Notebookcheck

红米Note 6 Pro智能手机评测

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Zewei Shen), 11/25/2018
Android Smartphone Touchscreen

献给追求屏幕的买家。 红米Note 6 Pro是小米推出的另一款经济实惠的中档智能手机。1300元你能得到一块不错的IPS屏幕,即使和一些高端设备比起来也毫不逊色。而在我们的测试中,不仅仅是这块屏幕说服了我们。

Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Redmi Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
Graphics adapter
Qualcomm Adreno 509
Memory
3072 MB 
Display
6.26 inch 19:9, 2280 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, 多点电容触控屏, LCD IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 22 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD up to 256 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, OTG, VoLTE, Miracast, LED
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G GSM: 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900, CDMA 800 & TD-SCDMA; 3G HSDPA: 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100; 4G: 1(2100), 3(1800), 4(1700/2100), 5(850), 7(2600), 8(900), 20(800), 38(2600), 40(2300), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.2 x 157.9 x 76.4
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix 12+5 MP, f/1.9 aperture
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix 20+2 MP f/2.0 aperture
Additional features
Speakers: single speaker, Keyboard: onscreen, modular charger, Silicone case, USB cable, MiUI 9.6, 12 Months Warranty, SAR value: body 1.48 W/kg, head 0.76 W/kg, fanless
Weight
178 g, Power Supply: 63 g
Price
1300元(参考) Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼100% +74%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼80% +39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
354 (min: 313, max: 366) MBit/s ∼58%
Nokia 6 2018
Adreno 508, 630, 32 GB eMMC Flash
289 MBit/s ∼47% -18%
BQ Aquaris X2
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
275 MBit/s ∼45% -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
268 MBit/s ∼44% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
246 MBit/s ∼40% -31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=303)
210 MBit/s ∼34% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
Adreno 506, 625, 64 GB eMMC Flash
117 MBit/s ∼19% -67%
Honor 9 Lite
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
52.6 MBit/s ∼9% -85%
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% +156%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +144%
Nokia 6 2018
Adreno 508, 630, 32 GB eMMC Flash
345 MBit/s ∼50% +27%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
333 MBit/s ∼48% +22%
BQ Aquaris X2
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
322 (min: 275) MBit/s ∼46% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
273 MBit/s ∼39% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
272 (min: 212, max: 313) MBit/s ∼39%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=303)
205 MBit/s ∼29% -25%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
Adreno 506, 625, 64 GB eMMC Flash
119 MBit/s ∼17% -56%
Honor 9 Lite
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
49.9 MBit/s ∼7% -82%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø353 (313-366)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø272 (212-313)
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Photo mode
Photo mode
HDR recording
HDR recording
HDR recording + AI
HDR recording + AI
Portrait with Bokeh effect
Portrait with Bokeh effect
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro software

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
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
497
cd/m²
511
cd/m²
481
cd/m²
494
cd/m²
501
cd/m²
463
cd/m²
485
cd/m²
491
cd/m²
452
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 511 cd/m² Average: 486.1 cd/m² Minimum: 1.54 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 501 cd/m²
Contrast: 1139:1 (Black: 0.44 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.3 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
99.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.29
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
LCD IPS, 2280x1080, 6.26
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
LCD IPS, 2280x1080, 5.84
Xiaomi Mi 6X
LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Honor 9 Lite
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.65
Nokia 6 2018
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
BQ Aquaris X2
IPS LCD, 2160x1080, 5.65
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3
Screen
-50%
-55%
-81%
-33%
-91%
-55%
19%
Brightness middle
501
518
3%
554
11%
459
-8%
627
25%
417
-17%
631
26%
576
15%
Brightness
486
532
9%
538
11%
441
-9%
622
28%
421
-13%
622
28%
582
20%
Brightness Distribution
88
94
7%
91
3%
91
3%
82
-7%
88
0%
96
9%
90
2%
Black Level *
0.44
0.23
48%
0.61
-39%
0.47
-7%
0.41
7%
0.61
-39%
0.61
-39%
Contrast
1139
2252
98%
908
-20%
977
-14%
1529
34%
684
-40%
1034
-9%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.3
5.66
-146%
4.86
-111%
5.8
-152%
4.5
-96%
6.1
-165%
5.5
-139%
1.3
43%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.1
10.32
-69%
8.46
-39%
10.7
-75%
7
-15%
11.2
-84%
8.5
-39%
3.5
43%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.5
6.8
-353%
5.3
-253%
7.3
-387%
5.1
-240%
7.1
-373%
5.6
-273%
1.6
-7%
Gamma
2.29 96%
2.269 97%
2.281 96%
2.28 96%
2.26 97%
2.16 102%
2.38 92%
2.18 101%
CCT
6579 99%
8564 76%
7770 84%
7984 81%
7201 90%
8362 78%
7531 86%
6561 99%

* ... 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 2358 Hz ≤ 19 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2358 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 19 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2358 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8943 (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
26.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13.2 ms rise
↘ 13.6 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 53 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
48.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 24 ms rise
↘ 24.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 81 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
4547 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4578 Points ∼51% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
3644 Points ∼41% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5486 Points ∼61% +21%
Honor 9 Lite
3117 Points ∼35% -31%
Nokia 6 2018
3690 Points ∼41% -19%
BQ Aquaris X2
4309 Points ∼48% -5%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8938 Points ∼100% +97%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4309 - 5041, n=9)
4555 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=197)
4524 Points ∼51% -1%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
4945 Points ∼49%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4943 Points ∼49% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
4369 Points ∼44% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5843 Points ∼58% +18%
Honor 9 Lite
3730 Points ∼37% -25%
Nokia 6 2018
883 Points ∼9% -82%
BQ Aquaris X2
4974 Points ∼50% +1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
10024 Points ∼100% +103%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4781 - 5426, n=9)
4974 Points ∼50% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=247)
4308 Points ∼43% -13%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
1335 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1339 Points ∼32% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
880 Points ∼21% -34%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1620 Points ∼38% +21%
Honor 9 Lite
945 Points ∼22% -29%
Nokia 6 2018
4210 Points ∼100% +215%
BQ Aquaris X2
1323 Points ∼31% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
3378 Points ∼80% +153%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1323 - 1506, n=9)
1354 Points ∼32% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=248)
1270 Points ∼30% -5%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
5611 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
5642 Points ∼61% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
4828 Points ∼52% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5995 Points ∼65% +7%
Honor 9 Lite
4911 Points ∼53% -12%
Nokia 6 2018
4719 Points ∼51% -16%
BQ Aquaris X2
5706 Points ∼62% +2%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
9225 Points ∼100% +64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5611 - 6068, n=9)
5101 Points ∼55% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=255)
4555 Points ∼49% -19%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
6218 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
5716 Points ∼46% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
6723 Points ∼54% +8%
Honor 9 Lite
5887 Points ∼47% -5%
Nokia 6 2018
5484 Points ∼44% -12%
BQ Aquaris X2
6437 Points ∼51% +4%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
12535 Points ∼100% +102%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (6040 - 6999, n=8)
6422 Points ∼51% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (6412 - 13531, n=423)
4958 Points ∼40% -20%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
2258 Points ∼52%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2407 Points ∼55% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
1999 Points ∼46% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2764 Points ∼63% +22%
Honor 9 Lite
1712 Points ∼39% -24%
Nokia 6 2018
1686 Points ∼39% -25%
BQ Aquaris X2
2396 Points ∼55% +6%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4364 Points ∼100% +93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (2258 - 2644, n=9)
2379 Points ∼55% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (2293 - 4439, n=277)
1709 Points ∼39% -24%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
645 Points ∼15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
855 Points ∼20% +33%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
442 Points ∼10% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1244 Points ∼29% +93%
Honor 9 Lite
401 Points ∼9% -38%
Nokia 6 2018
801 Points ∼19% +24%
BQ Aquaris X2
872 Points ∼21% +35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4250 Points ∼100% +559%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (645 - 872, n=9)
837 Points ∼20% +30%
Average of class Smartphone (869 - 8206, n=277)
1465 Points ∼34% +127%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
765 (min: 643, max: 2256) Points ∼18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
998 Points ∼23% +30%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
535 Points ∼13% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1417 Points ∼33% +85%
Honor 9 Lite
483 Points ∼11% -37%
Nokia 6 2018
907 Points ∼21% +19%
BQ Aquaris X2
1016 Points ∼24% +33%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4275 Points ∼100% +459%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (765 - 1016, n=9)
978 Points ∼23% +28%
Average of class Smartphone (1010 - 5189, n=280)
1360 Points ∼32% +78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
2383 Points ∼54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2390 Points ∼54% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
2023 Points ∼46% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2815 Points ∼64% +18%
Honor 9 Lite
1707 Points ∼39% -28%
Nokia 6 2018
1740 Points ∼39% -27%
BQ Aquaris X2
2359 Points ∼54% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4407 Points ∼100% +85%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (2343 - 2683, n=9)
2401 Points ∼54% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4493, n=292)
1689 Points ∼38% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
1406 Points ∼24%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1385 Points ∼24% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
784 Points ∼13% -44%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1981 Points ∼34% +41%
Honor 9 Lite
617 Points ∼11% -56%
Nokia 6 2018
1320 Points ∼23% -6%
BQ Aquaris X2
1402 Points ∼24% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5854 Points ∼100% +316%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1358 - 1406, n=9)
1395 Points ∼24% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=292)
2068 Points ∼35% +47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
1554 Points ∼28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1528 Points ∼28% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
885 Points ∼16% -43%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2121 Points ∼39% +36%
Honor 9 Lite
719 Points ∼13% -54%
Nokia 6 2018
1395 Points ∼26% -10%
BQ Aquaris X2
1540 Points ∼28% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5456 Points ∼100% +251%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1525 - 1554, n=9)
1539 Points ∼28% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 7856, n=293)
1734 Points ∼32% +12%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
2354 Points ∼56%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2346 Points ∼56% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
2104 Points ∼50% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2757 Points ∼66% +17%
Honor 9 Lite
1748 Points ∼42% -26%
Nokia 6 2018
1738 Points ∼42% -26%
BQ Aquaris X2
2353 Points ∼56% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4183 Points ∼100% +78%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (2251 - 2634, n=9)
2361 Points ∼56% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼39% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
815 Points ∼19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
797 Points ∼19% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
392 Points ∼9% -52%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1164 Points ∼28% +43%
Honor 9 Lite
253 Points ∼6% -69%
Nokia 6 2018
707 Points ∼17% -13%
BQ Aquaris X2
816 Points ∼19% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4206 Points ∼100% +416%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (797 - 818, n=9)
813 Points ∼19% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼28% +46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
953 Points ∼23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
934 Points ∼22% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
479 Points ∼11% -50%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1335 Points ∼32% +40%
Honor 9 Lite
312 Points ∼7% -67%
Nokia 6 2018
814 Points ∼19% -15%
BQ Aquaris X2
955 Points ∼23% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4201 Points ∼100% +341%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (934 - 962, n=9)
951 Points ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼27% +19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
2350 Points ∼57%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2379 Points ∼57% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
2098 Points ∼51% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2680 Points ∼65% +14%
Honor 9 Lite
1788 Points ∼43% -24%
Nokia 6 2018
1733 Points ∼42% -26%
BQ Aquaris X2
2338 Points ∼56% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4150 Points ∼100% +77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1349 - 2626, n=9)
2266 Points ∼55% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=384)
1540 Points ∼37% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
1338 Points ∼25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1313 Points ∼25% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
743 Points ∼14% -44%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1891 Points ∼36% +41%
Honor 9 Lite
184 Points ∼3% -86%
Nokia 6 2018
1249 Points ∼24% -7%
BQ Aquaris X2
1337 Points ∼25% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5305 Points ∼100% +296%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1313 - 1353, n=9)
1333 Points ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=384)
1632 Points ∼31% +22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
1480 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1458 Points ∼29% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
867 Points ∼17% -41%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2023 Points ∼40% +37%
Honor 9 Lite
230 Points ∼5% -84%
Nokia 6 2018
1332 Points ∼27% -10%
BQ Aquaris X2
1478 Points ∼30% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4996 Points ∼100% +238%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1458 - 1493, n=9)
1477 Points ∼30% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=392)
1387 Points ∼28% -6%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
17065 Points ∼46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
17471 Points ∼48% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
15870 Points ∼43% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
21016 Points ∼57% +23%
Honor 9 Lite
14780 Points ∼40% -13%
Nokia 6 2018
13196 Points ∼36% -23%
BQ Aquaris X2
16747 Points ∼46% -2%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
36755 Points ∼100% +115%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (16719 - 19365, n=9)
17286 Points ∼47% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=539)
12880 Points ∼35% -25%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
20865 Points ∼31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
20909 Points ∼31% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
13369 Points ∼20% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
28984 Points ∼43% +39%
Honor 9 Lite
11712 Points ∼17% -44%
Nokia 6 2018
18572 Points ∼27% -11%
BQ Aquaris X2
20806 Points ∼31% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
67730 Points ∼100% +225%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (20610 - 20909, n=9)
20801 Points ∼31% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=539)
17994 Points ∼27% -14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
19980 Points ∼35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
20033 Points ∼35% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
13847 Points ∼24% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
26731 Points ∼47% +34%
Honor 9 Lite
12278 Points ∼22% -39%
Nokia 6 2018
17030 Points ∼30% -15%
BQ Aquaris X2
19743 Points ∼35% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
57047 Points ∼100% +186%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (19714 - 20404, n=9)
19905 Points ∼35% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=540)
15114 Points ∼26% -24%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
36 fps ∼30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
35 fps ∼29% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
23 fps ∼19% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
50 fps ∼42% +39%
Honor 9 Lite
19 fps ∼16% -47%
Nokia 6 2018
30 fps ∼25% -17%
BQ Aquaris X2
36 fps ∼30% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
120 fps ∼100% +233%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (35 - 36, n=9)
35.7 fps ∼30% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=564)
31.4 fps ∼26% -13%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
33 fps ∼54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
35 fps ∼57% +6%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
21 fps ∼34% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
48 fps ∼79% +45%
Honor 9 Lite
18 fps ∼30% -45%
Nokia 6 2018
31 fps ∼51% -6%
BQ Aquaris X2
34 fps ∼56% +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
61 fps ∼100% +85%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (33 - 40, n=9)
34.9 fps ∼57% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=567)
25 fps ∼41% -24%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
16 fps ∼22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
16 fps ∼22% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
9.9 fps ∼14% -38%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
23 fps ∼32% +44%
Honor 9 Lite
8.6 fps ∼12% -46%
Nokia 6 2018
14 fps ∼19% -12%
BQ Aquaris X2
16 fps ∼22% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
73 fps ∼100% +356%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (16 - 16, n=9)
16 fps ∼22% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=486)
16.8 fps ∼23% +5%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
14 fps ∼33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
15 fps ∼36% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
9.4 fps ∼22% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
21 fps ∼50% +50%
Honor 9 Lite
8.4 fps ∼20% -40%
Nokia 6 2018
15 fps ∼36% +7%
BQ Aquaris X2
15 fps ∼36% +7%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
42 fps ∼100% +200%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (14 - 18, n=9)
15.2 fps ∼36% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=489)
16 fps ∼38% +14%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
10 fps ∼34%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
9.8 fps ∼34% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
6.5 fps ∼22% -35%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
15 fps ∼52% +50%
Honor 9 Lite
3.2 fps ∼11% -68%
Nokia 6 2018
9.8 fps ∼34% -2%
BQ Aquaris X2
10 fps ∼34% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29 fps ∼100% +190%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (9.8 - 10, n=9)
9.98 fps ∼34% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼49% +43%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
9.1 fps ∼35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
10 fps ∼38% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
6.1 fps ∼23% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
14 fps ∼54% +54%
Honor 9 Lite
5 fps ∼19% -45%
Nokia 6 2018
10 fps ∼38% +10%
BQ Aquaris X2
9.8 fps ∼38% +8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
26 fps ∼100% +186%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (9.1 - 12, n=9)
9.97 fps ∼38% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼53% +53%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
3.4 fps ∼18%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
19 fps ∼100% +459%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (3.4 - 4.4, n=6)
3.65 fps ∼19% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 59, n=62)
10.2 fps ∼54% +200%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
2.2 fps ∼17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
13 fps ∼100% +491%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (2.2 - 2.2, n=6)
2.2 fps ∼17% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 31, n=62)
6.49 fps ∼50% +195%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
5.4 fps ∼30%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
18 fps ∼100% +233%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5.3 - 6.9, n=6)
5.73 fps ∼32% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (5.7 - 59, n=62)
14.4 fps ∼80% +167%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
6 fps ∼18%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
33 fps ∼100% +450%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5.9 - 6, n=6)
5.98 fps ∼18% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 63, n=61)
15.7 fps ∼48% +162%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
6.3 fps ∼20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
6.3 fps ∼20% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
3.5 fps ∼11% -44%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
9 fps ∼29% +43%
Honor 9 Lite
3.2 fps ∼10% -49%
Nokia 6 2018
5.6 fps ∼18% -11%
BQ Aquaris X2
6.3 fps ∼20% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
31 fps ∼100% +392%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (6.3 - 6.3, n=9)
6.3 fps ∼20% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼32% +57%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
5.7 fps ∼36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
6 fps ∼38% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
3.6 fps ∼23% -37%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
8.6 fps ∼54% +51%
Honor 9 Lite
2.9 fps ∼18% -49%
Nokia 6 2018
5.9 fps ∼37% +4%
BQ Aquaris X2
6 fps ∼38% +5%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16 fps ∼100% +181%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5.7 - 7.4, n=9)
6.11 fps ∼38% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼56% +56%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 6X
10.11 fps ∼31%
BQ Aquaris X2
7.5 fps ∼23%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29.12 (min: 9.74, max: 74.17) fps ∼90%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
7.5 fps ∼23%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 651, n=36)
32.4 fps ∼100%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 6X
8.96 fps ∼31%
BQ Aquaris X2
6.63 fps ∼23%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16.92 (min: 6.06, max: 28.78) fps ∼59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
6.63 fps ∼23%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 606, n=34)
28.8 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
25.57 (min: 7.38, max: 46.96) fps ∼71%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 739, n=32)
36.1 fps ∼100%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
115565 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
115654 Points ∼38% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
79099 Points ∼26% -32%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
140714 Points ∼47% +22%
Honor 9 Lite
89639 Points ∼30% -22%
Nokia 6 2018
90435 Points ∼30% -22%
BQ Aquaris X2
116748 Points ∼39% +1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
300617 Points ∼100% +160%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (115565 - 138661, n=9)
119151 Points ∼40% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=170)
118332 Points ∼39% +2%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
95603 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
92672 Points ∼37% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
68348 Points ∼27% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
110680 Points ∼44% +16%
Honor 9 Lite
67727 Points ∼27% -29%
Nokia 6 2018
72580 Points ∼29% -24%
BQ Aquaris X2
96430 Points ∼38% +1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
250848 Points ∼100% +162%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (58541 - 125213, n=9)
94527 Points ∼38% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=387)
75990 Points ∼30% -21%

Legend

 
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 625, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi 6X Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Honor 9 Lite HiSilicon Kirin 659, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 6 2018 Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Qualcomm Adreno 508, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
BQ Aquaris X2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
109.18 Points ∼100% +144%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
52.139 Points ∼48% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (44.2 - 51.5, n=9)
45.4 Points ∼42% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Chrome 70)
44.786 Points ∼41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
44.322 Points ∼41% -1%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
44.245 Points ∼41% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=422)
36.7 Points ∼34% -18%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
28.167 Points ∼26% -37%
Honor 9 Lite (Chrome 63)
26.42 Points ∼24% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro (Chrome 68)
25.787 Points ∼24% -42%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
23285 Points ∼100% +178%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
9995 Points ∼43% +19%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
9004 Points ∼39% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (8273 - 9746, n=8)
8697 Points ∼37% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
8422 Points ∼36% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Chrome 70)
8386 Points ∼36%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=557)
5556 Points ∼24% -34%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
4993 Points ∼21% -40%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro (Chrome 68)
4808 Points ∼21% -43%
Honor 9 Lite (Chrome 63)
4742 Points ∼20% -43%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=578)
11474 ms * ∼100% -141%
Honor 9 Lite (Chrome 63)
10250.4 ms * ∼89% -115%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
9922.7 ms * ∼86% -108%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro (Chrome 68)
9879.9 ms * ∼86% -107%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
4768.9 ms * ∼42% -0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Chrome 70)
4766.9 ms * ∼42%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
4740 ms * ∼41% +1%
BQ Aquaris X2
4733 ms * ∼41% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4105 - 4820, n=9)
4630 ms * ∼40% +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
1951.9 ms * ∼17% +59%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
124 Points ∼100% +121%
Average of class Smartphone (25 - 161, n=63)
63.6 Points ∼51% +14%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
61 Points ∼49% +9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 66)
56 Points ∼45% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Chrome 70)
56 Points ∼45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (54 - 61, n=6)
56 Points ∼45% 0%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
54 Points ∼44% -4%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro (Chrome 68)
38 Points ∼31% -32%
Nokia 6 2018 (Chrome 66)
35 Points ∼28% -37%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
334 Points ∼100% +118%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
173 Points ∼52% +13%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
164 Points ∼49% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
158 Points ∼47% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (147 - 184, n=7)
158 Points ∼47% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro (Chrome 70)
153 Points ∼46%
Nokia 6 2018
117 Points ∼35% -24%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼33% -27%
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro (Chrome 68)
109 Points ∼33% -29%
Honor 9 Lite (Chrome 63)
108 Points ∼32% -29%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 ProXiaomi Redmi Note 5Xiaomi Redmi 6 ProXiaomi Mi 6XHonor 9 LiteNokia 6 2018BQ Aquaris X2Huawei Mate 20 ProAverage 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-15%
17%
2%
8%
-19%
-8%
100%
-32%
-35%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
63.68 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.4
-2%
62.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
71.94 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
61.29 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
62.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
72.38 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
14%
47.1 (3.4 - 87.1, n=111)
-26%
45.5 (3.4 - 87.1, n=317)
-29%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.91 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.4
-1%
83.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
83.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
83.42 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
82.91 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
83.18 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
-1%
66.3 (8.2 - 96.5, n=111)
-21%
63.7 (8.2 - 96.5, n=317)
-24%
Random Write 4KB
67.27
16.3
-76%
72.6
8%
6.89
-90%
66.83
-1%
15.3
-77%
14.4
-79%
157.84
135%
18.9 (0.75 - 77.3, n=151)
-72%
16.1 (0.14 - 164, n=607)
-76%
Random Read 4KB
55.55
48.9
-12%
66.87
20%
72.98
31%
68.39
23%
38.78
-30%
43.9
-21%
157.42
183%
36.3 (3.59 - 117, n=151)
-35%
38.3 (1.59 - 173, n=607)
-31%
Sequential Write 256KB
119.9
121.6
1%
212.87
78%
203.7
70%
138.21
15%
118.32
-1%
188.7
57%
196.39
64%
95 (14.8 - 189, n=151)
-21%
79.9 (2.99 - 246, n=607)
-33%
Sequential Read 256KB
278.9
287.6
3%
278.66
0%
271.98
-2%
269.56
-3%
272.59
-2%
270.5
-3%
853.28
206%
230 (25.8 - 440, n=151)
-18%
230 (12.1 - 895, n=607)
-18%
0102030Tooltip
: Ø25.4 (13-27)
Dead Trigger 2
0102030405060Tooltip
: Ø59.7 (56-60)
Max. Load
 33.5 °C33.1 °C34.5 °C 
 33.2 °C31.9 °C34.5 °C 
 32.8 °C32.6 °C32.9 °C 
Maximum: 34.5 °C
Average: 33.2 °C
31.1 °C32.1 °C32.2 °C
30.9 °C31.5 °C32.8 °C
31 °C31.3 °C32.1 °C
Maximum: 32.8 °C
Average: 31.7 °C
Power Supply (max.)  29.4 °C | Room Temperature 20 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.2 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.5 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 35.7 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 34.2 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.4 °C / 76 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2030.731.9252531.43126.828.34026.325.85029.835.16327.426.2802125.610019.525.812518.826.816019.238.820017.642.925016.950.431515.855.14001561.45001568.263014.771.380014.872.9100014.675125014.375.9160013.476.7200014.478.1250014.476.9315014.876.140001575.9500014.873.6630014.772.480001570.21000014.969.21250015.268.31600015.751.5SPL26.886.9N0.967.7median 15median 70.2Delta1.21238.144.137.636.935.933.428.12828.625.627.823.929.824.530.425.922.220.123.930.82043.319.44817.253.216.460.516.562.315.16415.16514.667.914.470.413.771.812.373.312.17311.869.411.766.711.763.911.662.911.654.811.56511.56911.655.756.725.981.110.40.846.2median 14.4median 63.93.39.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Redmi Note 6 ProXiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 48% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.12 / 2.62 / 2.65 Watt
Load midlight 3.65 / 5.73 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Honor 9 Lite
3000 mAh
Nokia 6 2018
3000 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2
3100 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-15%
-13%
13%
19%
30%
9%
4%
-6%
14%
Idle Minimum *
1.12
1
11%
1.3
-16%
0.65
42%
0.85
24%
0.67
40%
0.65
42%
0.95
15%
0.981 (0.6 - 1.75, n=9)
12%
0.881 (0.2 - 3.4, n=635)
21%
Idle Average *
2.62
2.6
1%
2.1
20%
1.94
26%
2
24%
1.76
33%
2.24
15%
2.17
17%
2.28 (1.4 - 4.48, n=9)
13%
1.721 (0.6 - 6.2, n=634)
34%
Idle Maximum *
2.65
2.9
-9%
3.7
-40%
1.97
26%
2.04
23%
1.78
33%
2.26
15%
2.25
15%
2.66 (2 - 4.5, n=9)
-0%
1.998 (0.74 - 6.6, n=635)
25%
Load Average *
3.65
5
-37%
4.5
-23%
4.65
-27%
3.23
12%
2.82
23%
3.87
-6%
4.47
-22%
4.58 (3.65 - 7.92, n=9)
-25%
4.03 (0.8 - 10.8, n=629)
-10%
Load Maximum *
5.73
8.2
-43%
6
-5%
5.93
-3%
4.93
14%
4.56
20%
6.8
-19%
6.15
-7%
7.47 (5.1 - 13.6, n=9)
-30%
5.75 (1.2 - 14.2, n=629)
-0%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
19h 11min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
16h 01min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 12min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 55min
Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6 Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Honor 9 Lite
3000 mAh
Nokia 6 2018
3000 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2
3100 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Battery Runtime
7%
17%
-32%
-26%
12%
-36%
4%
Reader / Idle
1151
1824
58%
1765
53%
1046
-9%
965
-16%
1833
59%
1747
52%
H.264
972
902
-7%
1214
25%
608
-37%
622
-36%
675
-31%
854
-12%
WiFi v1.3
961
872
-9%
868
-10%
495
-48%
601
-37%
942
-2%
617
-36%
767
-20%
Load
295
258
-13%
293
-1%
192
-35%
253
-14%
362
23%
282
-4%

Pros

+ 做工出色
+ IPS屏幕素质高
+ 续航时间长
+ 相机可圈可点
+ GPS定位准确
+ 几乎没有发热问题

Cons

- 性能(软件)
- 扬声器
- 没有TypeC接口
- PWM调光
- WLAN信号一般

总结-在这个价位,无人能敌

In review: Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro. Test unit provided by TradingShenzhen.
In review: Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro. Test unit provided by TradingShenzhen.

通过这台红米Note 6 Pro,小米给了我们一台价格低廉但综合性能不错的手机。即使和上一代差距不大,小米还是做出了正确的升级。前代偏蓝的屏幕在这台手机上不再存在,它的这块IPS面板是中端机型里的佼佼者,有着出色的色彩还原和高亮度。除此之外,相机和续航同样让人满意。

我们仍然希望最新的MIUI版本更新将带来更好的性能,因为现在这个系统并不能完全发挥骁龙636的性能。我们对这台机子还有其他一些小的抱怨,例如屏幕闪烁,单声道扬声器以及即使在2018年还是缺少的Type-C接口。

毫无疑问,红米Note 6 Pro是一台值得我们推荐的手机。然而,考虑到小米未来还会推出几台高性价比的中端机型,红米Note 6 Pro是否有着比小米A2或是小米A2 Lite更好的性价比?

“千元中端机的质量在过去的几个月得到了很大的提升。选择红米Note 6 Pro不会是一个错误。”

Xiaomi Redmi Note 6 Pro - 10/31/2018 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
42 / 60 → 70%
Weight
90%
Battery
98%
Display
89%
Games Performance
45 / 63 → 72%
Application Performance
59 / 70 → 84%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
62 / 91 → 68%
Camera
70%
Average
76%
86%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 红米Note 6 Pro智能手机评测
Marcus Herbrich, 2018-11-25 (Update: 2018-11-25)