Notebookcheck Logo

Nokia 5.3智能手机评测:简版安卓手机

一圈相机。 诺基亚5.3提供了一个四摄像头,一个大显示屏和一个持久的电池,价格相对较低。 但是,它的价格范围内竞争激烈。
Android ARM Smartphone
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3 (5 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 8 x 2.2 GHz, Kryo 260
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
6.55 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 268 PPI, Capacitive, IPS, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 48 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm, Card Reader: 最大512 GB的microSD,专用, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度传感器,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 4.2, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.5 x 164.3 x 76.6
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f / 1.8,相位比较自动对焦,LED闪光灯,视频@ 1080p / 30fps(相机1); 5.0MP,广角镜(相机2); 2.0MP,微距镜头(3号相机); 2.0MP,景深(相机4)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/​2.0
Additional features
Speakers: 下边缘为单声道扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟, 充电器,USB电缆,耳机,SIM卡工具, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat 4(150Mbps / 50Mbps); UKW-无线电, fanless
Weight
185 g, Power Supply: 63 g
Price
199 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Vergleichsgeräte

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
75.7 %7
07/2020
Nokia 5.3
SD 665, Adreno 610
185 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.55"1600x720
80.7 %7
06/2020
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
SD 720G, Adreno 618
209 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.67"2400x1080
76.7 %7
08/2020
Huawei P smart Pro
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
206 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.59"2340x1080
78.4 %7
11/2019
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
SD 665, Adreno 610
188 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.30"2280x1080
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3
Nokia 5.3

Size comparison

165.8 mm 76.7 mm 8.8 mm 209 g164.3 mm 76.6 mm 8.5 mm 185 g163.1 mm 77.2 mm 8.8 mm 206 g158.4 mm 75.8 mm 9.1 mm 188 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
256 (247min - 263max) MBit/s +57%
Nokia 5.3
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
163 (25min - 258max) MBit/s
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
152 (1min - 254max) MBit/s -7%
Huawei P smart Pro
802.11 b/g/n
51.5 (19min - 90max) MBit/s -68%
iperf3 receive AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
286 (225min - 321max) MBit/s +97%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
182 (11min - 259max) MBit/s +26%
Nokia 5.3
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
145 (20min - 215max) MBit/s
Huawei P smart Pro
802.11 b/g/n
42.4 MBit/s -71%
0153045607590105120135150165180195210225240255Tooltip
Nokia 5.3; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø145.2 (20-215)
Nokia 5.3; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø162.6 (25-258)

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
click to load images
ColorChecker
19.3 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
14 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
16.4 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Nokia 5.3: 10.95 ∆E min: 3.33 - max: 21.07 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.8 ∆E
54.3 ∆E
38.8 ∆E
37.8 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
62.8 ∆E
54.2 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
42.7 ∆E
27.1 ∆E
65.8 ∆E
64.5 ∆E
30.3 ∆E
48.1 ∆E
36.6 ∆E
76.8 ∆E
42.6 ∆E
42.9 ∆E
92.1 ∆E
70.7 ∆E
52.1 ∆E
36.6 ∆E
24 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Nokia 5.3: 46.8 ∆E min: 13.55 - max: 92.11 ∆E
477
cd/m²
479
cd/m²
491
cd/m²
488
cd/m²
523
cd/m²
497
cd/m²
468
cd/m²
450
cd/m²
469
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 523 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 482.4 cd/m² Minimum: 4.58 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 523 cd/m²
Contrast: 1137:1 (Black: 0.46 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.22 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
94.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.226
Nokia 5.3
IPS, 1600x720, 6.55
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.67
Huawei P smart Pro
TFT-LCD (LTPS), 2340x1080, 6.59
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
IPS, 2280x1080, 6.30
Response Times
21%
8%
28%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
56 ?(28, 28)
44 ?(21, 23)
21%
51.2 ?(21.2, 30)
9%
36 ?(17, 19)
36%
Response Time Black / White *
30 ?(15, 15)
24 ?(9, 15)
20%
28 ?(10, 18)
7%
24 ?(9, 15)
20%
PWM Frequency
463 ?(20)
Screen
18%
-3%
11%
Brightness middle
523
622
19%
480
-8%
597
14%
Brightness
482
612
27%
459
-5%
596
24%
Brightness Distribution
86
94
9%
87
1%
93
8%
Black Level *
0.46
0.56
-22%
0.47
-2%
0.52
-13%
Contrast
1137
1111
-2%
1021
-10%
1148
1%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
6.22
3.98
36%
5.7
8%
5.93
5%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
10.56
7.33
31%
11.3
-7%
9.42
11%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
8
4.5
44%
7.8
2%
5.3
34%
Gamma
2.226 99%
2.206 100%
2.27 97%
2.232 99%
CCT
8856 73%
7361 88%
8813 74%
7632 85%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
114.9
Total Average (Program / Settings)
20% / 18%
3% / -1%
20% / 14%

* ... smaller is better

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
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15 ms rise
↘ 15 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 77 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 28 ms rise
↘ 28 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.9 ms).

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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18071 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
312 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
559 Points +79%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
330 Points +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (309 - 314, n=8)
311 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 2138, n=214, last 2 years)
900 Points +188%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1350 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1690 Points +25%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
1356 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1256 - 1421, n=8)
1356 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6681, n=214, last 2 years)
2947 Points +118%
PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8538 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
9027 Points +6%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
9854 Points +15%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8186 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (7437 - 9051, n=10)
8163 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10884 - 19297, n=2, last 2 years)
15091 Points +77%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6775 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
7673 Points +13%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
6993 Points +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6534 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6189 - 11432, n=12)
6985 Points +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9101 - 12871, n=4, last 2 years)
10872 Points +60%
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
24065 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
38671 Points +61%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
21876 Points -9%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
23253 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (22445 - 25046, n=11)
23846 Points -1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
15403 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
52700 Points +242%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2177 Points -86%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
24992 Points +62%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (15403 - 25351, n=11)
24085 Points +56%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
20320 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
20019 Points -1%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
22398 Points +10%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
18698 Points -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (17865 - 24652, n=11)
20749 Points +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1795 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3501 Points +95%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
1489 Points -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1765 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1675 - 1795, n=12)
1751 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (712 - 7285, n=52, last 2 years)
3548 Points +98%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1663 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3647 Points +119%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
1335 Points -20%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1634 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1564 - 1663, n=12)
1623 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (618 - 9451, n=52, last 2 years)
3905 Points +135%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2482 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3070 Points +24%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2487 Points 0%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2452 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2282 - 2596, n=12)
2427 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1093 - 4525, n=52, last 2 years)
3005 Points +21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1810 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3669 Points +103%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
1508 Points -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1790 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1754 - 1810, n=12)
1787 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (704 - 23024, n=115, last 2 years)
9038 Points +399%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1692 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3803 Points +125%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
1342 Points -21%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1670 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1650 - 1692, n=12)
1669 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (607 - 45492, n=114, last 2 years)
15757 Points +831%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2396 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3267 Points +36%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2496 Points +4%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2393 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2199 - 2503, n=12)
2369 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1075 - 8749, n=114, last 2 years)
4335 Points +81%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1152 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2507 Points +118%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
999 Points -13%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1128 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1076 - 1152, n=12)
1119 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (286 - 7890, n=104, last 2 years)
2680 Points +133%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
999 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2369 Points +137%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
845 Points -15%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
979 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (927 - 999, n=12)
970 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (240 - 9814, n=104, last 2 years)
2667 Points +167%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2476 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3152 Points +27%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2456 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2424 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2212 - 2580, n=12)
2418 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (858 - 4679, n=104, last 2 years)
3126 Points +26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1148 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2680 Points +133%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
991 Points -14%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1126 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1097 - 1151, n=11)
1135 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (317 - 20131, n=177, last 2 years)
6571 Points +472%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
999 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2551 Points +155%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
875 Points -12%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
981 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (980 - 999, n=11)
988 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (267 - 33376, n=176, last 2 years)
9383 Points +839%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2409 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3256 Points +35%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2478 Points +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2341 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2154 - 2541, n=11)
2377 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (938 - 8480, n=176, last 2 years)
4169 Points +73%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
14 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps +21%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
6.1 fps -56%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.6 fps -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6.2 - 15, n=12)
9.14 fps -35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.6 - 123, n=221, last 2 years)
43.1 fps +208%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.3 fps
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
7 fps -16%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.2 fps -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (7.8 - 8.4, n=12)
8.13 fps -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.3 - 229, n=221, last 2 years)
63.1 fps +660%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.8 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
11 fps +25%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
2.3 fps -74%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
4.5 fps -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (3.9 - 9.1, n=12)
5.53 fps -37%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.8 - 105, n=221, last 2 years)
32.1 fps +265%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
7 fps +150%
Huawei P smart Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144
4 fps +43%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2.7 - 2.8, n=12)
2.78 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 94, n=221, last 2 years)
25.1 fps +796%
Nokia 5.3Xiaomi Redmi Note 9SHuawei P smart ProMotorola Moto G8 PlusAverage 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
40%
76%
17%
-19%
338%
Sequential Read 256KB
299.5
496.6
66%
822
174%
302.5
1%
273 ?(95.6 - 704, n=201)
-9%
1471 ?(215 - 4512, n=213, last 2 years)
391%
Sequential Write 256KB
243.2
214.8
-12%
195.4
-20%
217.4
-11%
176.8 ?(40 - 274, n=201)
-27%
1084 ?(57.5 - 3678, n=213, last 2 years)
346%
Random Read 4KB
109.1
137
26%
154.3
41%
59.9
-45%
59.1 ?(9.58 - 148.5, n=201)
-46%
243 ?(22.2 - 543, n=213, last 2 years)
123%
Random Write 4KB
45.2
123.6
173%
156.3
246%
124.9
176%
31.7 ?(2.34 - 146.9, n=201)
-30%
267 ?(13 - 709, n=213, last 2 years)
491%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
77.3 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
74.5 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
76.5 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
72.6 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-6%
77.4 ?(21.1 - 107.6, n=144)
0%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
60.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
54.9 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-10%
69 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
14%
52.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-14%
58.3 ?(11.2 - 83.3, n=144)
-4%
Max. Load
 51.7 °C46.7 °C41.9 °C 
 50.3 °C44.4 °C42 °C 
 48.7 °C44.8 °C42 °C 
Maximum: 51.7 °C
Average: 45.8 °C
39.9 °C45.9 °C51.1 °C
40.5 °C46.1 °C49.9 °C
41.4 °C46.2 °C50.7 °C
Maximum: 51.1 °C
Average: 45.7 °C
Power Supply (max.)  42.6 °C | Room Temperature 21.2 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 45.8 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 51.7 °C / 125 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 51.1 °C / 124 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.5 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.4362539.736.7312827.74027.429.55029.835.86325.832.28022.223.610023.422.412521.222.316019.224.820018.931.22501937.831517.242.24001647.350016.755.863018.856.880014.763.8100015.669.212501467160013.966.7200014.462.9250014.761.7315014.359.340001558500015.764.9630015.865.2800015.764.71000016.255.61250015.750.51600015.940.4SPL71.86327.676.1N26.315134.9median 15.9median 56.8median 14.3median 55.5Delta3.312.813.320.632.430.53531.927.126.4262730.431.225.228.822.722.525.522.120.124.719.235.417.839.417.845.916.149.916.655.715.962.514.365.514.770.414.873.614.37114.165.116.369.114.472.313.868.713.970.414.264.414.559.114.666.41568.115.359.115.751.660.964.571.226.98113.817.725.60.948.4median 15median 64.4median 48.4median 13.9median 64.73.311.122.81316.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseNokia 5.3Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Nokia 5.3 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 75% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 86% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (119.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Nokia 5.3
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S
5020 mAh
Huawei P smart Pro
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto G8 Plus
4000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
876
1187
36%
757
-14%
980
12%
912 ?(424 - 2844, n=223, last 2 years)
4%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
14h 36min

Pros

+ 相对轻薄
+ 最新软件
+ 续航时间长
+ 专用microSD读取器
+ 多功能的摄像系统...

Cons

- ...成像质量一半
- 负载下过热
- 仅eMMC闪存
- WLAN性能波动
- 屏幕上蓝光严重

总结——给的太少:

In review: Nokia 5.3 test device provided by Nokia Germany.
In review: Nokia 5.3 test device provided by Nokia Germany.

诺基亚5.3看起来有点过时了。放在去年,相对较大的电池,灵活的摄像头系统和同等水平的性能还能一战。然而,在2020年,在这个价位,与竞争对手相比,这太少了,并甚至有些落后,即使只卖200欧元,我们也很难原谅:

即使在室温下,在较长的负载下温度也太高。 WLAN数据速率不断变化,LTE速度缓慢。到2020年,屏幕上仍然有很严重的蓝光。

诺基亚5.3有一些缺点,因此大大落后于价格昂贵的竞争对手。

当然,诺基亚5.3相当轻薄,它提供合理的续航时间,并且功能强大,足以满足日常使用的需求。安卓是最新版本,在接下来的两年中,借助Android One,您可以安全地进行更新。但是,由于相机整体上很难让人信服,而且其他制造商提供了这么多更好的产品,因此我们很难为诺基亚手机提出推荐。

充其量,如果它以低得多的价格在去年上市,那么这款手机可能适合于需求不高的用户。

Nokia 5.3 - 07/02/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
76%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
43 / 70 → 62%
Weight
89%
Battery
90%
Display
82%
Games Performance
15 / 64 → 23%
Application Performance
64 / 86 → 75%
Temperature
78%
Noise
100%
Audio
62 / 90 → 69%
Camera
44%
Average
70%
76%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > Nokia 5.3智能手机评测:简版安卓手机
Florian Schmitt, 2020-07- 5 (Update: 2020-07- 5)