对摩托罗拉 Moto G37 的评测结论
摩托罗拉 Moto G37 是一款极具吸引力的手机，凭借其亲民的价格，非常适合预算有限的用户，或作为备用手机使用。 您无需放弃5G功能；它不仅提供稳定且足够快的Wi-Fi数据速度，还配备了一块亮度适中的屏幕。
相机成像质量足以满足基本需求，指纹传感器运行相当可靠，电池续航时间也大致与同类产品持平。
不过，与前代机型 Moto G35 相比，该机型在成本方面也有显著削减——这很可能是由于内存价格的急剧上涨： 广角摄像头已被移除，屏幕分辨率大幅降低，包装盒中未附带保护壳，存储速度明显变慢，并且也不再支持 eSIM。
当前一代的入门级智能手机普遍以成本削减为特征。与此同时，旧款机型通常只能获得短暂的安全更新——甚至可能根本无法获得。如果您能等待，建议暂缓购买新机型一两年，直到内存市场形势再次缓和。
如果你现在非买不可，Moto G37 是一款性能可靠、价格合理的智能手机——尽管它在同类产品中稍显逊色。
Pros
Cons
价格与供货情况
摩托罗拉为Moto G37定价略低于300美元，例如在amazon.com上。
规格
机身与功能——配色时尚，但存储空间有限
摩托罗拉已将Moto G37融入其当前的设计系列。这意味着该机型提供三种时尚的潘通色（紫红色、蓝色和灰色）；国际市场上还提供一种绿松石色版本。此外，机身背部采用柔软的塑料材质，并配备了一个设计时尚、与机身浑然一体的摄像头模组。
材质与边框之间的过渡虽不如该品牌更高价位机型那般浑然一体，但手机做工扎实，不会弯曲。
该机通过了IP64认证，这意味着手机能很好地抵御灰尘和污垢，但不应将其浸入水中。
该机标配128 GB存储空间和4 GB运行内存；在国际市场，甚至还有仅配备64 GB存储空间的版本。我们原以为这种存储容量早已成为历史，即便是入门级手机也不例外……
存储空间可通过microSD卡扩展，在我们的测试中，读卡器的读写速度相当快。
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Motorola Moto G37 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Motorola Moto G35 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (5.72 - 58.9, n=52, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| CMF Phone 2 Pro (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
跨平台磁盘测试（CPDT）
通信与操作——可靠的触摸屏
Wi-Fi 5 属于顶级标准，因此 Moto G37 的预期网速约为 260–330 Mbit/s。 虽然速度不算特别快，但对于那些家中本就没有千兆宽带、且不打算在高速家庭网络中使用该手机的用户来说，这已经足够了。
由于缺少部分国际蜂窝频段，因此在出国旅行前，您应确认在目的地国家能否使用 Moto G37 进行移动上网。我们的测试表明，其信号接收表现稳定。但在高楼林立等复杂环境下，信号偶尔会出现中断。
屏幕最高可实现每秒120帧的刷新率，触摸屏操作精准且响应迅速。右侧的待机键内置指纹传感器，可快速、可靠地解锁手机。
| Networking | |
| Motorola Moto G37 | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| Motorola Moto G35 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A37 5G | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| CMF Phone 2 Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | |
软件与可持续发展——更新周期短的摩托罗拉
该设备预装了 Android 16 系统，并搭载了 MotoUI 界面，该界面仅对原生 Android 系统进行了微调，并倾向于将高级功能转移到其自带的应用程序中。
新的安全更新计划发布至2029年4月——这其实并不算太久。
包装采用无塑料设计，但未提供有关该手机可持续性的进一步信息。
相机——仅配备两枚镜头
尽管机身背面有四个摄像头开孔，但实际上只有一个配备了图像传感器：5000万像素摄像头作为主摄像头。
其规格与Moto G35相似，但已无法录制4K视频。在这个价位段，其成像质量相当扎实，在低光环境下的表现也相当不错。不过，锐度仅属中等。
前置摄像头拍摄的照片效果尚可，但不应过度放大查看。
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.
PlantSurroundingLow Light
显示——分辨率优化
在IPS显示屏方面，成本削减的迹象同样明显：分辨率降至1,604×720像素。
这使得该手机在同价位竞品中处于劣势，尤其是考虑到这些竞品通常配备亮度显著更高的OLED显示屏。
色彩还原相当准确，但在这一方面，竞品同样领先。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Center on Battery: 876 cd/m²
Contrast: 1653:1 (Black: 0.53 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.83 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.71}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.6 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.96}
98.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.209
CCT: 7094 K
| Motorola Moto G37 IPS, 1604x720, 6.7" | Motorola Moto G35 IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G AMOLED, 2392x1080, 6.8" | Samsung Galaxy A37 5G Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7" | CMF Phone 2 Pro AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.8" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 274% | 92% | 29% | ||
| APL18 Peak Brightness (cd/m²) | 943 | 3430 264% | 1839 95% | 1215 29% | |
| HDR Peak Brightness (cd/m²) | 933 | 3582 284% | 1752 88% | 1198 28% | |
| Response Times | -80% | 94% | 92% | 96% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * (ms) | 16.3 ? | 39.2 ? -140% | 0.99 ? 94% | 1.57 ? 90% | 0.54 ? 97% |
| Response Time Black / White * (ms) | 19.6 ? | 23.6 ? -20% | 1.13 ? 94% | 1.39 ? 93% | 0.93 ? 95% |
| PWM Frequency (Hz) | 60 | 240 | 90 | ||
| PWM Amplitude * (%) | 13.61 | 16.58 | 13.04 | ||
| Screen | -26% | 31% | -18% | 28% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 876 | 1069 22% | 979 12% | 1127 29% | 1280 46% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | 0.53 | 0.7 -32% | |||
| Contrast (:1) | 1653 | 1527 -8% | |||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.83 | 3.32 -81% | 1.3 29% | 2.6 -42% | 1.3 29% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.55 | 5.48 -20% | 2.6 43% | 5.3 -16% | 3.9 14% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.6 | 3.6 -38% | 1.6 38% | 3.7 -42% | 2 23% |
| Gamma | 2.209 100% | 2.167 102% | 2.23 99% | 2.06 107% | 2.14 103% |
| CCT | 7094 92% | 6141 106% | 6688 97% | 6496 100% | 6776 96% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 976 | 969 | 1277 | ||
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 88 | 95 | 97 | ||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -53% /
-40% | 133% /
107% | 55% /
37% | 51% /
45% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7744 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 19.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 43 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (19.8 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 16.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 11.3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 31 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (30.9 ms). | ||
性能、排放与电池续航——功耗低，电池续航表现尚可
搭载联发科天玑6300处理器的Moto G37，其性能其实并未比前代机型有明显提升。其性能也远逊于同价位竞品，且在日常使用中并不总是能完全流畅运行。
至少在满载运行时，机身最高温度尚在可接受范围内，即使长时间使用后，性能损失也微乎其微。
底部边缘的小扬声器由听筒辅助发声。尽管如此，其音质表现仍偏重高音，听感并不特别出彩。若通过USB或蓝牙连接外置音箱或耳机，则能获得清澈的音质。音频传输的无线编解码器选项涵盖了最重要的几种。
电池容量设计为5,200毫安时，略高于平均水平，在我们的Wi-Fi测试中，续航时间约延长了一小时。不过，竞争对手在此方面也已领先一步。该手机支持最高20瓦的充电功率；充满电需要超过2小时。
| Motorola Moto G37 | Motorola Moto G35 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G | Samsung Galaxy A37 5G | CMF Phone 2 Pro | Average 128 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 219% | 192% | 336% | 219% | -18% | 410% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 355.5 | 989.3 178% | 911.87 157% | 1986.3 459% | 986.43 177% | 300 ? -16% | 2227 ? 526% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 331.3 | 860.3 160% | 867.34 162% | 1732.34 423% | 524.58 58% | 196.6 ? -41% | 1910 ? 477% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 68.5 | 272.1 297% | 222.77 225% | 368.9 439% | 294.62 330% | 85.7 ? 25% | 311 ? 354% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 93.8 | 318.9 240% | 302.72 223% | 115.25 23% | 385.68 311% | 58.5 ? -38% | 358 ? 282% |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.9 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.3 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
3DMark 压力测试
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A37 5G | |
| Motorola Moto G37 | |
| CMF Phone 2 Pro | |
| Motorola Moto G35 | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G | |
| Motorola Moto G37 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A37 5G | |
| Motorola Moto G35 | |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy A37 5G | |
Motorola Moto G37 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 10.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 73% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 85% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 10% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.1 / 0.2 Watt |
| Idle |  0.9 / 1.2 / 1.4 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Motorola Moto G37 5200 mAh | Motorola Moto G35 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G 5520 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A37 5G 5000 mAh | CMF Phone 2 Pro 5000 mAh | Average Mediatek Dimensity 6300 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -9% | -29% | -24% | -35% | -13% | ||
| Idle Minimum * (Watt) | 0.9 | 1.04 -16% | 0.85 6% | 1.04 -16% | 1.108 ? -23% | 0.879 ? 2% | |
| Idle Average * (Watt) | 1.2 | 1.33 -11% | 1.86 -55% | 1.63 -36% | 1.695 ? -41% | 1.474 ? -23% | |
| Idle Maximum * (Watt) | 1.4 | 1.38 1% | 1.94 -39% | 1.69 -21% | 1.955 ? -40% | 1.663 ? -19% | |
| Load Average * (Watt) | 4.05 | 5.55 ? | 6.75 ? | ||||
| Load Maximum * (Watt) | 8.98 | 7.75 ? | 11.2 ? |
* ... smaller is better
| Motorola Moto G37 5200 mAh | Motorola Moto G35 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G 5520 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A37 5G 5000 mAh | CMF Phone 2 Pro 5000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery runtime | -6% | 7% | 5% | 3% | |
| WiFi v1.3 (h) | 17.7 | 16.7 -6% | 19 7% | 18.6 5% | 18.3 3% |
| Reader / Idle (h) | 36.6 | ||||
| H.264 (h) | 21.1 | ||||
| Load (h) | 4.2 |
Notebookcheck 综合评分
若非那些简短的安全更新，你几乎不得不退而求其次选择上一代机型——摩托罗拉在Moto G37上的偷工减料程度就是如此之大。
其他厂商仍有替代产品，因此我们仅向那些绝对钟爱其设计且能以极实惠的价格入手的用户推荐这款测试机型。
Motorola Moto G37
- 07/30/2026 v8
Florian Schmitt
Total Sustainability Score: 可选方案的比较
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 72.7%  | Motorola Moto G37 Mediatek Dimensity 6300 ⎘ ARM Mali-G57 MP2 ⎘ 4 GB Memory, 128 GB eMMC | Amazon: List Price: 250€ | 191 g | 128 GB eMMC Flash | 6.72" 1604x720 262 PPI IPS |
2. 72.3%  | Motorola Moto G35 Unisoc T8100 (T760) ⎘ ARM Mali-G57 MP4 ⎘ 4 GB Memory, 128 GB UFS 2.2 | Amazon: List Price: 179€ | 188 g | 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.72" 2400x1080 392 PPI IPS |
3. 76.5%  | Xiaomi Redmi Note 15 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 710 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 2.2 | Amazon: $229.50 List Price: 300€ | 178 g | 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.77" 2392x1080 388 PPI AMOLED |
4. 79%  | Samsung Galaxy A37 5G Samsung Exynos 1480 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 530 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 3.1 | Amazon: List Price: 519€ | 196 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" 2340x1080 385 PPI Super AMOLED |
5. 76.9%  | CMF Phone 2 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 7300 ⎘ ARM Mali-G615 MP2 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 2.2 | Amazon: List Price: 279€ | 185 g | 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.77" 2400x1080 389 PPI AMOLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Add as a preferred source on Google
