DXOMARK

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE Battery test

DXOMARK — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 14:15:10 +0000

We put the Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

Battery capacity: 5000 mAh
25W charger (not included)
6.5-inch, 1080 x 2340, 90 Hz, OLED display
MediaTek Helio G99 (6 nm)
Tested ROM / RAM combination: 128 GB + 4 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

137

battery

158
Autonomy

Home/Office

177

221

On the go

165

195

Calibrated

130

198

111
Charging

Full charge

102

224

Quick boost

121

212

135
Efficiency

Charge up

123

205

Discharge

141

194

Key performances

3 days 6h

Battery life

0h54

80% Charging time

1h44

Full charging time

3h55 autonomy

after 5-minute charge

Pros

Impressive autonomy performance in both indoor and outdoor use cases
High adapter efficiency
Very low discharging current when calling, video streaming, and when in idle

Cons

Takes more than 1 hour and a half to fully charge the battery
Very little autonomy regained from a 5-minute charging boost
Below-average charge-up efficiency

The Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE demonstrated a much-improved battery performance in all the use cases over the previous Samsung Galaxy A14 5G.

Equipped with the same-sized 5000 mAh battery as in the previous generation, the Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE lasted for more than 3 days and 6 hours when used moderately, compared with the A14 5G’s 2 and half days.

The A15 LTE’s outdoor performances were also quite impressive, and ranked among the best devices that we have tested. In the standardized use-case tests, the autonomy showing was very impressive for calling and watching a video in 4G conditions, although the autonomy when listening to music was not as long lasting when compared with its competitors.

The Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE supports up to 25W charging, which requires more than 1 hour and 40 minutes to fully charge the device. Moreover, the device struggled to regain much autonomy in a 5-minute boost charging, yielding less than 4 hours, which ranked in the lower half of our database.

The Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE has a very good adapter efficiency, which is higher than 93.5%. However, the global charge-up efficiency was at 76%, which is below average. On the other hand, the device’s discharging currents were generally below or around average levels, except when listening to music, meaning that the device is well optimized.

Compared to other devices in the Essential segment (<$199), the Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE ranked among the best devices, thanks to its excellent autonomy and great efficiency performances.

Test Summary

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

	Battery	Charger	Wireless	Display	Processor
Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE	5000mAh	25W (not included)	-	AMOLED 1080 x 2340	MediaTek Helio G99
Honor X7b	6000mAh	35W (included)	-	LCD 1080 x 2412	Qualcomm Snapdragon 680
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G	5000mAh	15W (not included)	-	LCD 1080 x 2408	MediaTek Dimensity 700

Autonomy

158

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

195

Honor X7b

How Autonomy score is composed

Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

Learn more about how we test battery

113h

Light Usage

Active: 2h30/day

78h

Moderate Usage

Active: 4h/day

48h

Intense Usage

Active: 7h/day

Home/Office

177

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

221

Honor X7b

A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power.

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves

On the go

165

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

195

Samsung Galaxy M51

Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)

Calibrated

130

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

198

Samsung Galaxy M51

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)

Charging

111

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

218

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

How Charging score is composed

Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.

Learn more about how we test battery

Wired

48%

in 30 min

0h54

0 - 80%

1h44

Full charge

102

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

224

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.

Power consumption and battery level during full charge

The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.

Time to full charge

The time to full charge chart breaks down the necessary time to reach 80%, 100% and full charge.

Quick boost

121

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

212

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.

Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)

Efficiency

135

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

154

Oppo Reno6 5G

How Efficiency score is composed

The DXOMARK power efficiency score consists of two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge rate, both of which combine data obtained during robot-based typical usage scenario, calibrated tests and charging evaluation, taking into consideration the device’s battery capacity. DXOMARK calculate the annual power consumption of the product, shown on below graph, which is representative of the overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.

Learn more about how we test battery

Annual Consumption Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

3 kWh

Efficient

Good

Bad

Inefficient

Charge up

123

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

205

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro

The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.

Overall charge efficiency

Discharge

141

Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

194

Apple iPhone 14 Pro

The discharge subscore rates the speed of a battery’s discharge during a test, which is independent of the battery’s capacity. It is the ratio of a battery’s capacity divided by its autonomy. A small-capacity battery could have the same autonomy as a large-capacity battery, indicating that the device is well-optimized, with a low discharge rate.

Average discharge current

The post Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Camera test

DXOMARK — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:17:21 +0000

We put the Crosscall Stellar-X5 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 50 MP, 80° (equivalent 26mm measured)
Ultra-wide:13 MP, 120° (equivalent 15mm measured)

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Crosscall Stellar-X5

113

camera

115
Photo

Exposure

102

130

Color

128

Autofocus

105

125

124

117

25
Bokeh

54
Preview

81
Zoom

120

122

124
Video

Exposure

101

116

Color

106

119

Autofocus

120

Texture

105

118

Noise

105

119

Artifacts

Stabilization

101

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 180

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 169

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 138

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 154

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

110^th

1. Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

163

2. Honor Magic6 Pro

158

3. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

3. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

157

5. Huawei P60 Pro

156

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

8. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

8. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

10. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

11. Oppo Find X6

150

11. Vivo X100 Pro

150

13. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

13. Xiaomi 14 Ultra

149

15. Google Pixel 8

148

16. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

16. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

18. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

18. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

20. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

20. Apple iPhone 15

145

22. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

23. Huawei P50 Pro

143

24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

24. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

27. Google Pixel 7

140

27. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

140

27. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

27. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

31. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

32. Xiaomi 14

138

33. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

34. Google Pixel 8a

136

34. Vivo X90 Pro

136

34. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

34. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

38. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

38. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

38. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

41. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

41. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

43. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

43. Apple iPhone 14

133

43. Google Pixel Fold

133

43. Google Pixel 7a

133

43. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)

133

43. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)

133

43. Samsung Galaxy S23+

133

43. Samsung Galaxy S23

133

51. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

51. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

51. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

54. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

54. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

54. Xiaomi 13

130

57. Huawei P40 Pro

129

57. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

57. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

57. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

61. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

61. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

63. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

63. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

63. OnePlus 11

127

63. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

63. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

68. Google Pixel 6

126

68. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

68. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

68. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

72. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

72. Apple iPhone 13

125

72. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

72. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

76. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

76. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

78. Xiaomi 13T

123

79. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

79. Google Pixel 6a

122

79. Honor 90

122

79. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

79. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

84. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

85. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

85. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

85. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

88. Honor Magic Vs

119

88. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

90. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

90. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

92. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

92. Apple iPhone 12

117

92. Honor Magic V2

117

92. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

92. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

92. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

98. Apple iPhone 11

116

98. Asus Zenfone 8

116

98. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

101. Honor 70

115

101. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

101. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

101. Xiaomi 12T

115

105. Nothing Phone(1)

114

105. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

105. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

105. Oppo Find X5

114

105. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

110. Crosscall Stellar-X5

113

110. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

110. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

110. Xiaomi 12

113

114. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

114. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

116. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

116. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

116. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

119. Google Pixel 5

109

119. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

121. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

121. Fairphone 5

108

121. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

108

121. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

121. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

126. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

127. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

128. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

129. Samsung Galaxy A35 5G

104

130. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

131. Huawei P40

102

131. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

133. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

133. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

135. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

135. Google Pixel 4a

100

137. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

138. Oppo Find X5 Lite

139. Oppo Reno4 5G

140. Oppo A94 5G

140. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

142. Samsung Galaxy A72

142. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

142. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

146. Oppo Reno6 5G

147. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

147. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

149. Motorola moto g54 5G

149. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

151. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

151. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

153. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

153. Vivo Y76 5G

155. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

156. Honor 90 Smart

156. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

158. Sony Xperia 10 V

158. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

160. TCL 40R 5G

161. Realme 9i 5G

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

163. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

164. Honor 90 Lite

165. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

166. Fairphone 4

166. Oppo A78 5G

166. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

169. Motorola moto g34 5G

169. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

171. Motorola Moto G62 5G

172. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

173. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

174. Sony Xperia 10 IV

174. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

174. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

174. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

178. Honor X7

178. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

180. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

180. Xiaomi Redmi 13C 5G

182. Honor 70 Lite

183. Motorola Moto G23

184. Oppo A77 5G

185. Honor X8 5G

185. TCL 406

187. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

188. Crosscall Action-X5

189. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

190. Crosscall Core-Z5

191. Oppo A57

191. Oppo A16s 5G

193. Samsung Galaxy A05s

193. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

74^th

1. Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

163

2. Honor Magic6 Pro

158

3. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

3. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

157

5. Huawei P60 Pro

156

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

8. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

8. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

10. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

11. Oppo Find X6

150

11. Vivo X100 Pro

150

13. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

13. Xiaomi 14 Ultra

149

15. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

15. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

17. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

17. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

19. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

20. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

21. Huawei P50 Pro

143

22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

22. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

25. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

140

25. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

25. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

28. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23+

133

42. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

42. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

44. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

46. Huawei P40 Pro

129

46. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

46. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

49. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

49. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

51. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

51. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

51. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

54. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

54. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

56. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

56. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

58. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

58. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

60. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

60. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

60. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

63. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

64. Honor Magic Vs

119

64. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

66. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

66. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

68. Honor Magic V2

117

68. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

70. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

70. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

72. Oppo Find X5

114

72. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

74. Crosscall Stellar-X5

113

74. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

76. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

77. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

77. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

79. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

80. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Target exposure is generally accurate; extended dynamic range
Generally accurate white balance and pleasant color rendering for outdoor and indoor images
Generally high texture levels in outdoor images
Stable and accurate photo autofocus in outdoor and indoor conditions

Cons

Occasional low image contrast in challenging backlit conditions
In photo, visible ghosting, hue shifts, and color quantization
In video, generally unstable autofocus
Image noise in low light
Low detail preservation when zooming in

The Crosscall Stellar-X5 is the French brand’s entry into the Ultra-premium realm, with a sleeker look and feel as well as better camera specifications than prior models in an aim to bridge the gap between the rugged work phone and the personal phone. The higher-resolution sensor and a better chipset than the previously tested Action-X5 indeed resulted in significant improvements in all aspects of our image quality evaluation. The Stellar-X5’s camera score also improved considerably thanks to images that were consistently well exposed and that showed an extended dynamic range.

In addition, the camera has an efficient zero shutter lag capability in most tested conditions, meaning the user is likely to capture the intended moment, particularly fast-action scenarios like sports.

Crosscall has made great strides in image quality with the Stellar-X5 compared with the company’s previous offerings, but when compared with other devices in the same segment, the Stellar-X5 still has some way to go. For example, the HDR algorithm had quite a lot of artifacts such as contrast issues and ghosting. The device also performed some unwanted refocusing and had some instabilities, especially in video recording. However, video stabilization was quite good.

Even though Crosscall devices are targeted for outdoor photographers who usually take wide-angle images such as landscapes, we would have liked to have seen the Stellar-X5 come equipped with at least one dedicated tele module. But even without the tele camera, the Stellar-X5 produced good zoomed-in images that contained a fairly high level of details simply by cropping a photo taken with the main 50 MP wide module.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – in this indoor example: fairly high level of texture on face, fairly extended dynamic range, slight hue shift visible (reflection on the wall) and visible ringing

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us on how to receive a full report.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Camera Scores

This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

115

Crosscall Stellar-X5

169

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Photo scores

The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

Exposure

102

Crosscall Stellar-X5

130

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – Accurate target exposure and extended dynamic range.

Honor 70 – Accurate target exposure and extended dynamic range.

Color

Crosscall Stellar-X5

128

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – Bright and Vivid colors, high level of details

Honor 70 – Bright and Vivid colors, lower level of texture

Autofocus

105

Crosscall Stellar-X5

125

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ2EV TL84 Handheld

This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 100Lux with TL84 illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 2, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 2. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Texture

Crosscall Stellar-X5

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – crop of the DMC at 100lux

Crosscall Action X5 – crop of the DMC at 100lux

Honor 70 – crop of the DMC at 100lux

Noise

Crosscall Stellar-X5

117

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Artifacts

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others types of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Zoom

Crosscall Stellar-X5

164

Huawei Pura 70 Ultra

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Zoom Scores

This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Crosscall Stellar-X5 - fine details are lost

Honor 70

Honor 70 - fine details are lost

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5 - fine details are lost

Video

124

Crosscall Stellar-X5

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Video scores

Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Exposure

101

Crosscall Stellar-X5

116

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Color

106

Crosscall Stellar-X5

119

Honor Magic6 Pro

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – accurate target exposure but some exposure blinking (on trees in the background), some autofocus pumping, limited dynamic range with hue shift (on forehead).

Texture

105

Crosscall Stellar-X5

118

Oppo Find X6 Pro

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Noise

105

Crosscall Stellar-X5

119

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Stabilization

101

Crosscall Stellar-X5

118

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk-and-run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 – fairly efficient motion compensation in walk and run motion.

Artifacts

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

The post Crosscall Stellar-X5 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Oppo Find X7 Ultra Battery test

DXOMARK — Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:09:12 +0000

We put the Oppo Find X7 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

Battery capacity: 5000 mAh
100W charger (not included)
6.82-inch, 1440 x 3168, 120 Hz, OLED display
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen3 (4 nm)
Tested ROM / RAM combination: 256 GB + 16 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

160

battery

156
Autonomy

Home/Office

171

221

On the go

122

195

Calibrated

148

198

170
Charging

Full charge

163

224

Quick boost

178

212

153
Efficiency

Charge up

146

205

Discharge

156

194

Key performances

2 days 19h

Battery life

0h20

80% Charging time

0h32

Full charging time

10h17 autonomy

after 5-minute charge

Position in Global Ranking

1^st

1. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

160

2. Honor Magic6 Pro

157

3. Honor X9b

156

3. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)

156

5. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

152

6. Honor X7b

151

6. Oppo Find X6 Pro

151

8. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

150

9. Honor X7a

147

9. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

147

11. Oppo Reno6 5G

146

12. Realme GT Neo 2 5G

144

13. Honor X9a

143

14. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

142

15. Honor Magic5 Pro

141

15. Oppo Reno8 5G

141

17. Asus ROG Phone 6

140

17. Sony Xperia 10 V

140

19. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

139

20. Huawei P60 Pro

138

20. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro

138

20. Oppo A77 5G

138

20. Sony Xperia 10 IV

138

24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

136

24. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

136

24. Samsung Galaxy M51

136

24. Vivo Y72 5G

136

24. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

136

24. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

136

24. Xiaomi 11T

136

31. Asus ROG Phone 7

135

31. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

135

31. Oppo Find X5 Lite

135

34. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

134

34. Samsung Galaxy S23+

134

34. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

134

34. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

133

38. Oppo A74

133

38. Vivo Y76 5G

133

38. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

133

38. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

133

38. Xiaomi 14

133

38. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

133

45. Honor X8 5G

132

45. Oppo A78 5G

132

45. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

132

45. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S

132

49. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

131

49. POCO F5 Pro

131

49. Samsung Galaxy A72

131

49. Wiko Power U30

131

53. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

130

53. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

130

55. Realme GT Neo 3

129

55. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

129

55. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

129

55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

129

55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro

129

60. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

128

60. OnePlus Nord 2 5G

128

60. Xiaomi 13

128

63. Honor 90 Lite

127

63. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro

127

63. Oppo A94 5G

127

66. Honor 70

126

66. OnePlus 10T 5G

126

66. Oppo Find X3 Neo

126

66. Xiaomi 13 Pro

126

66. Xiaomi 11T Pro

126

71. OnePlus 11

125

71. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G

125

73. Nothing Phone (2)

124

74. Huawei P50 Pro

123

74. TCL 40R 5G

123

74. Xiaomi 12T Pro

123

77. OnePlus 9

122

78. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

121

78. Oppo A74 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

121

81. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G

120

81. Xiaomi 13T Pro

120

84. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

119

84. Nothing Phone(1)

119

84. Oppo A54 5G

119

84. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

119

88. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

118

88. Motorola Edge 20 Pro

118

88. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro

118

88. Xiaomi 12T

118

88. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

118

93. Realme GT 2 Pro

117

93. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

117

93. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

117

96. Honor X7

116

96. Honor 90

116

96. Oppo Find X5 Pro

116

96. Vivo Y20s

116

100. Apple iPhone 13

115

100. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

115

100. Realme GT 5G

115

103. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

114

103. Huawei P40 Lite

114

103. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

114

103. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G

114

103. Xiaomi 13T

114

108. Apple iPhone 15

113

108. Nokia G42 5G

113

108. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

113

108. Sony Xperia 5 IV

113

112. Apple iPhone 14

112

112. Motorola Moto G62 5G

112

112. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

112

112. OnePlus 8T

112

116. Google Pixel 8 Pro

111

116. Motorola Moto G9 Power

111

116. Oppo Find X5

111

116. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

111

116. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

111

121. Wiko Power U20

110

122. Oppo Find X3 Lite

109

122. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

109

122. Samsung Galaxy S23

109

125. Honor Magic Vs

108

125. Oppo Find N2 Flip

108

125. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

108

125. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

108

129. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)

107

129. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G

107

131. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

106

132. Black Shark 5 Pro

105

132. Oppo Find X3 Pro

105

134. OnePlus 9 Pro

104

135. Google Pixel 8

103

135. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

103

135. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

103

138. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip

102

138. Asus Zenfone 8

102

138. Google Pixel 7 Pro

102

138. Motorola moto g34 5G

102

142. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

101

143. OnePlus 10 Pro

100

143. POCO F4 GT

100

143. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

100

143. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

100

143. Xiaomi 12

100

148. Apple iPhone 13 mini

148. Realme C21

148. Realme C11

148. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

148. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

153. Google Pixel 7

153. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

153. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

156. Google Pixel 6

157. Google Pixel 7a

157. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

157. Vivo X51 5G

160. Honor Magic4 Pro

160. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

160. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

160. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

160. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Google Pixel 6a

165. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

167. Apple iPhone 12 mini

167. Google Pixel 5

167. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

170. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

171. Motorola moto g54 5G

171. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)

173. Google Pixel Fold

173. Xiaomi Redmi 9

175. Sony Xperia 1 IV

175. TCL 406

177. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

178. Fairphone 5

179. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

179. Xiaomi Mi 11

181. Google Pixel 6 Pro

182. Xiaomi 12 Pro

183. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

1^st

1. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

160

2. Honor Magic6 Pro

157

3. Oppo Find X6 Pro

151

4. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

142

5. Honor Magic5 Pro

141

6. Asus ROG Phone 6

140

7. Huawei P60 Pro

138

8. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

136

9. Asus ROG Phone 7

135

10. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

134

10. Samsung Galaxy S23+

134

12. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

133

12. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

133

14. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

131

15. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

130

16. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

128

17. Xiaomi 13 Pro

126

18. Huawei P50 Pro

123

19. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

121

20. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

119

21. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

118

22. Oppo Find X5 Pro

116

23. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

114

23. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

114

25. Sony Xperia 5 IV

113

26. Google Pixel 8 Pro

111

26. Oppo Find X5

111

26. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

111

29. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

109

30. Honor Magic Vs

108

30. Oppo Find N2 Flip

108

30. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

108

33. Oppo Find X3 Pro

105

34. OnePlus 9 Pro

104

35. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

103

35. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

103

37. Google Pixel 7 Pro

102

38. OnePlus 10 Pro

100

39. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

39. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

41. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

42. Honor Magic4 Pro

42. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

42. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

45. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

46. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

47. Google Pixel Fold

48. Sony Xperia 1 IV

49. Google Pixel 6 Pro

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

Pros

Excellent indoor autonomy
High gain in autonomy from 5-minute boost charging
Fast charging time to full capacity
Great autonomy when watching videos, indoor calling, and playing video games

Cons

Below average autonomy showing when outdoor calling, taking photos and browsing social apps outdoors
Very high residual power drain from the wireless stand
Below-average charge-related efficiency

The Oppo Find X7 Ultra delivered an outstanding overall battery experience, with an impressively well-balanced performance in all subscores — autonomy, charging, and efficiency. The 8-point improvement over its predecessor, the Oppo Find X6 Pro, pushed the latest flagship to the top spot in the battery ranking, a rare achievement for an ultra-premium smartphone.

Featuring a robust 5000 mAh battery, the Oppo Find X7 Ultra achieved 67 hours and 12 minutes of autonomy under moderate use. The device also excelled in various test scenarios, including idle screen-on, video streaming, gaming, and calling. Even though music streaming was not as impressive as the other individual use cases, the autonomy was still above average.

The Oppo Find X7 Ultra reached a full charge in under 50 minutes thanks to its peak wired charging power of 100W, the same as its predecessor. However, its wireless charging, which was at a maximum power of 50W, took over 2 hours and 20 minutes to reach a full charge. Nevertheless, the device was able to regain more than 10 hours of autonomy from a quick 5-minute charging boost, placing it in the top half of our database.

The Oppo Find X7 Ultra’s charging efficiency was 78.2%, which is notably high given the 100W charger, as high-power chargers typically have lower efficiency due to higher energy consumption during charging. The device exhibited significant residual power drain in both wired and wireless modes, whether plugged in or not. This was particularly notable with wireless charging, where the residual power drain reached nearly 6W while on the stand. Nonetheless, the device’s discharging currents were consistently low, indicating good overall optimization.

Balancing new power-demanding features while providing a satisfying user experience is often a challenge for ultra-premium smartphones. The Oppo Find X7 Ultra stands out in this segment, offering exceptional battery life and meticulous fine-tuning, making it the best in its class.

Test Summary

	Battery	Charger	Wireless	Display	Processor
Oppo Find X7 Ultra	5000mAh	100W (not included)	50W	LTPO AMOLED 1440 x 3168	Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
Oppo Find X6 Pro	5000mAh	100W (not included)	50W	AMOLED 1440 x 3168	Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2
Honor Magic6 Pro	5600mAh	80W (not included)	66W	OLED 1280 x 2800	Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3

Autonomy

156

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

195

Honor X7b

How Autonomy score is composed

Learn more about how we test battery

97h

Light Usage

Active: 2h30/day

67h

Moderate Usage

Active: 4h/day

42h

Intense Usage

Active: 7h/day

Position in Global Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)

28^th

1. Honor X7b

95h

2. Honor X7a

86h

3. Vivo Y72 5G

85h

4. Honor Magic6 Pro

81h

5. Wiko Power U30

80h

6. Sony Xperia 10 IV

80h

7. Honor X9b

77h

7. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)

77h

9. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

77h

10. Oppo A77 5G

76h

11. Sony Xperia 10 V

75h

12. Honor X8 5G

74h

13. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

74h

14. Samsung Galaxy M51

73h

15. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

72h

16. Asus ROG Phone 6

72h

17. Asus ROG Phone 7

72h

18. Honor X9a

72h

19. Wiko Power U20

71h

20. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G

70h

21. Oppo A78 5G

70h

22. Vivo Y20s

69h

23. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

69h

24. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10

69h

25. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G

69h

26. Samsung Galaxy A72

69h

27. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

68h

28. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

67h

29. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro

67h

30. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

67h

31. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

67h

32. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

66h

33. Honor Magic5 Pro

65h

34. Motorola Moto G62 5G

65h

35. Honor X7

65h

36. TCL 40R 5G

65h

37. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

65h

38. Oppo A54 5G

65h

39. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

65h

40. Nokia G42 5G

64h

41. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

64h

42. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

64h

43. Vivo Y76 5G

64h

44. Oppo Find X6 Pro

64h

45. Oppo A74

64h

46. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

64h

47. Motorola Moto G9 Power

64h

48. Oppo A74 5G

63h

49. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

63h

50. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

62h

51. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

62h

52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

62h

53. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S

61h

54. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

61h

55. Samsung Galaxy S23+

61h

56. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

60h

57. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

60h

58. Xiaomi 13 Pro

60h

59. Realme GT Neo 2 5G

60h

60. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro

60h

61. Honor 90 Lite

60h

62. Xiaomi 11T

59h

63. TCL 406

59h

64. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

59h

65. Realme C11

59h

66. Motorola moto g34 5G

59h

67. POCO F5 Pro

59h

68. Honor 70

58h

69. Oppo Find X5 Lite

58h

70. Oppo A94 5G

58h

71. Oppo Reno8 5G

58h

72. Huawei P60 Pro

57h

73. Realme C21

57h

74. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

57h

75. Oppo Reno6 5G

57h

76. Sony Xperia 5 IV

57h

77. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

57h

78. Honor 90

57h

79. Xiaomi 11T Pro

57h

80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

56h

81. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

56h

82. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

56h

83. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

56h

84. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

56h

85. OnePlus 10T 5G

55h

86. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

55h

87. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

55h

88. Nothing Phone (2)

55h

89. Google Pixel 8 Pro

55h

90. Google Pixel 7a

55h

91. OnePlus Nord 2 5G

54h

92. Nothing Phone(1)

54h

93. OnePlus 9

54h

94. Xiaomi 13T

54h

95. Xiaomi 13

54h

96. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G

54h

97. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

54h

98. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

54h

99. Xiaomi 12T Pro

54h

100. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

53h

101. Motorola moto g54 5G

53h

102. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

53h

103. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro

53h

104. Honor Magic Vs

53h

105. Xiaomi 14

53h

106. Apple iPhone 14

53h

107. Apple iPhone 13

52h

108. Motorola Edge 20 Pro

52h

109. OnePlus 11

52h

110. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

52h

111. Xiaomi 13T Pro

52h

112. Realme GT Neo 3

52h

113. Xiaomi 12T

52h

114. Google Pixel 7 Pro

52h

115. Realme GT 5G

52h

116. Huawei P50 Pro

51h

117. Oppo Find X3 Neo

51h

118. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G

51h

119. Samsung Galaxy S23

51h

119. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

51h

121. Apple iPhone 15

51h

122. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

51h

123. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

50h

124. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

50h

125. Google Pixel 6a

50h

126. Huawei P40 Lite

50h

127. Realme GT 2 Pro

50h

128. Xiaomi Redmi 9

50h

129. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

50h

130. Oppo Find N2 Flip

49h

131. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

49h

132. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip

49h

133. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

49h

134. Oppo Find X5 Pro

49h

135. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

49h

136. Google Pixel 7

49h

137. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

49h

138. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)

49h

139. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

49h

140. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

49h

141. Google Pixel 8

49h

142. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

48h

143. Google Pixel 6

48h

144. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

48h

145. Oppo Find X5

48h

146. Google Pixel Fold

47h

147. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

47h

148. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

47h

149. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

47h

150. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

47h

151. Sony Xperia 1 IV

47h

152. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

46h

153. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

46h

154. Oppo Find X3 Lite

46h

155. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro

46h

156. Xiaomi 12

45h

157. OnePlus 8T

45h

158. Asus Zenfone 8

45h

159. Google Pixel 5

44h

160. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

44h

161. Oppo Find X3 Pro

44h

162. OnePlus 10 Pro

43h

163. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

43h

164. OnePlus 9 Pro

43h

165. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

43h

166. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

42h

167. Google Pixel 6 Pro

41h

168. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

41h

169. Black Shark 5 Pro

41h

170. Apple iPhone 13 mini

41h

171. Apple iPhone 12 mini

40h

172. POCO F4 GT

40h

173. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

40h

174. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)

39h

175. Honor Magic4 Pro

39h

176. Vivo X51 5G

38h

177. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

38h

178. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

38h

179. Fairphone 5

37h

180. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

37h

181. Xiaomi Mi 11

36h

182. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

35h

183. Xiaomi 12 Pro

34h

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)

6^th

1. Honor Magic6 Pro

81h

2. Asus ROG Phone 6

72h

3. Asus ROG Phone 7

72h

4. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

69h

5. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

68h

6. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

67h

7. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

67h

8. Honor Magic5 Pro

65h

9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

65h

10. Oppo Find X6 Pro

64h

11. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

64h

12. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

63h

13. Samsung Galaxy S23+

61h

14. Xiaomi 13 Pro

60h

15. Huawei P60 Pro

57h

16. Sony Xperia 5 IV

57h

17. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

56h

18. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

56h

19. Google Pixel 8 Pro

55h

20. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

54h

21. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

54h

22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

53h

23. Honor Magic Vs

53h

24. Google Pixel 7 Pro

52h

25. Huawei P50 Pro

51h

26. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

51h

27. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

50h

28. Oppo Find N2 Flip

49h

29. Oppo Find X5 Pro

49h

30. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

49h

31. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

49h

32. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

48h

33. Oppo Find X5

48h

34. Google Pixel Fold

47h

35. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

47h

36. Sony Xperia 1 IV

47h

37. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

46h

38. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

44h

39. Oppo Find X3 Pro

44h

40. OnePlus 10 Pro

43h

41. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

43h

42. OnePlus 9 Pro

43h

43. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

43h

44. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

42h

45. Google Pixel 6 Pro

41h

46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

41h

47. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

40h

48. Honor Magic4 Pro

39h

49. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

38h

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

34h

Home/Office

171

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

221

Honor X7b

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves

On the go

122

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

195

Samsung Galaxy M51

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)

Calibrated

148

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

198

Samsung Galaxy M51

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)

Charging

170

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

218

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

How Charging score is composed

Learn more about how we test battery

Wired

98%

in 30 min

0h20

0 - 80%

0h32

Full charge

Wireless

43%

in 30 min

1h12

0 - 80%

2h22

Full charge

163

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

224

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

Position in Global Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%

10^th

1. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

0h08

2. Black Shark 5 Pro

0h13

3. Realme GT Neo 3

0h14

4. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro

0h14

5. OnePlus 10T 5G

0h16

6. POCO F4 GT

0h17

7. OnePlus 11

0h18

8. Xiaomi 11T Pro

0h18

9. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro

0h19

10. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

0h20

11. Oppo Reno8 5G

0h21

12. Realme GT 5G

0h21

13. OnePlus 9

0h21

14. Xiaomi 12 Pro

0h21

15. Oppo Reno6 5G

0h22

16. Xiaomi 12T Pro

0h22

17. OnePlus 9 Pro

0h22

18. Honor Magic4 Pro

0h22

19. OnePlus Nord 2 5G

0h22

20. Xiaomi 14

0h22

21. Oppo Find X5 Lite

0h22

22. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

0h22

23. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

0h22

24. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

0h23

25. Oppo Find X3 Pro

0h23

26. Oppo Find X3 Neo

0h23

27. Xiaomi 13 Pro

0h23

28. Oppo Find X5 Pro

0h23

29. Oppo Find X6 Pro

0h24

30. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

0h24

31. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

0h24

32. Oppo Find X5

0h25

33. OnePlus 8T

0h25

34. Xiaomi 12T

0h25

35. Realme GT Neo 2 5G

0h25

36. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

0h26

37. Oppo Find X3 Lite

0h26

38. OnePlus 10 Pro

0h26

39. Realme GT 2 Pro

0h26

40. Xiaomi 12

0h27

41. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

0h28

42. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro

0h28

43. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

0h28

44. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

0h28

45. Xiaomi 13

0h29

46. Honor Magic6 Pro

0h29

47. Huawei P60 Pro

0h29

48. Honor Magic Vs

0h29

49. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

0h29

50. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

0h29

51. Xiaomi 13T Pro

0h30

52. Xiaomi 11T

0h30

53. Huawei P50 Pro

0h30

54. Xiaomi Mi 11

0h31

55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

0h31

56. POCO F5 Pro

0h32

57. Honor 70

0h32

58. Nothing Phone (2)

0h32

59. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

0h33

60. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

0h34

61. Huawei P40 Lite

0h34

62. Asus ROG Phone 6

0h35

63. Xiaomi 13T

0h35

64. Honor 90

0h35

65. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

0h37

66. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

0h37

67. Honor Magic5 Pro

0h37

68. Asus ROG Phone 7

0h37

69. Samsung Galaxy S23+

0h37

70. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

0h38

71. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

0h38

72. Oppo A94 5G

0h39

73. Vivo Y76 5G

0h39

74. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

0h39

75. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

0h40

76. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

0h40

77. Vivo X51 5G

0h41

78. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

0h42

79. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

0h42

80. Motorola Edge 20 Pro

0h43

81. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G

0h43

82. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G

0h43

83. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

0h44

84. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

0h44

85. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

0h44

86. Oppo Find N2 Flip

0h45

87. Asus Zenfone 8

0h45

88. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

0h46

89. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

0h46

90. Nothing Phone(1)

0h47

90. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

0h47

92. Google Pixel 8

0h48

93. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

0h48

94. Oppo A74

0h48

95. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

0h48

96. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)

0h49

97. Google Pixel 8 Pro

0h49

98. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

0h49

99. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

0h49

100. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

0h49

101. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

0h49

102. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

0h49

103. Oppo A78 5G

0h49

104. Oppo A77 5G

0h50

105. Samsung Galaxy S23

0h50

105. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)

0h50

107. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

0h51

108. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

0h51

109. Honor 90 Lite

0h51

110. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

0h51

110. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

0h51

112. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

0h51

113. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10

0h52

114. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S

0h52

115. Apple iPhone 12 mini

0h52

116. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

0h52

117. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

0h52

118. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

0h52

119. Honor X9a

0h53

120. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

0h53

121. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

0h53

122. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

0h54

123. Apple iPhone 14

0h54

124. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

0h54

124. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

0h54

126. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

0h54

127. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro

0h55

128. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

0h56

129. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

0h56

130. Honor X9b

0h56

130. Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh)

0h56

132. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

0h57

133. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

0h57

134. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

0h57

135. Apple iPhone 13 mini

0h57

136. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

0h57

137. Samsung Galaxy A72

0h58

138. Apple iPhone 13

0h58

139. Google Pixel 7

1h00

140. Google Pixel Fold

1h00

141. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip

1h01

142. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

1h01

143. Apple iPhone 15

1h02

144. Honor X8 5G

1h02

145. Google Pixel 6 Pro

1h02

146. Google Pixel 6

1h03

146. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

1h03

148. Google Pixel 7 Pro

1h03

149. Honor X7

1h05

150. Sony Xperia 1 IV

1h05

151. Sony Xperia 5 IV

1h05

152. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

1h06

153. Fairphone 5

1h07

154. Google Pixel 7a

1h07

155. Honor X7b

1h08

156. Honor X7a

1h10

157. Google Pixel 6a

1h11

158. Motorola moto g34 5G

1h12

159. Google Pixel 5

1h14

160. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

1h15

161. Vivo Y72 5G

1h18

162. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

1h20

163. Oppo A74 5G

1h21

164. Sony Xperia 10 V

1h22

165. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G

1h22

166. Samsung Galaxy M51

1h23

167. TCL 40R 5G

1h25

168. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

1h25

169. Vivo Y20s

1h25

170. Motorola moto g54 5G

1h26

171. Motorola Moto G62 5G

1h26

172. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

1h28

173. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G

1h30

174. Nokia G42 5G

1h33

175. Sony Xperia 10 IV

1h45

176. Wiko Power U30

1h47

177. Realme C21

1h50

178. Oppo A54 5G

1h51

179. Xiaomi Redmi 9

1h52

180. Motorola Moto G9 Power

1h53

181. Realme C11

1h56

182. TCL 406

2h02

183. Wiko Power U20

2h22

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%

1^st

1. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

0h20

2. Xiaomi 12 Pro

0h21

3. Honor Magic4 Pro

0h22

4. OnePlus 9 Pro

0h22

5. Oppo Find X3 Pro

0h23

6. Xiaomi 13 Pro

0h23

7. Oppo Find X5 Pro

0h23

8. Oppo Find X6 Pro

0h24

9. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

0h24

10. Oppo Find X5

0h25

11. OnePlus 10 Pro

0h26

12. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

0h28

13. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

0h28

14. Honor Magic6 Pro

0h29

15. Huawei P60 Pro

0h29

16. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

0h29

17. Honor Magic Vs

0h29

18. Huawei P50 Pro

0h30

19. Asus ROG Phone 6

0h35

20. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

0h37

21. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

0h37

22. Honor Magic5 Pro

0h37

23. Asus ROG Phone 7

0h37

24. Samsung Galaxy S23+

0h37

25. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

0h38

26. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

0h39

27. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

0h40

28. Oppo Find N2 Flip

0h45

29. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

0h46

30. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

0h48

31. Google Pixel 8 Pro

0h49

32. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

0h49

33. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

0h51

34. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

0h51

35. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

0h52

36. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

0h54

37. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

0h54

38. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

0h56

39. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

0h56

40. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

0h57

41. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

0h57

42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

0h57

43. Google Pixel Fold

1h00

44. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

1h01

45. Google Pixel 6 Pro

1h02

46. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

1h03

47. Google Pixel 7 Pro

1h03

48. Sony Xperia 1 IV

1h05

49. Sony Xperia 5 IV

1h05

50. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

1h06

Wired
Wireless

Power consumption and battery level during full charge

Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge

Wired
Wireless

Time to full charge

Quick boost

178

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

212

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)

Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)

Efficiency

153

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

154

Oppo Reno6 5G

How Efficiency score is composed

Learn more about how we test battery

Annual Consumption Oppo Find X7 Ultra

4.2 kWh

Efficient

Good

Bad

Inefficient

Charge up

146

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

205

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro

Overall charge efficiency

Discharge

156

Oppo Find X7 Ultra

194

Apple iPhone 14 Pro

Average discharge current

The post Oppo Find X7 Ultra Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Crosscall Stellar-X5 Display test

display-qa — Tue, 04 Jun 2024 12:30:13 +0000

We put the Crosscall Stellar-X5 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across four criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications

6.5 inches LCD IPS
Dimensions: 172.4 x 80.1 x 11.9 mm (6.79 x 3.15 x 0.47 inches)
Resolution: 1080 x 2400 pixels, (~405 ppi density)
Aspect ratio: 20:9
Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Crosscall Stellar-X5

109

display

Readability

106

164

Color

111

165

Video

103

163

Touch

138

164

Position in Global Ranking

120^th

1. Honor Magic6 Pro

157

2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

155

3. Google Pixel 8 Pro

154

3. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)

154

3. Samsung Galaxy S24 (Exynos)

154

6. Google Pixel 8

153

6. Vivo X100 Pro

153

8. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

151

8. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

151

8. Honor Magic V2

151

8. Honor Magic5 Pro

151

8. Honor 200 Pro

151

13. Samsung Galaxy S23

149

14. Google Pixel 7 Pro

148

14. Huawei Mate 60 Pro

148

14. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

148

17. Samsung Galaxy S23+

147

17. Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

147

19. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

19. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

21. Google Pixel Fold

145

22. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

144

22. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

144

24. Huawei P60 Pro

143

24. Samsung Galaxy A35 5G

143

26. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

142

26. Oppo Find N2 Flip

142

26. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

142

29. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

30. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

140

30. Apple iPhone 15

140

30. Honor 90

140

30. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

140

34. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

138

34. Apple iPhone 14

138

34. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

138

34. Oppo Find X6 Pro

138

38. OnePlus Open

137

38. Oppo Find X5 Pro

137

38. Vivo X Fold

137

38. Xiaomi 14

137

42. Google Pixel 7

136

42. Honor Magic Vs

136

44. Apple iPhone 13

135

44. Google Pixel 7a

135

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

44. Vivo X90 Pro+

135

44. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

135

49. Huawei P50 Pro

134

49. Nothing Phone (2)

134

49. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

134

52. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

133

52. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

133

52. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

133

52. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)

133

52. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

133

57. Asus ROG Phone 7

132

57. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

132

57. Vivo X90 Pro

132

57. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3

132

57. Xiaomi 13

132

62. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

131

62. Sony Xperia 5 IV

131

62. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

131

62. Xiaomi 13 Pro

131

66. Apple iPhone 13 mini

130

66. Google Pixel 6 Pro

130

66. Honor Magic4 Pro

130

66. Oppo Find X5

130

66. Realme GT 2 Pro

130

66. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

130

66. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

130

66. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

130

66. Vivo X70 Pro+

130

66. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

130

66. Xiaomi 12T

130

77. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

129

77. Xiaomi 13T Pro

129

77. Xiaomi 13T

129

80. Oppo Find N2

128

81. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

127

81. Asus ROG Phone 6

127

81. Sony Xperia 5 V

127

81. Xiaomi 12T Pro

127

85. Asus Zenfone 10

126

85. Oppo Find X6

126

85. Sony Xperia 1 IV

126

85. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

126

89. Google Pixel 6a

125

89. Google Pixel 6

125

89. Honor 70

125

89. Oppo Find X3 Pro

125

89. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

125

89. Xiaomi Mi 11

125

89. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

125

96. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

124

96. OnePlus 11

124

96. OnePlus 10 Pro

124

96. OnePlus 9 Pro

124

96. Oppo Reno8 5G

124

101. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

123

101. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

123

101. Oppo Find X3 Neo

123

101. Xiaomi 12 Pro

123

105. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

105. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

122

105. Nothing Phone(1)

122

108. Apple iPhone 12

121

109. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

120

109. Realme GT 5G

120

111. Fairphone 5

119

111. Xiaomi 12

119

113. Asus Zenfone 8

115

113. Oppo Reno6 5G

115

115. Realme GT Neo 2 5G

114

115. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

114

117. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra

113

117. Oppo Find X5 Lite

113

119. POCO F4 GT

111

120. Crosscall Stellar-X5

109

121. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

108

122. Sony Xperia 10 V

105

123. Sony Xperia 10 IV

104

124. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

103

125. Black Shark 5 Pro

100

126. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

127. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

70^th

1. Honor Magic6 Pro

157

2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

155

3. Google Pixel 8 Pro

154

3. Samsung Galaxy S24+ (Exynos)

154

5. Vivo X100 Pro

153

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

151

6. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

151

6. Honor Magic V2

151

6. Honor Magic5 Pro

151

10. Google Pixel 7 Pro

148

10. Huawei Mate 60 Pro

148

10. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

148

13. Samsung Galaxy S23+

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Google Pixel Fold

145

17. Oppo Find X7 Ultra

144

17. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

144

19. Huawei P60 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

142

20. Oppo Find N2 Flip

142

20. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

142

23. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

24. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

140

25. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

138

25. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

138

25. Oppo Find X6 Pro

138

28. OnePlus Open

137

28. Oppo Find X5 Pro

137

28. Vivo X Fold

137

31. Honor Magic Vs

136

32. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

32. Vivo X90 Pro+

135

34. Huawei P50 Pro

134

34. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

134

36. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

133

36. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

133

36. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

133

36. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

133

40. Asus ROG Phone 7

132

40. Vivo X90 Pro

132

40. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3

132

43. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

131

43. Sony Xperia 5 IV

131

43. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

131

43. Xiaomi 13 Pro

131

47. Google Pixel 6 Pro

130

47. Honor Magic4 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5

130

47. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

130

47. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

130

47. Vivo X70 Pro+

130

47. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

130

54. Oppo Find N2

128

55. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

127

55. Asus ROG Phone 6

127

55. Sony Xperia 5 V

127

58. Oppo Find X6

126

58. Sony Xperia 1 IV

126

60. Oppo Find X3 Pro

125

60. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

125

60. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

125

63. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

124

63. OnePlus 10 Pro

124

63. OnePlus 9 Pro

124

66. Xiaomi 12 Pro

123

67. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

67. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

122

69. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra

113

70. Crosscall Stellar-X5

109

71. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

103

Pros

No frame drops when watching video
Accurate screen interactions, with quick reaction to touch
No screen flicker

Cons

Poor readability in indoor and outdoor conditions
Minimum luminance is too high in a low-light condition
Dark tones are not visible when watching HDR10 video
Brightness drops quickly when viewing the screen at an angle

The Crosscall Stellar-X5’s screen provided a very uneven performance in our Display protocol, with a screen experience that was affected by a pinkish cast in all conditions.

Although the Stellar-X5’s display luminance and contrast levels were able to match most ultra-premium phones in indoor conditions, the device’s display was still difficult to read, especially in bright outdoor environments. In complete darkness, the screen’s luminance remained much too bright to offer a comfortable viewing experience.

Watching HDR10 video was also a mixed experience. Although there were no frame drops, it was sometimes hard to make out the dark tones in the video content due to the lack of brightness.

Otherwise, the Crosscall Stellar-X5’s liquid crystal display was basically free of any flicker, a phenomenon that is more likely to occur in OLED displays, which are typically found on other ultra-premium phone displays.

Although intended touch interactions on the display were often fast and accurate, the display did frequently execute unwanted touches.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis, a device undergoes a series of objective and perceptual tests in controlled lab and real-life conditions. The DXOMARK Display score takes into account the overall user experience the screen provides, considering the hardware capacity and the software tuning. In testing, only factory-installed video and photo apps are used. More in-depth details about how DXOMARK tests displays are available in the article “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”

The following section focuses on the key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Full reports with detailed performance evaluations are available upon request. To order a copy, please contact us.

Readability

106

Crosscall Stellar-X5

164

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates the user’s ease and comfort of viewing still content, such as photos or a web page, on the display under different lighting conditions. Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing and analysis.

Learn more about how we test display readability

Luminance under various lighting conditions

This graph shows the screen luminance in environments that range from total darkness to outdoor conditions. In our labs, the indoor environment (250 lux to 830 lux) simulates the artificial and natural lighting conditions commonly seen in homes (with medium diffusion); the outdoor environment (from 20,000 lux) replicates a situation with highly diffused light.

Contrast under various lighting conditions

This graph shows the screen’s contrast levels in lighting environments that range from total darkness to outdoor conditions. In our labs, the indoor environment (250 lux to 830 lux) simulates the artificial and natural lighting conditions commonly seen in homes (with medium diffusion); the outdoor environment (from 20,000 lux) replicates a situation with highly diffused light.

Photo EOTF

The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for still images follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under intensive lighting conditions (20,000 lux) in the low gray level regions.

Photo EOTF

Luminance vs Viewing Angle

This graph presents how the luminance drops as viewing angles increase.

Skin-tone rendering in an indoor (1000 lux) environment

From left to right: Crosscall Stellar-X5, Fairphone 4, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

(Photos for illustration only)

Skin-tone rendering in a sunlight (>90 000 lux) environment

From left to right: Crosscall Stellar-X5, Fairphone 4, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

(Photos for illustration only)

Average Reflectance (SCI) Crosscall Stellar-X5

4.8 %

Low

Good

Bad

High

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

SCI stands for Specular Component Included, which measures both the diffuse reflection and the specular reflection. Reflection from a simple glass sheet is around 4%, while it reaches about 6% for a plastic sheet. Although smartphones’ first surface is made of glass, their total reflection (without coating) is usually around 5% due to multiple reflections created by the complex optical stack.
Average reflectance is computed based on the spectral reflectance in the visible spectrum range (see graph below) and human spectral sensitivity.

Reflectance (SCI)

Wavelength (horizontal axis) defines light color, but also our capacity to see it; for example, UV is a very low wavelength that the human eye cannot see; Infrared is a high wavelength that the human eye also cannot see). White light is composed of all wavelengths between 400 nm and 700 nm, i.e. the range the human eye can see. Measurements above show the reflection of the devices within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm).

Uniformity

This graph shows the distribution of luminance throughout the entire display panel. Uniformity is measured with a 20% gray pattern, with bright green indicating ideal luminance. An evenly spread-out bright green color on the screen indicates that the display’s brightness is uniform. Other colors indicate a loss of uniformity.

PWM Frequency Crosscall Stellar-X5

No flicker

Bad

Good

Bad

Great

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

Displays flicker for 2 main reasons: refresh rate and Pulse Width Modulation. Pulse width modulation is a modulation technique that generates variable-width pulses to represent the amplitude of an analog input signal. This measurement is important for comfort because flickering at low frequencies can be perceived by some individuals, and in the most extreme cases, can induce seizures. Some experiments show that discomfort can appear at a higher frequency. A high PWM frequency (>1500 Hz) tends to be less disturbing for users.

Temporal Light Modulation

This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the most important modulation. The combination of a low frequency and a high peak is susceptible to inducing eye fatigue.

Color

111

Crosscall Stellar-X5

165

Google Pixel 8

How Display Color score is composed

Color evaluations are performed in different lighting conditions to see how well the device manages color with the surrounding environment. Devices are tested with sRGB and Display-P3 image patterns. Both faithful mode and default mode are used for our evaluation. Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing & analysis.

Learn more about how we test display color

White point color under D65 illuminant at 830 lux

This graph shows the white point coordinates for the image pattern using the default or the faithful mode. D65 illuminant (6500 Kelvin) is a standard that defines the color of white at midday; it is used for display calibration as a white reference, therefore devices are expected to be at or close to the D65 white point.

Color fidelity

Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes. The tested color mode is the most faithful proposed by each device, and a color correction is applied to account for the different white points of each device.

White color shift with angle

This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

Circadian Action Factor Crosscall Stellar-X5

0.34

Good

Bad

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

The circadian action factor is a metric that defines how light impacts the human sleep cycle. It is the ratio of the light energy contributing to sleep disturbances (centered around 450 nm, representing blue light) over the light energy contributing to our perception (covering 400 nm to 700 nm and centered on 550 nm, which is green light). A high circadian action factor means that the ambient light contains strong blue-light energy and is likely to affect the body’s sleep cycle, while a low circadian action factor implies the light has weak blue-light energy and is less likely to affect sleeping patterns.

BLF ON
BLF OFF

Spectrum of white emission with Night mode ON

Spectrum measurements of a white web page with BLF mode on and off. This graph shows the impact of blue light filtering on the whole spectrum. All other settings used are default, in particular, the luminance level follows the auto-brightness adaptation from the manufacturer.
The wavelength (horizontal axis) defines light color but also the capacity to see it. For example, UV, which has a very low wavelength, and infra-red, which has a high wavelength, are both not visible to the human eye. White light is composed of all wavelengths between 400 nm and 700 nm, which is the range visible to the human eye.

Spectrum of white emission with Night mode OFF

Video

103

Crosscall Stellar-X5

163

Samsung Galaxy S23

How Display Video score is composed

The video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling in indoor and low-light conditions . Our measurements run in the labs are completed by perceptual testing and analysis.

Learn more about how we test display Video

SDR
HDR10

Video peak luminance vs Lighting conditions

This bar chart presents the peak luminance measured for SDR and HDR10 content on a 10% window white pattern.

Video peak luminance vs Lighting conditions

This bar chart presents the peak luminance measured for SDR and HDR10 content on a 10% window white pattern.

Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment

Clockwise from top left: Crosscall Stellar-X5, Fairphone 4, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

(Photos for illustration only)

0 Lux
830 Lux

SDR video EOTF curve

These curves represent the SDR video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). The standard for SDR videos follows a 2.2 gamma. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).

SDR video EOTF curve

0 Lux
830 Lux

HDR10 video EOTF curve

These curves represent the HDR10 video tone distribution for white color.
The Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) defines how bits are converted into luminance out of the display. Gray levels (horizontal axis) represent the different shades from pure white (100% gray level) to pitch black (0% gray level). While the PQ (Perceptual Quantizer) standard is reminded here for reference, it cannot be a target for smartphones as it is an absolute standard whereas smartphones adapt their brightness to lighting conditions. The flatter the curves, the harder it is to perceive differences between consecutive shades. This phenomenon is more frequent under bright lighting conditions (830 lux) in the low gray levels region (< 30%).

HDR10 video EOTF curve

Gamut coverage for video content under 0 lux environment

The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The solid color gamut measures the extent of the color area that the device can render in total darkness. The dotted line represents the content’s artistic intent. The measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

Gamut coverage for video content under 830 lux environment

SDR Video Frame Drops FHD at 30 fps

0 %

Few

Good

Bad

Many

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

SDR Video Frame Drops UHD at 30 fps

1.2 %

Few

Good

Bad

Many

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

These gauges present the percentage of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. These irregularities are not necessarily perceived by users (unless they are all located at the same time stamp) but are an indicator of performance.

Touch

138

Crosscall Stellar-X5

164

Google Pixel 7 Pro

How Display Touch score is composed

We evaluate the touch attributes under many types of contents where touch is key, and requires different behaviors such as gaming (quick touch to response time), web (smooth scrolling of the page) and images (accurate and smooth navigation from one image to another).

Learn more about how we test display touch

Average Touch Response Time Crosscall Stellar-X5

80 ms

Fast

Good

Bad

Slow

Crosscall Stellar-X5

Fairphone 5

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

Samsung Galaxy A55 5G

Touch To Display response time

This response time test precisely evaluates the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require high reactivity, such as gaming.

The post Crosscall Stellar-X5 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.