vivo Y21s智能手机评测--超薄、轻量、快速充电

Name: Vivo Y21s
Brand: Vivo

完全修复。 尽管价格很低，但vivo Y21s并不是没有快速充电和高分辨率的摄像头。这听起来不错，但在我们的深入测试中，这款手机也能说服人吗？

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), Published 01/12/2022 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone

Test device courtesy of cyberport.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Vivo Y21s (Y Series)

Processor

Mediatek Helio G80 8 x 2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55

Graphics adapter

ARM Mali-G52 MP2

Memory

4 GB

Display

6.51 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 270 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz

Storage

128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB

, 102 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5mm, Card Reader: microSD up to 128 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity, compass

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/900/1800/1900), 3G (B1/B2/B4/B5/B8), 4G (B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B20/B28/B38/B40/B41/B66) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 164.3 x 76.1

Battery

5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer

Charging

fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 11

Camera

Primary Camera: 50 MPix f/1.8, phase comparison-AF, LED-flash, Videos @1080p/30fps (Camera 1); 2.0MP, f/2.4, macro lens (Camera 2); 2.0MP, f/2.4, depth of field (Camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0, Videos @1080p/30fps

Additional features

Speakers: mono speaker, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, charger, cable, headset, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.83 W/kg (head), 1.09 W/kg (body), fanless

Weight

182 g

Price

189 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Possible competitors in comparison

Bewertung	Datum	Modell	Gewicht	Laufwerk	Groesse	Aufloesung
76.5 %	01/2022	Vivo Y21s Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2	182 g	128 GB eMMC Flash	6.51"	1600x720
74.9 %	12/2021	Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1	205 g	64 GB eMMC Flash	6.50"	1600x720
78.4 %	12/2021	Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2	190 g	64 GB eMMC Flash	6.30"	2340x1080
77 %	11/2021	Oppo A16s Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320	190 g	64 GB eMMC Flash	6.52"	1600x720

外壳和功能 - 带NFC的vivo Y21s

vivo Y21s的价格很低--买家甚至不需要为这个模型支付200欧元。这家中国制造商提供了一个塑料外壳，有微妙的深蓝色或令人眼花缭乱的浅蓝色与粉红色的反射。

机箱相当纤细，只有8毫米，但相机模块伸出来的地方相当多。仅182克的重量也非常低，特别是由于vivo Y21s也有一个相当大的6.51英寸的屏幕。制造质量很好，外壳在压力下几乎没有屈服。

这款廉价的vivo手机提供128GB的大容量存储，这比其他许多同价位的智能手机能提供的更多。另一方面，4GB的内存与同类产品相当，尽管由于扩展内存功能，额外的1GB大容量存储可以作为内存使用。

还有NFC和一个专用的microSD卡插槽，可以同时使用2张SIM卡。在我们用参考microSD Angelbird V60进行的测试中，读卡器的数据传输速度相当慢。它只在连续读取时达到了体面的速度。

Size comparison

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Vivo Y21s Oppo A16s Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 DIN A6 ❌

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F (Angelbird V60)	47.8 MB/s +186%
Oppo A16s (Angelbird AV Pro V60)	45.73 MB/s +174%
Average of class Smartphone (10.9 - 77, n=97, last 2 years)	28.3 MB/s +69%
Vivo Y21s (Angelbird V60)	16.7 MB/s
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 (Toshiba Exceria Pro)	15.71 MB/s -6%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

Vivo Y21s Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB: Ø28.9 (16.5-38.1)

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø32.3 (23.2-38.8)

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø41.7 (32.2-56.9)

Oppo A16s PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø37 (21.6-44.6)

Vivo Y21s Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB: Ø75.4 (14.3-79.1)

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø50.2 (31.6-54.4)

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø84 (59.8-90.4)

Oppo A16s PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø68.2 (16.6-76)

通信、软件和操作 - 快速和最新的

我们的设备支持WiFi 5，在我们与Netgear Nighthawk AX12路由器的测试中取得的速度很快。该智能手机不支持5G，但最必要的4G频率是可用的。经常出国旅行的用户应该检查哪些LTE频率在东道国是重要的。例如，欧洲版的vivo Y21s缺少美国或日本的一些重要LTE频段。

vivo称其软件界面为Funtouch OS，它是基于Android 11。在我们的测试设备上，安全补丁是从2021年12月开始的，因此在这次审查时是相当最新的，这对这样一款廉价的智能手机来说是不寻常的。有一些预装的广告应用程序，但它们可以很容易地被卸载。

指纹传感器安装在右侧，集成在略微凹陷的待机按钮上--它的反应非常迅速和可靠。人脸识别也可用于解锁智能手机。触摸屏可以可靠地工作。

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Vivo Y21s 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	348 (337^min - 353^max) MBit/s
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	347 (338^min - 353^max) MBit/s 0%
Oppo A16s 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	294 (151^min - 315^max) MBit/s -16%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F 802.11 b/g/n	42.9 (21^min - 65^max) MBit/s -88%
iperf3 receive AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	320 (290^min - 330^max) MBit/s +1%
Vivo Y21s 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	316 (234^min - 329^max) MBit/s
Oppo A16s 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	299 (200^min - 346^max) MBit/s -5%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F 802.11 b/g/n	50.4 (41^min - 57^max) MBit/s -84%

Vivo Y21s; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø315 (234-329)

Vivo Y21s; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø348 (337-353)

相机--vivo手机中没有广角相机

三个相机镜头位于智能手机的背面，但其中只有两个可以真正用于拍照。具有5000万像素的主摄像头和200万像素的微距镜头。第三个摄像头只用于支持虚化效果。然而，缺少一个广角摄像头对于即使是低于200欧元的相机系统的灵活性来说也是一个重大削减。

相机设备，至少在背面，与更昂贵的 Vivo Y33s而主摄像头的图像质量也让我们想起了这款姐妹手机。整体而言，图像清晰度不错，在光线良好的情况下，图像质量非常稳定，只是在非常明亮的区域有一点动态范围的问题。在弱光和高对比度的情况下，图像清晰度在这个价格范围内也是不错的，亮度也可以接受。视频可以在1080p下录制，最多30帧。

在实验室里，这款智能手机在光线良好的情况下显示出有些平淡的色彩和轻微的锐度不足，在低光下仍有一些细节可以识别。

前置摄像头的分辨率为800万像素，自拍效果不错，可以放大一些。

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.

Hauptkamera Pflanze Hauptkamera Umgebung Hauptkamera Low Light

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

显示屏 - 只有720p，而且不是很亮

vivo Y21s只提供720p的屏幕，而且屏幕的亮度相当平庸。这在黑暗的室外并不糟糕，但在阳光非常充足的情况下，用户可能会遇到反射和几乎无法识别屏幕内容的问题。

至少黑值是在一个体面的水平上，所以对比度和色彩再现都很好。显示器上颜色的准确性也处于通常水平。对于那些关心色彩准确性的人来说，特别是明亮的蓝色和橙色的偏差可能太高。

我们没有注意到PWM，所以对其敏感的人也可以使用这款智能手机。


386 cd/m²	388 cd/m²	354 cd/m²
394 cd/m²	407 cd/m²	380 cd/m²
356 cd/m²	417 cd/m²	390 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 417 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 385.8 cd/m² Minimum: 2.57 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 407 cd/m²
Contrast: 1100:1 (Black: 0.37 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.87 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 5.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
94% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.103

	Vivo Y21s IPS, 1600x720, 6.51	Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F IPS LCD, 1600x720, 6.50	Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 IPS LCD, 2340x1080, 6.30	Oppo A16s LCD, 1600x720, 6.52
Response Times		-32%	-14%	-2%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *	42 ?(19, 23)	58 ?(31, 27) -38%	52 ?(27, 25) -24%	48 ?(22, 26) -14%
Response Time Black / White *	27 ?(14, 13)	34 ?(17, 17) -26%	28 ?(13, 15) -4%	24 ?(10.8, 13.2) 11%
PWM Frequency		178.6 ?(7)	352.1 ?(5)
Screen		12%	26%	25%
Brightness middle	407	446 10%	496 22%	607 49%
Brightness	386	423 10%	491 27%	586 52%
Brightness Distribution	85	88 4%	91 7%	90 6%
Black Level *	0.37	0.29 22%	0.19 49%	0.52 -41%
Contrast	1100	1538 40%	2611 137%	1167 6%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	4.87	4.94 -1%	5.5 -13%	3.1 36%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	9.28	8.81 5%	8.88 4%	6.7 28%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	5.4	5.1 6%	6.6 -22%	2 63%
Gamma	2.103 ^105%	2.145 ^103%	2.36 ^93%	2.17 ^101%
CCT	7511 ^87%	7890 ^82%	8432 ^77%	6806 ^96%
Total Average (Program / Settings)		-10% / 3%	6% / 18%	12% / 20%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 14 ms rise
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 13 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 63 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 19 ms rise
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 23 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 63 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17915 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

性能、排放和电池寿命 - 伟大的快速充电技术

该 Helio G80被用作SoC。该芯片提供八个核心，最高时钟为2GHz。因此，就其价格范围而言，vivo Y21s在性能方面绝对令人信服。在更复杂的任务或同时运行的几个应用程序中，用户将不得不考虑明显的性能损失和停顿，但有足够的能力完成基本任务，如信使服务。

智能手机中的eMMC存储并不完全是快速的，但在我们的测试中的价值对于这个价格范围来说是相当不错的。vivo的Y21s在散热方面也处于通常水平。它只有在非常热的环境中才会感到不舒服。

小型单声道扬声器的声音相当适中，显示出明显偏离中值的声音特征。即使在较低的音量下，高音也被非常强烈地过度强调，而低频几乎没有任何东西。当你通过蓝牙或3.5毫米插孔连接扬声器或耳机时，它听起来更好。令人高兴的是：目前所有通过蓝牙获得更高音频质量的aptX编解码器都得到支持。

在电池耗尽之前，你可以用vivo Y21s通过WLAN上网超过16小时。这是一个很好的，但对于这个级别来说并不突出的价值。由于有高达18瓦的快速充电和附带的充电器，机主很快就会有足够的电量使用几个小时，而且电池也可以在90分钟内完全充满。

Geekbench 5.5 | PCMark for Android | 3DMark | GFXBench

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	384 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	178 Points -54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	355 Points -8%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	176 Points -54%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (300 - 387, n=12)	357 Points -7%
Average of class Smartphone (119 - 2138, n=217, last 2 years)	918 Points +139%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1341 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	1087 Points -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1336 Points 0%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	965 Points -28%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (790 - 1370, n=12)	1275 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (473 - 6681, n=217, last 2 years)	3009 Points +124%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	5801 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	5739 Points -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	7090 Points +22%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	5272 Points -9%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (5589 - 8120, n=10)	6354 Points +10%
Average of class Smartphone (4761 - 21385, n=213, last 2 years)	11798 Points +103%

3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1736 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	1273 Points -27%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1897 Points +9%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	928 Points -47%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1720 - 2054, n=9)	1790 Points +3%
Average of class Smartphone (704 - 23024, n=114, last 2 years)	9351 Points +439%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1581 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	1142 Points -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1765 Points +12%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	853 Points -46%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1550 - 1903, n=9)	1641 Points +4%
Average of class Smartphone (607 - 45492, n=113, last 2 years)	16352 Points +934%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	2642 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	2032 Points -23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	2778 Points +5%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	1343 Points -49%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (2552 - 2846, n=9)	2689 Points +2%
Average of class Smartphone (1075 - 8749, n=113, last 2 years)	4426 Points +68%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1361 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	863 Points -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1463 Points +7%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	486 Points -64%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1319 - 1384, n=11)	1348 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (286 - 7890, n=103, last 2 years)	2770 Points +104%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1202 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	738 Points -39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1264 Points +5%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	412 Points -66%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1161 - 1204, n=11)	1186 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (240 - 9814, n=103, last 2 years)	2769 Points +130%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	2539 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	2031 Points -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	2654 Points +5%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	1301 Points -49%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (2347 - 2669, n=11)	2527 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (858 - 4679, n=103, last 2 years)	3166 Points +25%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1368 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	867 Points -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1453 Points +6%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	539 Points -61%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1346 - 1387, n=10)	1364 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (317 - 20131, n=180, last 2 years)	6789 Points +396%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	1198 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	736 Points -39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	1253 Points +5%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	462 Points -61%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (1178 - 1875, n=10)	1265 Points +6%
Average of class Smartphone (267 - 33376, n=179, last 2 years)	9811 Points +719%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	2712 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	2109 Points -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	2811 Points +4%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	1304 Points -52%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (2564 - 2830, n=10)	2674 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (938 - 8480, n=179, last 2 years)	4236 Points +56%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	688 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	428 Points -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	721 Points +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (679 - 706, n=10)	689 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (395 - 9839, n=134, last 2 years)	2569 Points +273%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	683 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	426 Points -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	717 Points +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (682 - 716, n=10)	690 Points +1%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 20068, n=202, last 2 years)	6307 Points +823%
Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	174 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	116 Points -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	186 Points +7%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (171 - 179, n=10)	175 Points +1%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 5226, n=206, last 2 years)	1697 Points +875%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	172 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	117 Points -32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	181 Points +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (171 - 186, n=10)	174.8 Points +2%
Average of class Smartphone (110 - 5248, n=201, last 2 years)	1705 Points +891%

GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	17 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	11 fps -35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	8.5 fps -50%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	7.8 fps -54%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (7.5 - 18, n=11)	11.7 fps -31%
Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 123, n=224, last 2 years)	43.8 fps +158%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	9 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	6.2 fps -31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	9.7 fps +8%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	4.2 fps -53%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (8.2 - 9.2, n=11)	8.95 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 229, n=224, last 2 years)	64.4 fps +616%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	9.5 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	7 fps -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	5.5 fps -42%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	5 fps -47%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (4.8 - 11, n=11)	7.15 fps -25%
Average of class Smartphone (2.8 - 105, n=224, last 2 years)	32.5 fps +242%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096	3.3 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096	2.2 fps -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076	3.5 fps +6%
Oppo A16s Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096	1.5 fps -55%
Average Mediatek Helio G80 (3.1 - 3.3, n=11)	3.25 fps -2%
Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 94, n=224, last 2 years)	25.6 fps +676%

	Vivo Y21s	Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F	Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021	Oppo A16s	Average 128 GB eMMC Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		-47%	-33%	-48%	-36%	212%
Sequential Read 256KB	316.1	302.3 -4%	309.4 -2%	289.2 -9%	283 ?(106.7 - 511, n=74) -10%	1505 ?(226 - 4512, n=215, last 2 years) 376%
Sequential Write 256KB	260.6	74.5 -71%	159.7 -39%	168.4 -35%	193 ?(72.3 - 314, n=74) -26%	1112 ?(57.5 - 3678, n=215, last 2 years) 327%
Random Read 4KB	139.7	77.8 -44%	73.6 -47%	45.32 -68%	82.4 ?(8.63 - 247, n=74) -41%	247 ?(22.2 - 543, n=215, last 2 years) 77%
Random Write 4KB	159.9	47.21 -70%	88.9 -44%	35.23 -78%	54 ?(3.84 - 159.9, n=74) -66%	271 ?(13 - 709, n=215, last 2 years) 69%

温度

Max. Load

Idle


42.6 °C	37.4 °C	34.5 °C
42.6 °C	37.4 °C	35 °C
41.5 °C	36.8 °C	34.8 °C

Maximum: 42.6 °C
Average: 38.1 °C


34.1 °C	37 °C	38 °C
34.9 °C	37.8 °C	40.3 °C
35 °C	37.7 °C	40.6 °C

Maximum: 40.6 °C
Average: 37.3 °C

Power Supply (max.) 40.6 °C | Room Temperature 21 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.1 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.6 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.3 °C / 72 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

扬声器

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Vivo Y21s audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 69% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 83% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

电池寿命

	Vivo Y21s 5000 mAh	Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F 5000 mAh	Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 4000 mAh	Oppo A16s 5000 mAh	Average of class Smartphone
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing	973	879 -10%	748 -23%	1053 8%	913 ?(424 - 2844, n=226, last 2 years) -6%

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		16h 13min

Pros

+ 轻薄

+ NFC

+ 大量的大容量存储

+ 对aptX编解码器的广泛支持

+ 长续航能力

+ 快速充电功能

+ 当前的安全补丁

+ 无PWM

Cons

- 没有广角摄像头

- 只有720p的屏幕

- 平庸的扬声器

- 屏幕亮度低

结论 - 良好的、负担得起的、轻量级的整体包装

vivo Y21s是一个更便宜的变体。 Y33s这种价格差异使这两款智能手机的共同点更加突出：在内存配置方面，vivo Y21s是一个榜样，此外还有一个非常轻的机身和一个大电池，提供良好的运行时间。NFC尚未在所有价格低于200欧元（约200美元）的智能手机上安装，所以vivo Y21s在这里也可以得分。

当然，一个广角摄像头会是一个很好的补充，但该智能手机的主摄像头可以拍摄体面的照片。想要全高清屏幕的用户将不得不在其他地方寻找。作为回报，vivo Y21s提供了18瓦的快速充电，所以当电池空了的时候，它很快就可以再次使用。

寻找廉价、轻便和耐用的智能手机的用户绝对应该考虑vivo Y21s。

总的来说，这款智能手机以低廉的价格提供了良好的功能，并能在许多方面令人信服。有了vivo Y33s买家支付了相当大的附加费，但他们也得到了全高清显示屏和更多的工作内存。这 Redmi Note 8 2021没有NFC，但也有一个更高分辨率的屏幕和一个广角摄像头。

价格和可用性

在测试时，vivo Y21s的售价约为180欧元（约合180美元），除此之外，还可以在我们的借阅者和合作伙伴cyberport.de。.

Vivo Y21s - 2022-01-05 01/05/2022 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis

83%

Keyboard

65 / 75 → 87%

Pointing Device

86%

Connectivity

44 / 70 → 62%

Weight

90%

Battery

91%

Display

82%

Games Performance

16 / 64 → 25%

Application Performance

77 / 86 → 89%

Temperature

90%

Noise

100%

Audio

50 / 90 → 56%

Camera

50%

Average

71%

77%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Editor of the original article: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 388017 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 > vivo Y21s智能手机评测--超薄、轻量、快速充电

Florian Schmitt, 2022-01-12 (Update: 2022-01-12)

vivo Y21s智能手机评测--超薄、轻量、快速充电

Possible competitors in comparison

外壳和功能 - 带NFC的vivo Y21s

Size comparison

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

通信、软件和操作 - 快速和最新的

相机--vivo手机中没有广角相机

显示屏 - 只有720p，而且不是很亮

Display Response Times

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

性能、排放和电池寿命 - 伟大的快速充电技术

温度

扬声器

Vivo Y21s audio analysis

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F audio analysis

电池寿命

Pros

Cons

结论 - 良好的、负担得起的、轻量级的整体包装

价格和可用性

More articles related to this device

Pricecompare