关于 realme 16 Pro 的结论
realme 16 Pro 是经济实惠的中端智能手机，它的外观非常吸引人，OLED 大屏幕和长电池续航能力爱好者以及自拍爱好者应该会对它感兴趣。长期的更新支持也对 realme 手机有利。
然而，它并不能真正达到宣传的属性。我们甚至没有接近 6500 尼特的巨大亮度；事实上，在我们的日常测量中，OLED 面板的亮度甚至更弱。特别大的扬声器系统也不是同类产品中最好的。
内置的联发科 SoC 也是如此，在同价位手机中并不算特别强大。Poco X8 Pro 在这方面的优势要大得多。
realme 16 Pro 的主摄像头成像质量相当吸引人，但我们并不认为它是中档手机中的亮点--潜在买家不应被高像素所迷惑。
Pros
Cons
realme 16 Pro 的价格和上市时间
realme 16 Pro 的基本配置为 8 GB LPDDR4X 内存和 256 GB UFS 3.1 内存，包括亚马逊在内的零售价约为 380 欧元。
- $499.00realme 16 Pro 5G Unlocked Smartphone 8+512GB Grey, 144Hz AMOLED Display, 7000mAh Battery, 80W SuperVOOC, 50+200MP Camera, MediaTek Dimensity 7300 Max 5G Chipset, IP69
- $609.00realme 16 Pro+ 5G Smartphone 12+512GB Grey,144Hz AMOLED Display,7000mAh Battery,80W SuperVOOC, 50+200MP Camera, Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 Rocket LPDDR5X, IP69
- $459.00realme 16 Pro 5G Unlocked Smartphone 8+256GB Gold, 144Hz AMOLED Display, 7000mAh Battery, 80W SuperVOOC, 50+200MP Camera, MediaTek Dimensity 7300 Max 5G Chipset, IP69
realme 16 Pro 的规格
外壳和功能 - IP68 防水Android 手机
realme 16 Pro 的表面处理得很好，由于采用了磨砂表面，几乎看不到指纹。边框和背面仅由塑料制成，这意味着在触感方面会有明显的妥协。不过，这种材料的选择有助于保持这款中档智能手机的轻盈，与其尺寸相当。
外壳通过了 IP68/IP69 认证，因此防水防尘性能特别好。正面显示屏的屏占比超过 89%，显得非常时尚。
与该价位的产品一样，USB-C 端口的规格仅为 2.0，这意味着无法进行有线图像输出。尽管目前内存价格居高不下，但 realme 16 Pro 的内存配置还是很厚道的，高达 12 GB 的内存为应用程序和要求更高的游戏提供了充足的储备。
通信和操作 - 无 WiFi 的廉价智能手机 7
realme 中端机仅配备了 Wi-Fi 6，无法访问快速的 6 GHz 频段，这意味着我们的测量结果并不快。不过，在日常使用中，大约 350 到 400 MBit/s 的测量值应该足以满足大多数用户的需求。
除了两张 nano-SIM 卡，realme 16 Pro 还可以使用 eSIM 卡。在所有手机标准中，该价格区间的频率覆盖都不错。不过，这款中端手机只有单频卫星连接定位功能。
在操作方面也是有好有坏。虽然光学指纹传感器在日常使用中效果很好，速度也很快，但在振动马达方面，realme 16 Pro 并没有散发出颜值感。产生的震动似乎并不精确，而且力度也不大。
| Networking | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
| iperf3 receive RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
| Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
| iperf3 receive RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
| iperf3 receive RT-BE96U WiFi7 | |
软件和可持续性 - 长时间更新的经济型手机
Realme 保证在欧洲进行五次主要的Android 升级，并在六年内提供最新的安全更新。在测试过程中，realme 16 Pro 使用了Android 16 和内部 realme UI 7.0。
在可持续发展方面，制造商保持低调。在 EPREL 数据库中，这款中端手机的可修复性等级为 "C"。不过，这里也没有提供有关回收的信息。
realme 16 Pro 的外包装似乎不含塑料。
摄像头 - 200 万像素的中档手机
如果你喜欢用智能手机自拍，那么在最经济实惠的中端手机中，你几乎找不到比 realme 16 Pro 更好的手机了。
然而，200 万像素的主摄像头却让人喜忧参半。在日光下，三星 HP5 的拍摄效果相当不错，但我们希望能有更高的锐度。在色彩还原方面也有一些异常现象。在黑暗环境中，快门释放时间大幅增加，质量明显下降。
realme 16 Pro 的缩放完全采用数字技术。得益于高像素，两倍放大是无损的。在明亮的光线下，效果令人印象深刻，但对于低分辨率的 800 万像素超广角，我们就不能这么说了。
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.
Main cameraMain cameraLow LightUltra wide angle
显示屏 - 经济实惠的Android 手机，配备 OLED 屏幕
realme 16 Pro 的 6.79 英寸 AMOLED 面板最大帧频为 144 Hz，HDR 峰值亮度应达到 6,500 尼特。然而，我们的测量结果连一半都达不到，尽管所提供的亮度也足以实现良好的 HDR 效果。
我们的 APL 测试与日常使用相关，但出乎意料的弱，因为这款中端手机只达到了与全表面白色显示屏类似的数值--这对于 OLED 面板来说是相当不寻常的。
根据一些说法，realme 使用直流调光来控制亮度，因此与 姊妹机型 Pro+在频率方面没有提供精确的细节。我们测得的基本频率仅为 120 Hz，因此对 PWM 比较敏感的人应该在购买前对 OLED 面板进行测试。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 1444 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.78 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.73}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.98}
95.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.234
CCT: 6806 K
| Realme 16 Pro AMOLED, 2772x1272, 6.8" | Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro AMOLED, 2756x1268, 6.6" | Samsung Galaxy A36 5G Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7" | Motorola Edge 70 Fusion AMOLED, 2772x1272, 6.8" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 1% | -6% | -3% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 1444 | 1104 -24% | 1127 -22% | 1501 4% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 1414 | 1102 -22% | 1137 -20% | 1476 4% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 96 | 97 1% | 98 2% | 96 0% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.78 | 1.2 33% | 1.8 -1% | 1.52 15% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.07 | 2.4 22% | 2.8 9% | 3.47 -13% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2 | 2.1 -5% | 2.1 -5% | 2.6 -30% |
| Gamma | 2.234 98% | 2.22 99% | 2.11 104% | 2.184 101% |
| CCT | 6806 96% | 6472 100% | 6466 101% | 6444 101% |
* ... smaller is better
| Display / APL18 Peak Brightness | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| Display / HDR Peak Brightness | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 120 Hz Amplitude: 13 % |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 120 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 120 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7857 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
固定缩放级别和不同亮度设置下的测量系列（最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来很平，但这是缩放造成的。信息框显示的是最小亮度下的振幅放大图）
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.6 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (19.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 8.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 7.9 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 22 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (31.2 ms). | ||
性能、排放和电池寿命 -Android-配备大容量电池的手机
realme 16 Pro 配备了联发科 Dimensity 7300 Max，但在我们的基准测试套件中，它的表现并不比 "普通 "Dimensity 7300 Max 更好。 Dimensity 7300的 Mali-G615 MP2.因此，对于这个价位的手机来说，这款中端手机的性能并不强劲，而且在日常使用中，realme 16 Pro 也无法保持其宣传的 "无延迟 "和 "流畅 "等特性。
对于经济实惠的中端手机来说，立体声扬声器还算可以，但音量较大时声音很快就会变得尖锐。制造商宣传 "300% 超大音量"，因此你可以将音量提高到超出正常水平，但我们的粉红噪声测量显示声音几乎没有深度。扬声器的音量也不大。
Realme 安装了 6500 毫安时的大容量电池，可通过 USB-C 接口以高达 45 瓦的功率充电。在 Wi-Fi 测试中，我们的电池续航时间超过了一天。
| Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total | |
| Average of class Smartphone (59.7 - 423, n=128, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 (60.2 - 138.5, n=9) | |
| Realme 16 Pro | Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | Average 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 28% | -65% | 2% | -22% | -2% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 1836.83 | 3576.86 95% | 968.34 -47% | 2049.4 12% | 1768 ? -4% | 2243 ? 22% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 1723.54 | 3565.14 107% | 166.77 -90% | 1825.9 6% | 1225 ? -29% | 1924 ? 12% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 371.21 | 324.76 -13% | 233.98 -37% | 351.2 -5% | 289 ? -22% | 307 ? -17% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 472.02 | 112.05 -76% | 62.58 -87% | 452.1 -4% | 325 ? -31% | 363 ? -23% |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.5 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.6 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
3DMark 压力测试
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Realme 16 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A36 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 70 Fusion | |
| Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro | |
Realme 16 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.7% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (21.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 72% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Motorola Edge 70 Fusion audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.3% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (25.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.1% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (15% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (13% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (35.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 85% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 94% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Realme 16 Pro 6500 mAh | Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro 6500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A36 5G 5000 mAh | Motorola Edge 70 Fusion 7000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery runtime | ||||
| WiFi v1.3 (h) | 26.3 | 19.4 -26% | 14.8 -44% | 24.5 -7% |
Notebookcheck 总体评分
如果您正在寻找一款大而明亮的 OLED 屏幕，价格适中的中端机型，那么 realme 16 Pro 是您的不二之选。
不过，realme 手机在很多方面都与强劲的竞争对手相差甚远。
Realme 16 Pro
- 05/09/2026 v8
Marcus Herbrich
Total Sustainability Score: 可比较的替代品
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 77.3%  | Realme 16 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 7300 ⎘ ARM Mali-G615 MP2 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB | List Price: 380€ | 192 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.78" 2772x1272 450 PPI AMOLED |
2. 83.8%  | Xiaomi Poco X8 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 8500 ⎘ ARM Mali-G720 MP8 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB | Amazon: List Price: 400€ | 202 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.59" 2756x1268 460 PPI AMOLED |
3. 78%  | Samsung Galaxy A36 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 710 ⎘ 6 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: List Price: 379€ | 195 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" 2340x1080 385 PPI Super AMOLED |
4. 77.4%  | Motorola Edge 70 Fusion Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 810 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: List Price: 420€ | 193 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.78" 2772x1272 450 PPI AMOLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Add as a preferred source on Google
