Notebookcheck Logo

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android

更多溢价。 谷歌的Pixel 6 Pro比其较小的兄弟姐妹提供更多的功能,主要集中在相机和显示屏上。在我们的评论中,我们会发现这种溢价是否真的值得。
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...
5G Android ARM Google Pixel Smartphone Touchscreen

谷歌的Pixel 6 Pro是 Pixel 6 ,是装备更好的竞争者。它拥有更大的显示屏,分辨率和刷新率都更高,电池更大,内存也更大。相机设置乍一看非常相似,但与Pixel 6不同的是,Pixel 6 Pro配备了光学变焦。

在欧洲,该设备有两种配置,一种是128GB的,一种是256GB的,起价分别为899美元和999美元。美国客户还可以选择512GB存储空间,价格为100美元。

Google Pixel 6 Pro (Pixel 6 Series)
Processor
Google Tensor 8 x 1.8 - 2.8 GHz, Exynos X1 / Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-G78 MP20
Memory
12288 MB 
, LPDDR5
Display
6.70 inch 19.5:9, 3120 x 1440 pixel 513 PPI, Capacitive, 10 multi touch points, LTPO-OLED, Corning Gorilla Glass Victus, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 114 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer, OTG, eSIM
Networking
Wi-Fi 6E (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.2, 2G (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19), LTE (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 48, 66, 71), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 20, 25, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.9 x 163.9 x 75.9
Battery
5003 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.85, 25 mm, 1/1.31", 1.2 µm) + 48 MPix (4x optical zoom, f/3.5, 104 mm, 1/2", 0.8 µm) + 12 MPix (ultra wide. f/2.2, 17 mm, 114°, 1.25 µm), Camera2-API: Full
Secondary Camera: 11.1 MPix (f/2.2, 20 mm, 1.22 µm, fix focus)
Additional features
Speakers: Dual, Keyboard: Onscreen, USB-Cabel, SIM-Needle, OTG-adapter, 24 Months Warranty, Body-SAR: 1.40 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.99 W/kg; GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), Galileo (E1, E5a), BeiDou (B1, B1C, B2a), QZSS (L1), fanless, waterproof
Weight
210 g
Price
899 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
89 %
04/2022
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20
210 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"3120x1440
88.7 %
05/2022
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920
196 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.60"2340x1080
87.4 %
02/2022
Xiaomi 12 Pro
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
204 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.73"3200x1440
90.6 %
10/2021
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15, A15 GPU 5-Core
203 g256 GB NVMe6.10"2532x1170
89 %
04/2022
Oppo Find X5 Pro
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
221 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"3216x1440

尽管谷歌Pixel 6 Pro拥有更大的显示屏和更大的电池,但它只是略大,而且比Pixel 6多出3克(0.1盎司)的重量。由于显示屏边框略窄,加上两侧的弧形玻璃,我们还发现显示屏与机身的比例提高到89%。

我们的评测单元的金属框架是抛光的,因此和覆盖在两侧的康宁大猩猩玻璃Victus一样容易受到指纹和污迹的影响。构建质量总体良好,缝隙均匀而狭窄,只有在翘起时才有轻微的吱吱声。

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro获得了IP68认证,可以防止灰尘和水的进入,有三种颜色可供选择。暴雨黑、阴天白和阳光色。

尺寸比较

163.9 mm 75.9 mm 8.9 mm 210 g163.6 mm 74.6 mm 8.66 mm 204 g163.7 mm 73.9 mm 8.5 mm 221 g157.4 mm 75.8 mm 7.6 mm 196 g146.7 mm 71.5 mm 7.65 mm 203 g

连接性 - 带有快速USB的Pixel 6 Pro

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro有一个快速的USB 3.2 Gen 1 USB端口,用于快速数据传输和USB OTG。不幸的是,它不支持有线显示输出。支持蓝牙5.2和NFC。

总的来说,Pixel 6 Pro沿袭了其前辈的极简主义做法。它缺乏对microSD存储扩展、通知LED、红外辐射器、FM广播接收器等的支持。

软件--更新周期长,包括Android 15

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro默认配备了Android 12,与Pixel 6,更新周期长,至少有三年的功能升级,外加两年的安全更新,共计五年。

6 Pro支持所有知名的Pixel功能,开箱后没有发现预装的第三方应用程序。

通信和GNSS - 带有Wi-Fi 6和VHT160的快速Wi-Fi

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro支持所有现代通信标准,包括蓝牙5.2、NFC和5G Sub6。

虽然理论上它的Wi-Fi调制解调器支持Wi-Fi 6E,但在实践中,它被证明是非常不稳定和不可靠的,当连接到我们的华硕ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000参考路由器时,经常出现信号丢失,这是谷歌需要解决的问题。由于对VHT160的支持,将我们自己限制在Wi-Fi 6是更可靠和极快的。

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1736 (874min - 1780max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1465 (1307min - 1536max) MBit/s ∼84% -16%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
826 (765min - 881max) MBit/s ∼48% -52%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
820 (799min - 837max) MBit/s ∼47% -53%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72.5 - 1736, n=36, last 2 years)
704 MBit/s ∼41% -59%
iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1710 (876min - 1774max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1214 (516min - 1524max) MBit/s ∼71% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
899 (432min - 966max) MBit/s ∼53% -47%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
890 (433min - 934max) MBit/s ∼52% -48%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78.3 - 1710, n=36, last 2 years)
716 MBit/s ∼42% -58%
iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000 6GHz 6E
Average of class Smartphone
  (1346 - 1704, n=3, last 2 years)
1486 MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1346 (696min - 1430max) MBit/s ∼91%
iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000 6GHz 6E
Average of class Smartphone
  (1565 - 1751, n=3, last 2 years)
1673 MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1565 (777min - 1666max) MBit/s ∼94%
iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
698 (632min - 775max) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.59 - 1395, n=236, last 2 years)
481 MBit/s ∼69%
iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
660 (599min - 698max) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (15.5 - 1348, n=236, last 2 years)
469 MBit/s ∼71%
09018027036045054063072081090099010801170126013501440153016201710Tooltip
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000 6GHz 6E; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1323 (696-1430)
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000 6GHz 6E; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1538 (777-1666)
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, ARM Mali-G78 MP20; iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1705 (874-1780)
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø825 (765-881)
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, ARM Mali-G78 MP20; iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1681 (876-1774)
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 GT-AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø885 (432-966)
室内的GPS测试
在室内
户外的GPS测试
在户外

Pixel 6 Pro支持所有常见的定位服务,并设法在室内以高精确度获得卫星锁定。

在我们通常的自行车旅行中,我们将其准确性与Garmin Venu 2。事实证明,Pixel 6 Pro并不是特别准确,记录的轨迹和我们的实际位置之间有一些偏差。尽管如此,它仍然足以满足日常导航的需要。

GPS测试:环湖
GPS测试:环湖
GPS测试:转折点
GPS测试:转折点
GPS测试:总结
GPS测试:总结

电话和通话质量

在电话方面,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro与Pixel 6非常相似,通过一张Nano SIM卡和一张eSIM卡支持双卡。它既支持VoLTE,也支持Wi-Fi通话。

通话质量非常好,至少在使用该设备的耳机时是如此。语音传输清晰自然,在谈话的几秒钟内有良好的环境噪音消除。该设备的三个麦克风和软件算法在这方面做得很好。

然而,在扬声器上,我们发现Pixel 6 Pro的声音略显混浊和空洞,麦克风范围有些有限。

相机 - 改进的Pixel 6设置

Pixel 6 Pro自拍
Pixel 6 Pro自拍

目前这两款Pixel手机的摄像头设置非常相似。唯一的区别是Pixel 6 Pro的光学变焦和更高分辨率的前置摄像头。它还支持[email protected][email protected]视频录制。

主摄像头和超广角镜头都与Pixel 6,你可以在我们的Pixel 6评测中找到关于这两个摄像头的更多细节。额外的4倍潜望式变焦可以实现20倍的总数字变焦,至少根据谷歌的说法。在现实中,小于8倍的变焦水平继续使用主镜头,只有在8倍以上才会转向潜望镜镜头。请记住,这只是在主要物体不超过3英尺远的情况下才是如此。

视频是以60 FPS的UHD格式记录的,变焦限制在7倍。然而,如果你降低FPS或视频分辨率,你也可以利用相机的全部变焦能力。

2倍变焦
4倍光学变焦
10倍变焦
20倍变焦

Pixel 6 Pro变焦(从左到右):2倍、4倍、10倍和20倍变焦

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.

HauptkameraHauptkameraUltraweitwinkel5-facher ZoomLow-Light
click to load images
ColorChecker
3.9 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
0.5 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
4 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 6 Pro: 4.78 ∆E min: 0.5 - max: 11.13 ∆E
ColorChecker
30 ∆E
54.8 ∆E
39.9 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
45.2 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.8 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
43.7 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
63.9 ∆E
31.9 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
37.7 ∆E
75.8 ∆E
44.5 ∆E
42.5 ∆E
92.9 ∆E
71 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel 6 Pro: 47.12 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 92.93 ∆E

配件和保修 - Pixel智能手机,不带充电器

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro配备了一条USB-C电缆,一个USB OTG加密狗(USB-C到A),以及一个SIM卡工具。兼容的有线或无线充电器需要单独购买。

与欧洲机型不同,在美国销售的设备仅有12个月的保修期,可选择延长保修期至两年,费用为199美元,或延长至三年,月费为9美元。

输入设备和处理 - 没有人脸检测

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的电容式触摸屏工作无误,感觉非常流畅。它可以同时检测多达10个输入,而且总体上非常准确。内置的振动电机非常坚固和清晰。

该设备有一个屏内指纹识别器,虽然非常快,但不是特别准确和可靠。脸部检测是不可用的。

显示屏 - LTPO OLED,最高可达120赫兹

子像素阵列
子像素阵列

6.7英寸显示屏以原生QHD+分辨率运行,不能在软件中降低。此外,这个LTPO OLED显示屏支持在60和120赫兹之间的自适应刷新率切换。

照明非常均匀和一致,在我们的APL50测试中,显示屏在全白图像上达到了814尼特的峰值亮度,在均匀分布的黑色和白色瓷砖上达到了1,053尼特(中心)。在禁用环境光传感器的情况下,最大亮度被限制在489尼特。

PWM闪烁与Pixel 6相同,在最低亮度时在176.1和376.6赫兹之间有不均匀的闪烁,随着亮度水平的增加,幅度更加平缓。尽管如此,敏感的用户可能会遇到该设备的问题,特别是由于不支持直流调光。

797
cd/m²
800
cd/m²
814
cd/m²
796
cd/m²
794
cd/m²
813
cd/m²
793
cd/m²
792
cd/m²
809
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 814 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 800.9 cd/m² Minimum: 1.91 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 794 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.4
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.64-98 Ø5.6
98.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
Google Pixel 6 Pro
LTPO-OLED, 3120x1440, 6.70
Samsung Galaxy S22+
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.60
Xiaomi 12 Pro
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.73
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
OLED, 2532x1170, 6.10
Oppo Find X5 Pro
AMOLED, 3216x1440, 6.70
Screen
-38%
-8%
8%
1%
Brightness middle
794
1090
37%
959
21%
1050
32%
746
-6%
Brightness
801
1097
37%
977
22%
1058
32%
744
-7%
Brightness Distribution
97
98
1%
96
-1%
98
1%
97
0%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
0.9
2.5
-178%
1.1
-22%
1
-11%
0.9
-0%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
2.2
3.8
-73%
3.1
-41%
2.4
-9%
1.6
27%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.5
2.3
-53%
1.9
-27%
1.5
-0%
1.6
-7%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.04 108%
2.22 99%
2.2 100%
2.23 99%
CCT
6654 98%
6492 100%
6498 100%
6504 100%
6499 100%

* ... 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 360.5 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 360.5 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 360.5 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 21940 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

最低亮度
25%的亮度
25 %
50%的亮度
50 %
75%的亮度
75 %
最大手动亮度
100%

具有各种亮度设置的固定变焦

我们发现颜色配置文件 "自然 "能产生最准确的颜色。请记住,它只限于较小的sRGB色彩空间。如果你想使用更大的DCI-P3色彩空间,你需要启用 "自适应 "或 "生动 "色彩模式。两者都具有非常相似的白平衡,但饱和度不同。

灰度(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
灰度(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
颜色(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
颜色(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
色彩空间(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
色彩空间(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
饱和度(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)
饱和度(色彩配置文件:自然;目标色彩空间:sRGB)

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
1.354 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.73 ms rise
↘ 0.624 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. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
0.692 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.346 ms rise
↘ 0.346 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 0.692 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (37 ms).

户外使用性总体上非常好,但不如其他设备,例如,Test Samsung Galaxy S22+ Smartphone - Die große Version des Galaxy S22 Galaxy S22 Plus

正如预期的那样,可视角度非常好,只有亮度略有下降,在极端角度下没有明显的色差。

在户外
在户外
视角
视角

性能 - 采用谷歌SoC的Pixel智能手机

与它的兄弟姐妹一样,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro采用了谷歌自己的Google TensorSoC。它可以使用12GB的LPDDR5内存,Titan M2安全芯片,以及一个集成的ARM Mali-G78 MP20GPU。这种组合绝对可以在移动设备的高端光谱中找到,应该会有非常流畅的系统和游戏性能。

总的来说,该SoC的表现非常好,但结果是无法跟上更近期的竞争对手。然而,去年的SoC更有可能成为有价值的竞争对手,但内存写入性能比预期的略慢。不过,这在日常使用中应该不会产生任何影响。

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
1749 Points ∼100% +65%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1257 Points ∼72% +19%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1192 Points ∼68% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
1133 Points ∼65% +7%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
1057 Points ∼60%
Average Google Tensor
  (1041 - 1057, n=2)
1049 Points ∼60% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=262, last 2 years)
649 Points ∼37% -39%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
4829 Points ∼100% +64%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
3738 Points ∼77% +27%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
3599 Points ∼75% +22%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
3488 Points ∼72% +19%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
2941 Points ∼61%
Average Google Tensor
  (2805 - 2941, n=2)
2873 Points ∼59% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=262, last 2 years)
2142 Points ∼44% -27%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
962824 Points ∼100% +34%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
856953 Points ∼89% +19%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
850401 Points ∼88% +18%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
800608 Points ∼83% +11%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
720905 Points ∼75%
Average Google Tensor
  (702981 - 720905, n=2)
711943 Points ∼74% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (111952 - 1041980, n=101, last 2 years)
546770 Points ∼57% -24%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
14998 Points ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
13131 Points ∼88% +13%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
12144 Points ∼81% +5%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
11605 Points ∼77%
Average Google Tensor
  (10409 - 11605, n=2)
11007 Points ∼73% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 18567, n=132, last 2 years)
10102 Points ∼67% -13%
CrossMark - Overall
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
1135 Points ∼100% +25%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
1129 Points ∼99% +25%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
956 Points ∼84% +6%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
906 Points ∼80%
Average Google Tensor
  (849 - 906, n=2)
878 Points ∼77% -3%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
811 Points ∼71% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (226 - 1169, n=44, last 2 years)
740 Points ∼65% -18%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
7186 Points ∼100% +19%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6799 Points ∼95% +12%
Average Google Tensor
  (6053 - 6287, n=2)
6170 Points ∼86% +2%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
6053 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6007 Points ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (895 - 8124, n=181, last 2 years)
4139 Points ∼58% -32%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
0 Points ∼0% -100%
System
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
11373 Points ∼100% +26%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
10340 Points ∼91% +15%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
10006 Points ∼88% +11%
Average Google Tensor
  (9009 - 9085, n=2)
9047 Points ∼80% 0%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
9009 Points ∼79%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1542 - 19657, n=181, last 2 years)
7346 Points ∼65% -18%
Memory
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
6844 Points ∼100% +8%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6523 Points ∼95% +3%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
6336 Points ∼93%
Average Google Tensor
  (6071 - 6336, n=2)
6204 Points ∼91% -2%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
5125 Points ∼75% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1012 - 9044, n=181, last 2 years)
4781 Points ∼70% -25%
Graphics
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
21944 Points ∼100% +65%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
17475 Points ∼80% +31%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
15216 Points ∼69% +14%
Average Google Tensor
  (13319 - 15303, n=2)
14311 Points ∼65% +7%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
13319 Points ∼61%
Average of class Smartphone
  (478 - 25642, n=181, last 2 years)
7022 Points ∼32% -47%
Web
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
1960 Points ∼100% +11%
Average Google Tensor
  (1765 - 1851, n=2)
1808 Points ∼92% +2%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
1765 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1669 Points ∼85% -5%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1444 Points ∼74% -18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (718 - 2392, n=181, last 2 years)
1374 Points ∼70% -22%
AImark - Score v2.x
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144
105536 Points ∼100% +1725%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
72572 Points ∼69% +1155%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4293 - 286905, n=121, last 2 years)
63547 Points ∼60% +999%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192
6323 Points ∼6% +9%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
5982 Points ∼6% +3%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
5782 Points ∼5%
Average Google Tensor
  (5723 - 5782, n=2)
5753 Points ∼5% -1%
UL Procyon AI Inference - Overall Score
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
68880 Points ∼100% +146%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
63613 Points ∼92% +128%
Average Google Tensor
  (27946 - 28581, n=2)
28264 Points ∼41% +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288
27946 Points ∼41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1555 - 68880, n=57, last 2 years)
12864 Points ∼19% -54%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
2864 Points ∼100% +43%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2523 Points ∼88% +26%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2513 Points ∼88% +26%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1998 Points ∼70%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1935 Points ∼68% -3%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
3059 Points ∼100% +55%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2609 Points ∼85% +32%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2575 Points ∼84% +31%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2202 Points ∼72% +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1973 Points ∼64%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
11700 Points ∼100% +66%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10384 Points ∼89% +47%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10175 Points ∼87% +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7890 Points ∼67% +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7057 Points ∼60%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9927 Points ∼100% +52%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9826 Points ∼99% +51%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
9386 Points ∼95% +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7710 Points ∼78% +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6516 Points ∼66%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4150 Points ∼100% +6%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3919 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3909 Points ∼94% 0%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3902 Points ∼94% 0%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
1852 Points ∼45% -53%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
18090 Points ∼100% +69%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
16221 Points ∼90% +51%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
14680 Points ∼81% +37%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
13950 Points ∼77% +30%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10733 Points ∼59%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10005 Points ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9149 Points ∼91% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9105 Points ∼91% +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7742 Points ∼77%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
5956 Points ∼60% -23%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
12123 Points ∼100% +26%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11221 Points ∼93% +16%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10958 Points ∼90% +14%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9654 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
7773 Points ∼64% -19%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
31940 Points ∼100% +105%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
25285 Points ∼79% +63%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
23949 Points ∼75% +54%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
20842 Points ∼65% +34%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
15556 Points ∼49%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4296 Points ∼100% +4%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4147 Points ∼97%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4120 Points ∼96% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3923 Points ∼91% -5%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
2130 Points ∼50% -49%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
121 fps ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼98% +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
101 fps ∼83%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼50% -41%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼50% -41%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
425 fps ∼100% +240%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
417 fps ∼98% +234%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
380 fps ∼89% +204%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
320 fps ∼75% +156%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
125 fps ∼29%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼100% +83%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
117 fps ∼98% +80%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps ∼55%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼50% -8%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼50% -8%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
251 fps ∼100% +182%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
229 fps ∼91% +157%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
214 fps ∼85% +140%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
181 fps ∼72% +103%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
89 fps ∼35%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
114 fps ∼100% +171%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
87 fps ∼76% +107%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼53% +43%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56 fps ∼49% +33%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps ∼37%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
169 fps ∼100% +160%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
151 fps ∼89% +132%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
130 fps ∼77% +100%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
111 fps ∼66% +71%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps ∼38%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
73 fps ∼100% +143%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼82% +100%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps ∼53% +30%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps ∼49% +20%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
30 fps ∼41%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
95 fps ∼100% +98%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
72 fps ∼76% +50%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
71 fps ∼75% +48%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
63 fps ∼66% +31%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
48 fps ∼51%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼100% +88%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54 fps ∼90% +69%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps ∼60% +13%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
32 fps ∼53%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
27 fps ∼45% -16%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40 fps ∼100% +33%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
39 fps ∼98% +30%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
34 fps ∼85% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
31 fps ∼78% +3%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
30 fps ∼75%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps ∼100% +56%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
60 fps ∼90% +40%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps ∼79% +23%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
44 fps ∼66% +2%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43 fps ∼64%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
119 fps ∼100% +72%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
94 fps ∼79% +36%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
92 fps ∼77% +33%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
69 fps ∼58%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼50% -13%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
181.6 Points ∼100% +98%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
107.364 Points ∼59% +17%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
103 Points ∼57% +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
91.7 Points ∼50%
Average Google Tensor (90.1 - 91.7, n=2)
90.9 Points ∼50% -1%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
84.1 Points ∼46% -8%
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 182.6, n=177, last 2 years)
59.6 Points ∼33% -35%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
413.7 Points ∼100% +118%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
189.6 Points ∼46%
Average Google Tensor (180.4 - 189.6, n=2)
185 Points ∼45% -2%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
172.8 Points ∼42% -9%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
147.5 Points ∼36% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
135.54 Points ∼33% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 414, n=184, last 2 years)
110.8 Points ∼27% -42%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
243 runs/min ∼100% +119%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
111 runs/min ∼46%
Average Google Tensor (104 - 111, n=2)
107.5 runs/min ∼44% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
105 runs/min ∼43% -5%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
104 runs/min ∼43% -6%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
73.5 runs/min ∼30% -34%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 244, n=162, last 2 years)
58.9 runs/min ∼24% -47%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
248 Points ∼100% +136%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
153 Points ∼62% +46%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
133 Points ∼54% +27%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
119 Points ∼48% +13%
Average Google Tensor (105 - 110, n=2)
107.5 Points ∼43% +2%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
105 Points ∼42%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 265, n=189, last 2 years)
89.5 Points ∼36% -15%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
64222 Points ∼100% +46%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
44398 Points ∼69% +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
44034 Points ∼69%
Average Google Tensor (43376 - 44034, n=2)
43705 Points ∼68% -1%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
38407 Points ∼60% -13%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
29750 Points ∼46% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (3526 - 65969, n=193, last 2 years)
22101 Points ∼34% -50%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 15230, n=195, last 2 years)
3281 ms * ∼100% -259%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)
1557.9 ms * ∼47% -70%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)
1330 ms * ∼41% -45%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)
1125 ms * ∼34% -23%
Average Google Tensor (915 - 1034, n=2)
975 ms * ∼30% -7%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)
915 ms * ∼28%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)
413.6 ms * ∼13% +55%

* ... smaller is better

Google Pixel 6 ProSamsung Galaxy S22+Xiaomi 12 ProOppo Find X5 ProGoogle Pixel 5Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
130%
203%
80%
-18%
80%
10%
Sequential Read 256KB
1560
1629.99
4%
1620
4%
1410
-10%
851
-45%
1567 ?(1030 - 1898, n=34)
0%
891 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=260, last 2 years)
-43%
Sequential Write 256KB
242.5
1001.67
313%
1465
504%
894
269%
190
-22%
752 ?(233 - 1095, n=34)
210%
430 ?(11.9 - 1465, n=260, last 2 years)
77%
Random Read 4KB
129.4
306.7
137%
324.9
151%
183.7
42%
138.9
7%
232 ?(126.2 - 322, n=34)
79%
158.5 ?(13.5 - 325, n=260, last 2 years)
22%
Random Write 4KB
178.5
297.67
67%
448.9
151%
210.4
18%
155.9
-13%
232 ?(121.4 - 323, n=34)
30%
151.3 ?(5.5 - 449, n=260, last 2 years)
-15%

排放 - 谷歌张量的短期性能爆发

温度

闲置时,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro基本保持凉爽,即使在负载下也只是选择性地轻微升温。

然而,在其凉爽的外壳内,情况就大不相同了。在运行3DMark Wild Life压力测试时,谷歌的TensorSoc受到了极大的影响,不得不对其性能进行热调节,最高可达56%。不过,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的情况非常好,因为这与三星的三星Galaxy S21 FE 5G评论。粉丝版智能手机进入下一回合Galaxy S21 FE'sSnapdragon 888 非常相似。

Max. Load
 34.5 °C33.9 °C34.2 °C 
 35.5 °C36.8 °C34.7 °C 
 34.2 °C37.3 °C33.8 °C 
Maximum: 37.3 °C
Average: 35 °C
33.7 °C35 °C35.1 °C
33.8 °C35.5 °C36 °C
33.4 °C36 °C35.5 °C
Maximum: 36 °C
Average: 34.9 °C
Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.3 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.3 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
81.2 (47.5min) % ∼100% +87%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
62.7 (37.2min) % ∼77% +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
58.2 (27.4min) % ∼72% +34%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47.2 (27.4min) % ∼58% +9%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43.4 (17.4min) % ∼53%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe
70.7 (13.1min) % ∼100% +61%
Oppo Find X5 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
62.7 (9.64min) % ∼89% +43%
Samsung Galaxy S22+
Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60.9 (8.06min) % ∼86% +38%
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
44 (5.37min) % ∼62%
Xiaomi 12 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
% ∼0% -100%
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø7.56 (5.37-12.2)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø10.9 (9.64-15.4)
Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.7.2: Ø5.44 (5.09-9.07)
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø27.6 (17.4-40.2)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø41.7 (37.2-59.4)
Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø22.6 (20-34.1)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø43.7 (38.1-60.9)

演讲者

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的两个扬声器总体表现相对较好,低音不足,只有在高音量时才会变得更加明显和引人注目。

有线声音输出只支持通过USB-C,而且不包括兼容的加密狗,必须单独购买。无线蓝牙音频输出通过SBC、AAC、aptX、aptX HD和LDAC支持高清晰音频。

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.435.9252829.73132.624.34027.727.1503435.6632722.88023.619.410022.327.512517.738.816016.148.320012.852.525013.156.53151256400959.55001166.463010.767.680010.373.3100010.972.2125012.169.5160011.869.720001263.7250011.863.6315011.965.1400012.974.7500013.379.6630013.476.6800013.570.61000013.664.11250014.8691600014.164.6SPL24.684.6N0.658.7median 12.8median 65.1Delta1.16.737.434.32836.532.636.327.731.23441.32736.523.635.922.338.317.739.516.151.612.850.913.156.312609631167.910.770.910.374.310.977.112.17911.879.61281.511.881.711.983.312.980.813.378.613.472.713.578.613.671.414.868.914.16424.691.30.686.3median 12.8median 71.41.110.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel 6 ProSamsung Galaxy S22+
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel 6 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 23% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy S22+ audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

能源管理--超过5000毫安时的Pixel 6 Pro

消耗功率

在我们的测试中,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的耗电量原来并不明显,总体上相当低。

它的5,003毫安时电池支持最高30瓦的有线充电,谷歌提供的可选29瓦电源。第三方电源将需要支持USB-PD 3.0,以实现快速充电。

另外,Pixel 6 Pro也可以进行无线充电。可选的谷歌Pixel Stand 2的充电功率高达23W,其他经Qi认证的EPP电源仅有12W,设备支持反向无线充电。

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.03 / 0.11 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.7 / 1 / 1.04 Watt
Load midlight 6.87 / 9.87 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Google Pixel 6 Pro
5003 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S22+
4500 mAh
Xiaomi 12 Pro
4600 mAh
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
3095 mAh
Oppo Find X5 Pro
5000 mAh
Average Google Tensor
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-7%
-10%
6%
-15%
3%
-25%
Idle Minimum *
0.7
0.71
-1%
0.94
-34%
0.51
27%
1.24
-77%
0.69 ?(0.68 - 0.7, n=2)
1%
0.915 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=206, last 2 years)
-31%
Idle Average *
1
1.1
-10%
1.24
-24%
1.54
-54%
1.39
-39%
1 ?(1 - 1, n=2)
-0%
1.702 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=206, last 2 years)
-70%
Idle Maximum *
1.04
1.19
-14%
1.34
-29%
1.57
-51%
1.42
-37%
1.03 ?(1.02 - 1.04, n=2)
1%
1.931 ?(0.69 - 4, n=206, last 2 years)
-86%
Load Average *
6.87
7.74
-13%
5.7
17%
3.06
55%
3.58
48%
6.13 ?(5.39 - 6.87, n=2)
11%
4.47 ?(2.1 - 7.74, n=206, last 2 years)
35%
Load Maximum *
9.87
9.64
2%
8.12
18%
4.59
53%
6.99
29%
9.44 ?(9 - 9.87, n=2)
4%
7.33 ?(3.56 - 11.9, n=206, last 2 years)
26%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910Tooltip
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor: Ø5.64 (1.196-10.2)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1: Ø5.27 (0.963-10.9)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

0123456789101112Tooltip
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø10.3 (9.15-12.5)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.58 (7.9-10.8)
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor; Idle 1min: Ø0.843 (0.767-1.248)
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1; Idle 1min: Ø0.933 (0.856-1.058)

电池寿命

尽管Pixel 6 Pro的电池很大,但在我们的测试中,它的表现几乎与Pixel 6,它的电池小得多,为4,614 mAh。进一步的改进是可能的,例如支持更现代和灵活的自适应显示刷新率。

综合考虑,该设备应能轻松度过漫长的一天。

Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 99)
11h 07min
Google Pixel 6 Pro
5003 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G
4500 mAh
Xiaomi 12 Pro
4600 mAh
Apple iPhone 13 Pro
3095 mAh
Oppo Find X5 Pro
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-11%
15%
49%
18%
Reader / Idle
1430
2036
2614
1269
WiFi v1.3
667
594
-11%
766
15%
993
49%
788
18%
Load
388
337
333
367
H.264
934
788
1493
1142

Pros

+ 明亮且色彩准确的120 Hz OLED
+ 快速的SoC
+ IP68认证
+ 强大的三摄像头
+ 更新周期长

Cons

- 没有存储扩展
- 自适应刷新率仅在60和120赫兹之间
- 免提电话的语音质量差
- 没有通过USB的显示输出

结论 - 强大的设备

在审查中。谷歌Pixel 6 Pro。评测单位由数码港提供
在审查中。谷歌Pixel 6 Pro。评测单位由数码港提供

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro在几个方面改进了更实惠的Pixel 6。它的圆形显示屏意味着拿在手里更舒服,而且你几乎注意不到它的尺寸增加。更高的120赫兹刷新率意味着它看起来和感觉都更流畅。改进后的相机阵列不仅有后置的长焦镜头,还有一个分辨率更高的前置相机。

无线和反向无线充电、防止灰尘和水进入的IP68认证、快速Wi-Fi和现代5G连接完成了整个包装,即使是最宽敞的SKU,其MSRP也只略高于1000美元。

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro是一款功能强大的高端智能手机,拥有纯粹的Android ,并拥有良好的三摄阵列。

与其更昂贵的竞争对手相比,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro确实存在一些不足之处。例如,它的USB 3.2端口不携带显示输出信号,而且它的自适应显示器只支持60或120赫兹。电池寿命肯定会从更灵活的方法中受益。在我们的测试中,它的Wi-Fi 6E支持变得非常不稳定和不可靠。Pixel 6 Pro的更新周期非常长,但我们过去曾遇到过更新分发和延迟的问题。说到这里,最新的4月更新及时到来,没有造成任何问题。

如果你想要一个长的更新周期,你也可以仔细看看三星的Galaxy S22-系列智能手机,它承诺比谷歌的Pixel 6-系列有一个额外的功能更新。其他强大的Android 智能手机包括小米12 ProFind X5 Pro,尽管这些手机的价格较高,而且并非在每个市场都有。

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

价格和可用性

Pixel 6 Pro可以直接通过Google购买。以及通常的零售渠道,如亚马逊.

Google Pixel 6 Pro - 04/12/2022 v7
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
91%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
68 / 70 → 97%
Weight
88%
Battery
89%
Display
92%
Games Performance
62 / 64 → 96%
Application Performance
81 / 86 → 94%
Temperature
93%
Noise
100%
Audio
76 / 90 → 84%
Camera
81%
Average
83%
89%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Finn D. Boerne
Editor of the original article: Finn D. Boerne - Translator - 450 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2017
Ninh Duy
Translator: Ninh Duy - Editorial Assistant - 233204 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008
contact me via: Facebook
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android
Daniel Schmidt, 2022-04-14 (Update: 2022-04-14)