28.4 fps ∼71% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (0.89 - 54, n=393)
10.7 fps ∼27% -62%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
28 fps ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6 fps ∼19% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16 fps ∼52% -43%
Google Pixel 3 XL
18 fps ∼58% -36%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
31 fps ∼100% +11%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
15 fps ∼48% -46%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (15 - 30, n=9)
23.6 fps ∼76% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (1.6 - 58, n=397)
9.69 fps ∼31% -65%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
273409 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
118959 Points ∼39% -56%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
300617 Points ∼99% +10%
Google Pixel 3 XL
285269 Points ∼94% +4%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
302955 Points ∼100% +11%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
236552 Points ∼78% -13%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (268359 - 316199, n=9)
292583 Points ∼97% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (52607 - 398720, n=286)
131662 Points ∼43% -52%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
253082 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
98170 Points ∼39% -61%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
250848 Points ∼99% -1%
Google Pixel 3 XL
215632 Points ∼85% -15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
214090 Points ∼85% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (245662 - 254229, n=9)
250407 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 283270, n=486)
86413 Points ∼34% -66%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
1239 Points ∼72%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1037 Points ∼60% -16%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
1424 Points ∼82% +15%
Google Pixel 3 XL
1176 Points ∼68% -5%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
1731 Points ∼100% +40%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1132 Points ∼65% -9%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (1239 - 1430, n=9)
1329 Points ∼77% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=616)
747 Points ∼43% -40%
Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5070 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1608 Points ∼10% -68%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6273 Points ∼40% +24%
Google Pixel 3 XL
7989 Points ∼51% +58%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
15659 Points ∼100% +209%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6506 Points ∼42% +28%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (4963 - 7758, n=9)
6356 Points ∼41% +25%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=616)
1965 Points ∼13% -61%
Memory (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5700 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2492 Points ∼40% -56%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6283 Points ∼100% +10%
Google Pixel 3 XL
2825 Points ∼45% -50%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
1815 Points ∼29% -68%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2068 Points ∼33% -64%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (5210 - 6283, n=9)
5631 Points ∼90% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 7500, n=616)
1473 Points ∼23% -74%
System (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
7923 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4320 Points ∼37% -45%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8604 Points ∼74% +9%
Google Pixel 3 XL
4417 Points ∼38% -44%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
11675 Points ∼100% +47%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6137 Points ∼53% -23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (7597 - 8604, n=9)
8112 Points ∼69% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=616)
2887 Points ∼25% -64%
Overall (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 X
4104 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2058 Points ∼42% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4687 Points ∼96% +14%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3291 Points ∼67% -20%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4895 Points ∼100% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3110 Points ∼64% -24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (4014 - 4746, n=9)
4419 Points ∼90% +8%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=620)
1437 Points ∼29% -65%

Legend

 
Huawei Mate 20 X HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Google Pixel 3 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Apple iPhone Xs Max Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
273.01 Points ∼100% +193%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
109.18 Points ∼40% +17%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (93.2 - 109, n=8)
101 Points ∼37% +8%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
93.241 Points ∼34%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
75.8 Points ∼28% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
63.012 Points ∼23% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
44.568 Points ∼16% -52%
Average of class Smartphone (12 - 273, n=516)
39.1 Points ∼14% -58%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
43114 Points ∼100% +103%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
23285 Points ∼54% +10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (20618 - 23285, n=9)
21662 Points ∼50% +2%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
21208 Points ∼49%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
16228 Points ∼38% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
14663 Points ∼34% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
8273 Points ∼19% -61%
Average of class Smartphone (1994 - 43280, n=677)
6359 Points ∼15% -70%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=697)
10720 ms * ∼100% -400%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
4578.1 ms * ∼43% -113%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
2785 ms * ∼26% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
2710 ms * ∼25% -26%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (1948 - 3098, n=9)
2189 ms * ∼20% -2%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
2145.4 ms * ∼20%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
1951.9 ms * ∼18% +9%
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
603.1 ms * ∼6% +72%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
155 Points ∼100% +80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
124 Points ∼80% +44%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (86 - 124, n=9)
103 Points ∼66% +20%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
100 Points ∼65% +16%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
86 Points ∼55%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
72 Points ∼46% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 161, n=147)
63 Points ∼41% -27%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
347 Points ∼100% +50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
334 Points ∼96% +44%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
287 Points ∼83% +24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (228 - 334, n=5)
277 Points ∼80% +19%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
232 Points ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
202 Points ∼58% -13%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
148 Points ∼43% -36%
Average of class Smartphone (66 - 362, n=332)
119 Points ∼34% -49%

* ... smaller is better

Huawei Mate 20 XXiaomi Mi Max 3Huawei Mate 20 ProGoogle Pixel 3 XLSamsung Galaxy Note 9Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-33%
-4%
-17%
-20%
-16%
-56%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
72 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
60.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-16%
72.38 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
1%
66.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
61.5 (27.8 - 72.4, n=17)
-15%
48.5 (9.5 - 87.1, n=409)
-33%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.14 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
83.79 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
83.18 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
0%
77 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
77 (31.3 - 88.2, n=17)
-7%
66.6 (8.1 - 96.5, n=409)
-20%
Random Write 4KB
237.63
87.08
-63%
157.84
-34%
132.7
-44%
21
-91%
86.8 (18.2 - 250, n=39)
-63%
20.6 (0.14 - 250, n=725)
-91%
Random Read 4KB
144.44
72.87
-50%
157.42
9%
120.8
-16%
134
-7%
139 (98.9 - 158, n=39)
-4%
45.4 (1.59 - 175, n=725)
-69%
Sequential Write 256KB
182.7
185.4
1%
196.39
7%
228.6
25%
196
7%
205 (182 - 503, n=39)
12%
93 (2.99 - 503, n=725)
-49%
Sequential Read 256KB
911.88
274.63
-70%
853.28
-6%
632.6
-31%
805
-12%
751 (427 - 912, n=39)
-18%
262 (12.1 - 1468, n=725)
-71%

Arena of Valor

010203040506070Tooltip
; min: Ø60.2 (60-61)
; high HD: Ø60.2 (58-61)

Asphalt 9: Legends

010203040Tooltip
; High Quality: Ø29.9 (28-31)
; Standard / low: Ø29.9 (29-31)
Max. Load
 33.4 °C33.6 °C30.3 °C 
 32.4 °C32.4 °C30 °C 
 30.8 °C31.2 °C29.9 °C 
Maximum: 33.6 °C
Average: 31.6 °C
27.7 °C28.5 °C34.7 °C
27.5 °C28.9 °C32.4 °C
27.9 °C28.9 °C30.3 °C
Maximum: 34.7 °C
Average: 29.6 °C
Power Supply (max.)  32 °C | Room Temperature 22 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.6 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.7 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.4 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.137.32529.230.4312622.34023.221.55031.931.36327.421.7802921.610024.224.812518.4341601851.820017.450.725014.456.131515.859.740016.360.850015.461.163014.763.580016.265.5100014.773125013.871.616001474.3200014.473.9250014.176.4315014.674.1400014.672.7500014.470.5630014.469.2800014.863.71000015.259.21250014.758.61600014.849.7SPL26.984.1N0.955.6median 14.7median 63.5Delta1.49.632.341.525.63125.733.227.429.23738.323.323.621.424.121.725.119.933.217.439.9174716.450.114.551.314.256.714.156.912.655.512.558.51259.911.860.911.662.411.463.911.358.811.456.111.159.711.25811.356.711.259.411.358.411.355.711.350.954.565.56767.167.365.824.171.69.618.919.520.221.617.80.629median 11.8median 56.71.74.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHuawei Mate 20 XSamsung Galaxy Note 9
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Huawei Mate 20 X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Note 9 audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 9% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.25 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.79 / 1.72 / 1.83 Watt
Load midlight 5.53 / 9.85 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Huawei Mate 20 X
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5500 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3 XL
3430 mAh
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3174 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
14%
-2%
8%
10%
-20%
-3%
9%
Idle Minimum *
0.79
0.7
11%
0.95
-20%
0.7
11%
1
-27%
0.9
-14%
0.794 (0.6 - 0.97, n=9)
-1%
0.878 (0.2 - 3.4, n=752)
-11%
Idle Average *
1.72
1.5
13%
2.17
-26%
1.4
19%
1.4
19%
1.9
-10%
2.04 (0.9 - 2.6, n=9)
-19%
1.732 (0.6 - 6.2, n=751)
-1%
Idle Maximum *
1.83
2.2
-20%
2.25
-23%
2
-9%
1.7
7%
3.7
-102%
2.37 (1.83 - 2.77, n=9)
-30%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=752)
-10%
Load Average *
5.53
3.8
31%
4.47
19%
4.8
13%
4.6
17%
5.3
4%
4.91 (3.74 - 6.3, n=9)
11%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=746)
27%
Load Maximum *
9.85
6.5
34%
6.15
38%
9.5
4%
6.7
32%
7.6
23%
7.51 (6.15 - 9.85, n=9)
24%
5.88 (1.2 - 14.2, n=746)
40%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
33h 04min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 06min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 26min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 00min
Huawei Mate 20 X
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5500 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3 XL
3430 mAh
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3174 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
66%
-8%
-13%
-21%
-1%
Reader / Idle
1984
1747
-12%
1725
-13%
1305
-34%
1687
-15%
H.264
986
854
-13%
724
-27%
801
-19%
896
-9%
WiFi v1.3
786
1305
66%
767
-2%
691
-12%
742
-6%
794
1%
Load
300
282
-6%
299
0%
223
-26%
354
18%

Pros

+ 超大屏幕
+ WiFi速度快
+ 蓝牙5.0
+ 相机优秀
+ 双卡双待

Cons

- nano存储卡
- PWM调光
华为Mate 20 X. Test device courtesy of Huawei Germany.
华为Mate 20 X. Test device courtesy of Huawei Germany.

华为Mate 20 X具有与其他Mate 20型号相同的讨喜品质。这款巨型智能平板手机具有出色的系统和存储性能,其相机则是一流的。此外,OLED屏幕令人印象深刻,LTE和Wi-Fi速度也是如此。

Mate 20 X缺乏Mate 20 Pro的独有功能,如3D面部识别,无线充电和40 W快充,这有些令人失望。屏幕亮度也较低也是另一个缺点。

“华为Mate 20 X是一款出色的旗舰级平板手机,其性能对于这种尺寸的设备而言是独一无二的。”

值得一提的是,虽然其他设备在我们的测试中也取得了类似的结果,后置三摄拍摄的图像几乎一样好。 但是,在旗舰级平板手机的市场上,你将找不到比更好的Mate 20 X替代品。

Huawei Mate 20 X - 01/10/2019 v6
Mike Wobker

Chassis
90%
Keyboard
69 / 75 → 92%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
48 / 60 → 80%
Weight
88%
Battery
96%
Display
90%
Games Performance
65 / 63 → 100%
Application Performance
80 / 70 → 100%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
74 / 91 → 81%
Camera
93%
Average
83%
91%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 华为Mate 20 X智能手机评测
Mike Wobker, 2019-02- 8 (Update: 2019-02- 8)