Notebookcheck

Wiko U Feel 智能手机简短评测

Andreas Osthoff (translated by Delta Zhang), 01/18/2017
Android Smartphone Touchscreen

挥动手指产生不同。 U Feel是一台来自法国厂商Wiko的新主流智能手机。两个亮点则在于它的设计和指纹识别器,指纹识别器可以根据手指的动作来产生不同的操作。通过我们的评测可以看到这台手机的能力。

Wiko U Feel (U Feel Series)
Processor
Mediatek MT6735 1.3 GHz
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-T720
Memory
3072 MB 
Display
5 inch 16:9, 1280x720 pixel 294 PPI, 五点触控电容屏, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, 10.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm Audio, Card Reader: 最大64GB microSD, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度计, 距离传感器, 罗盘, 位置传感器, USB-OTG, SAR Head: 0.287 W/kg, Body SAR: 0.829 W/kg
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.0, 2G GSM (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G UMTS (900/1900/2100 MHz), 4G LTE Cat.4 (DL 150 Mbps, UL 50 Mbps, 800/1800/2100/2600 MHz), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.55 x 143 x 70.7
Battery
9.25 Wh, 2500 mAh Lithium-Ion, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 212 h, Talk time 2G (according to manufacturer): 13 h, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 25 h
Operating System
Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix (LED 闪光灯, 双视图)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix (LED 闪光灯)
Additional features
Speakers: 单扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, Keyboard Light: yes, 耳机, 快速入门指南, Micro-USB线缆, 电源适配器(5 Watts), SIM-card 转接器, Google-Apps, Wiko-Tools, My Launcher, Phone Assist, My Music, Apps Lock, Files Lock, Camera, Calculator, Torch, Clock, Sound Recorder, Calendar, Videos, FM Radio, Downloads, Clean Master, SIM Toolkit, Gallery, One Clean, Fingerprint, Smart Gesture, Smart , 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
145 g, Power Supply: 56 g
Price
200 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
49.8 MBit/s ∼100% +4%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
47.8 MBit/s ∼96%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
58.3 MBit/s ∼100% +12%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
52 MBit/s ∼89%
Wiko U Feel: overview
Wiko U Feel: overview
Wiko U Feel: crossing
Wiko U Feel: crossing
Wiko U Feel: turning point
Wiko U Feel: turning point
Garmin Edge 500: overview
Garmin Edge 500: overview
Garmin Edge 500: crossing
Garmin Edge 500: crossing
Garmin Edge 500: turning point
Garmin Edge 500: turning point

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the zoom step. 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

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: 58 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 5069 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

445
cd/m²
499
cd/m²
515
cd/m²
455
cd/m²
500
cd/m²
521
cd/m²
435
cd/m²
485
cd/m²
513
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 521 cd/m² Average: 485.3 cd/m² Minimum: 20.88 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 500 cd/m²
Contrast: 2273:1 (Black: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.3 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 5.2 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.17
Wiko U Feel
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Honor 5C
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
AMOLED, 1280x720, 5.2
HTC Desire 530
IPS, 1280x720, 5
LG X Screen
IPS, 1280x720, 5
ZTE Blade V7
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
Screen
-34%
11%
-15%
-30%
-50%
Brightness
485
498
3%
291
-40%
376
-22%
376
-22%
411
-15%
Brightness Distribution
83
93
12%
96
16%
91
10%
90
8%
96
16%
Black Level *
0.22
0.49
-123%
0.32
-45%
0.27
-23%
0.38
-73%
Contrast
2273
1051
-54%
1172
-48%
1452
-36%
1076
-53%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.3
6.2
2%
4.7
25%
6
5%
7.5
-19%
9.4
-49%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.2
7.4
-42%
3
42%
4.5
13%
9.9
-90%
11.6
-123%
Gamma
2.17 111%
2.28 105%
2.03 118%
2.26 106%
2.07 116%
2.25 107%
CCT
7536 86%
8664 75%
6291 103%
6975 93%
9704 67%
9597 68%

* ... 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 71 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (26.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
58 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 25 ms rise
↘ 33 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. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (43.4 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score
Honor 5C
53143 Points ∼100% +89%
ZTE Blade V7
37070 Points ∼70% +32%
Wiko U Feel
28175 Points ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
27232 Points ∼51% -3%
HTC Desire 530
23561 Points ∼44% -16%
LG X Screen
22955 Points ∼43% -19%
Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Wiko U Feel
1541 Points ∼100%
HTC Desire 530
1007 Points ∼65% -35%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Wiko U Feel
530 Points ∼100%
HTC Desire 530
298 Points ∼56% -44%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Honor 5C
3914 Points ∼100%
ZTE Blade V7
2669 Points ∼68%
LG X Screen
1436 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
1425 Points ∼36%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Honor 5C
906 Points ∼100%
ZTE Blade V7
614 Points ∼68%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
473 Points ∼52%
LG X Screen
473 Points ∼52%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Honor 5C
1418 Points ∼100% +65%
ZTE Blade V7
944 Points ∼67% +10%
Wiko U Feel
860 Points ∼61%
LG X Screen
716 Points ∼50% -17%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
709 Points ∼50% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Honor 5C
480 Points ∼100% +189%
ZTE Blade V7
245 Points ∼51% +48%
Wiko U Feel
166 Points ∼35%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
42 Points ∼9% -75%
LG X Screen
42 Points ∼9% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Honor 5C
563 Points ∼100% +179%
ZTE Blade V7
293 Points ∼52% +45%
Wiko U Feel
202 Points ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
53 Points ∼9% -74%
LG X Screen
53 Points ∼9% -74%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Honor 5C
13588 Points ∼100% +39%
ZTE Blade V7
10430 Points ∼77% +6%
Wiko U Feel
9801 Points ∼72%
LG X Screen
9033 Points ∼66% -8%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
9022 Points ∼66% -8%
HTC Desire 530
6583 Points ∼48% -33%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Honor 5C
11319 Points ∼100% +160%
ZTE Blade V7
6170 Points ∼55% +42%
Wiko U Feel
4355 Points ∼38%
HTC Desire 530
3871 Points ∼34% -11%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
3838 Points ∼34% -12%
LG X Screen
3791 Points ∼33% -13%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Honor 5C
11755 Points ∼100% +137%
ZTE Blade V7
6786 Points ∼58% +37%
Wiko U Feel
4969 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
4400 Points ∼37% -11%
LG X Screen
4352 Points ∼37% -12%
HTC Desire 530
4261 Points ∼36% -14%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Honor 5C
19 fps ∼100% +126%
ZTE Blade V7
12 fps ∼63% +43%
Wiko U Feel
8.4 fps ∼44%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
5.2 fps ∼27% -38%
LG X Screen
5.1 fps ∼27% -39%
HTC Desire 530
4.8 fps ∼25% -43%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Honor 5C
20 fps ∼100% +43%
Wiko U Feel
14 fps ∼70%
ZTE Blade V7
12 fps ∼60% -14%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
9.7 fps ∼49% -31%
LG X Screen
9.6 fps ∼48% -31%
HTC Desire 530
8.9 fps ∼45% -36%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL
Honor 5C
7.9 fps ∼100% +163%
ZTE Blade V7
4.5 fps ∼57% +50%
Wiko U Feel
3 fps ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
1.8 fps ∼23% -40%
LG X Screen
1.8 fps ∼23% -40%
HTC Desire 530
1.7 fps ∼22% -43%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Honor 5C
8.4 fps ∼100% +42%
Wiko U Feel
5.9 fps ∼70%
ZTE Blade V7
4.5 fps ∼54% -24%
HTC Desire 530
4 fps ∼48% -32%
LG X Screen
4 fps ∼48% -32%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
3.8 fps ∼45% -36%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Honor 5C
4.5 fps ∼100% +137%
ZTE Blade V7
2.9 fps ∼64% +53%
Wiko U Feel
1.9 fps ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
fps ∼0% -100%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Honor 5C
4.9 fps ∼100% +11%
Wiko U Feel
4.4 fps ∼90%
ZTE Blade V7
2.9 fps ∼59% -34%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
fps ∼0% -100%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score
Honor 5C
5120 Points ∼100% +33%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
4126 Points ∼81% +7%
LG X Screen
4031 Points ∼79% +5%
ZTE Blade V7
3947 Points ∼77% +2%
Wiko U Feel
3856 Points ∼75%
HTC Desire 530
2922 Points ∼57% -24%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Honor 5C
707 Points ∼100% +19%
Wiko U Feel
595 Points ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
551 Points ∼78% -7%
LG X Screen
491 Points ∼69% -17%
HTC Desire 530
10 Points ∼1% -98%
ZTE Blade V7
10 Points ∼1% -98%
Graphics
Honor 5C
814 Points ∼100% +183%
ZTE Blade V7
430 Points ∼53% +49%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
312 Points ∼38% +8%
LG X Screen
302 Points ∼37% +5%
Wiko U Feel
288 Points ∼35%
HTC Desire 530
231 Points ∼28% -20%
Memory
Honor 5C
1504 Points ∼100% +231%
ZTE Blade V7
790 Points ∼53% +74%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
643 Points ∼43% +41%
LG X Screen
491 Points ∼33% +8%
Wiko U Feel
455 Points ∼30%
HTC Desire 530
300 Points ∼20% -34%
System
Honor 5C
2600 Points ∼100% +132%
ZTE Blade V7
1188 Points ∼46% +6%
Wiko U Feel
1121 Points ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
1060 Points ∼41% -5%
LG X Screen
1011 Points ∼39% -10%
HTC Desire 530
742 Points ∼29% -34%
Overall
Honor 5C
1225 Points ∼100% +125%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
585 Points ∼48% +8%
Wiko U Feel
544 Points ∼44%
LG X Screen
521 Points ∼43% -4%
ZTE Blade V7
249 Points ∼20% -54%
HTC Desire 530
149 Points ∼12% -73%

Legend

 
Wiko U Feel Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Honor 5C HiSilicon Kirin 650, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
HTC Desire 530 Qualcomm Snapdragon 210 MSM8909, Qualcomm Adreno 304, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG X Screen Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
ZTE Blade V7 Mediatek MT6753, ARM Mali-T720 MP4, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Octane V2 - Total Score
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4188 Points ∼100% +54%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2730 Points ∼65% 0%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2723 Points ∼65%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2689 Points ∼64% -1%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2650 Points ∼63% -3%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1796 Points ∼43% -34%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
17470.6 ms * ∼100% -28%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
13761.1 ms * ∼79% -1%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
13598.8 ms * ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
13046 ms * ∼75% +4%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
12879.8 ms * ∼74% +5%
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9111.2 ms * ∼52% +33%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
27.934 Points ∼100% +55%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
18.19 Points ∼65% +1%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
18 Points ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
16.8 Points ∼60% -7%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
15.666 Points ∼56% -13%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
12.1 Points ∼43% -33%
AndroBench 3-5
Random Write 4KB
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
15.7 MB/s ∼100% +78%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
11.6 MB/s ∼74% +31%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8.96 MB/s ∼57% +1%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8.83 MB/s ∼56%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8 MB/s ∼51% -9%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
7.58 MB/s ∼48% -14%
Random Read 4KB
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
61.7 MB/s ∼100% +165%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
28.07 MB/s ∼45% +21%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
23.24 MB/s ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
21 MB/s ∼34% -10%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
11.82 MB/s ∼19% -49%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
10 MB/s ∼16% -57%
Sequential Write 256KB
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
75.5 MB/s ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
72 MB/s ∼95% +80%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
72 MB/s ∼95% +80%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
55.76 MB/s ∼74% +40%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
39.94 MB/s ∼53%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
39.45 MB/s ∼52% -1%
Sequential Read 256KB
Honor 5C
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 650, 16 GB eMMC Flash
263 MB/s ∼100% +12%
Wiko U Feel
Mali-T720, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
234.83 MB/s ∼89%
ZTE Blade V7
Mali-T720 MP4, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
196.76 MB/s ∼75% -16%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
147 MB/s ∼56% -37%
LG X Screen
Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash
131 MB/s ∼50% -44%
HTC Desire 530
Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash
126.99 MB/s ∼48% -46%

* ... smaller is better

Max. Load
 44.6 °C43.4 °C38.9 °C 
 45.4 °C44.7 °C39.5 °C 
 44.6 °C45.1 °C39.2 °C 
Maximum: 45.4 °C
Average: 42.8 °C
38.5 °C43.1 °C45.5 °C
39.9 °C43.5 °C46.1 °C
38.3 °C43.6 °C47.4 °C
Maximum: 47.4 °C
Average: 42.9 °C
Power Supply (max.)  44.1 °C | Room Temperature 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.932.433.92531.831.331.83133.731.733.74030.92630.95030.639.430.66325.836.225.88026.428.626.410024.325.424.312524.821.324.816026.323.326.320030.122.530.12503922.43931544.721.344.740050.718.450.750058.817.558.863063.317.563.380070.917.270.9100075.616.875.6125076.317.376.3160074.317.474.3200074.816.674.8250074.417.374.4315072.517.672.5400070.617.670.6500071.117.771.1630073.917.473.9800075.217.775.21000072.817.972.8125007118.1711600060.418.160.4SPL85.429.885.4N60.41.360.4median 70.9Wiko U Feelmedian 17.7median 70.9Delta14.31.614.332.537.232.432.532.733.631.332.723.531.231.723.530.833.52630.841.139.139.441.132.933.436.232.928.930.728.628.926.425.825.426.427.324.821.327.328.325.823.328.332.62422.532.638.624.722.438.646.432.421.346.454.537.518.454.55942.917.55959.549.517.559.562.750.117.262.766.952.516.866.971.155.517.371.175.358.217.475.379.162.916.679.180.463.817.380.479.162.217.679.177.660.117.677.675.357.417.775.374.657.417.474.674.356.517.774.372.354.517.972.364.145.818.164.146.227.918.146.287.971.229.887.964.123.81.364.1median 64.1Honor 5Cmedian 50.1median 17.7median 64.114.612.21.614.6hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Wiko U Feel audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.39 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 72% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Honor 5C audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 81% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 90% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 6% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.05 / 0.03 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.82 / 1.61 / 1.8 Watt
Load midlight 5.99 / 6.7 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Gossen Metrahit Energy
Wiko U Feel
2500 mAh
Honor 5C
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
3100 mAh
HTC Desire 530
2200 mAh
ZTE Blade V7
2540 mAh
Power Consumption
2%
33%
-35%
28%
Idle Minimum *
0.82
0.89
-9%
0.61
26%
1.58
-93%
0.73
11%
Idle Average *
1.61
2.07
-29%
1.41
12%
2.59
-61%
0.92
43%
Idle Maximum *
1.8
2.15
-19%
1.51
16%
2.66
-48%
0.93
48%
Load Average *
5.99
3.46
42%
2.56
57%
5.22
13%
4.47
25%
Load Maximum *
6.7
5.18
23%
3.1
54%
5.67
15%
5.96
11%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
WiFi Surfing v1.3
9h 12min
Wiko U Feel
2500 mAh
Honor 5C
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
3100 mAh
HTC Desire 530
2200 mAh
LG X Screen
2300 mAh
ZTE Blade V7
2540 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
552
584
6%
643
16%
425
-23%
553
0%
519
-6%

Pros

+ 出色的外壳
+ 高亮度IPS屏幕
+ Android 6.0
+ microSD & 双SIM卡
+ 指纹识别
+ 长电池续航时间
+ 性能出色

Cons

- 电池不可更换
- 背部表面第一感觉很奇怪
- 糟糕的相机
- 中等的信号水平
- 只有 2.4 GHz WLAN
- 负载下表面温度较高(比如游戏)
In review: Wiko U Feel. Test model courtesy of Wiko Germany.
In review: Wiko U Feel. Test model courtesy of Wiko Germany.

整体上来说,Wiko U Feel在评测中给我们留下了好印象。我们无法在核心功能例如外壳,性能,主流智能手机的功能中找到任何明显的缺点。因此,它在竞争激烈的200欧元(约合223美金)的价位上是一个非常好的选择。

在实际使用中这台手机是十分让人享受的。Android 6.0的运行十分流畅,厂商没有对系统做出不必要的修改而且将指纹识别很好的集成进了系统中。指纹识别能够被用来解锁特定的APP或文件,或者通过传统的方式解锁(PIN,密码)。

来自法国厂商Wiko的U Feel在200欧元(约合223美金)的价位上的确是一个很好的选择,至少在你无需出色的相机的时候。尽管有着高分辨率,但成像质量依旧无法让人满意。

U Feel的缺点肯定包括有限的无线连接能力(无ac或5GHz WLAN,无NFC)以及特别糟糕的相机。尽管有着高分辨率(1300W像素),但成像质量依旧无法令我们满意。荣耀 5C有着稍好的整体配置包括更强的性能和更好的相机但它自身也存在一些问题。如果能够容忍上述缺点,那么就没有什么理由阻止购买Wiko U Feel了。

注:本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本,阅读完整的英文评测,请点击这里

Wiko U Feel - 09/03/2016 v5.1
Andreas Osthoff

Chassis
83%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
88%
Connectivity
38 / 60 → 63%
Weight
93%
Battery
92%
Display
83%
Games Performance
10 / 63 → 15%
Application Performance
32 / 70 → 45%
Temperature
82%
Noise
100%
Audio
59 / 91 → 65%
Camera
50%
Average
67%
80%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > Wiko U Feel 智能手机简短评测
Andreas Osthoff, 2017-01-18 (Update: 2017-01-18)