Test: Motorola Moto G9 Plus - Batterigigant som har problem med ljusstyrkan (Sammanfattning)
Testgrupp
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 79.8 % v7 (old) | 10/2020 | Motorola Moto G9 Plus SD 730G, Adreno 618 | 223 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.81" | 2400x1080 | |
| 82.9 % v7 (old) | 06/2020 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro SD 720G, Adreno 618 | 209 g | 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2400x1080 | |
| 81.3 % v7 (old) | 10/2020 | Samsung Galaxy M51 SD 730, Adreno 618 | 213 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 | |
| 79.6 % v7 (old) | 06/2020 | Realme 6 Pro SD 720G, Adreno 618 | 195 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.60" | 2400x1080 | |
| 79.8 % v7 (old) | 01/2020 | Oppo A91 Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3 | 172 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.40" | 2400x1080 | |
| 81.8 % v7 (old) | 09/2020 | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC SD 732G, Adreno 618 | 215 g | 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2400x1080 |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro | |
| Oppo A91 | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 | |
| Realme 6 Pro | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Oppo A91 | |
| Realme 6 Pro | |
Image Comparison
Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.
Main cameraMain cameraLow LightWide angle
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 93 %
Mitt på batteriet: 390 cd/m²
Kontrast: 591:1 (Svärta: 0.66 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.39 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 4.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.506
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus LTPS, 2400x1080, 6.8" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy M51 Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Realme 6 Pro IPS, 2400x1080, 6.6" | Oppo A91 AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.4" | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 58% | 19% | -5% | -23% | 39% | |
| Brightness middle | 390 | 610 56% | 626 61% | 442 13% | 594 52% | 623 60% |
| Brightness | 377 | 579 54% | 632 68% | 419 11% | 613 63% | 600 59% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 92 -1% | 94 1% | 90 -3% | 89 -4% | 93 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.66 | 0.37 44% | 0.37 44% | 0.54 18% | ||
| Contrast | 591 | 1649 179% | 1195 102% | 1154 95% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.39 | 1.8 47% | 2.88 15% | 6.1 -80% | 6.1 -80% | 1.8 47% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.22 | 3 43% | 4.97 5% | 9.7 -86% | 10.6 -103% | 4.7 10% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.3 | 2.5 42% | 5.9 -37% | 5.9 -37% | 7 -63% | 3.3 23% |
| Gamma | 2.506 88% | 2.31 95% | 3.441 64% | 2.35 94% | 2.28 96% | 2.26 97% |
| CCT | 6033 108% | 6864 95% | 6415 101% | 7631 85% | 7370 88% | 6712 97% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 23 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 11 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 48 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 55 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (844 - 9574, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4134 - 34246, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (5192 - 28121, n=61, last 2 years) | |
| AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 | |
| Realme 6 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (251673 - 275660, n=6) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chrome 85) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (45.8 - 50.6, n=6) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (79.2 - 87.7, n=6) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chrome 85) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (40.4 - 44.2, n=6) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chome 85) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (66 - 77, n=6) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chrome 85) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (16197 - 17768, n=6) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chrome 85) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (2770 - 3054, n=6) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99) | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus (Chrome 86) | |
| Samsung Galaxy M51 (Chrome 85) | |
| Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC (Chrome 85) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro | Samsung Galaxy M51 | Realme 6 Pro | Oppo A91 | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -4% | -2% | 15% | -13% | -4% | 24% | 325% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 489.4 | 498.1 2% | 491.7 0% | 513 5% | 505 3% | 506 3% | 760 ? 55% | 1887 ? 286% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 186.2 | 171.1 -8% | 189.8 2% | 203.3 9% | 185.3 0% | 173.1 -7% | 297 ? 60% | 1471 ? 690% |
| Random Read 4KB | 134.8 | 122.6 -9% | 123.6 -8% | 158.7 18% | 145.6 8% | 123.4 -8% | 152.9 ? 13% | 278 ? 106% |
| Random Write 4KB | 98.1 | 112.9 15% | 114.5 17% | 154 57% | 28.55 -71% | 112.6 15% | 131.6 ? 34% | 311 ? 217% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 85.3 ? | 76.7 ? -10% | 74.8 ? -12% | 86.4 ? 1% | 77.2 ? -9% | 75.2 ? -12% | 76 ? -11% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 65.4 ? | 54.9 ? -16% | 59.4 ? -9% | 63.4 ? -3% | 60.3 ? -8% | 55.6 ? -15% | 59.6 ? -9% |
PUBG mobile
Asphalt 9 Legends
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.2 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.4 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.6 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Motorola Moto G9 Plus audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 67.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 67.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 67.7% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (130.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 98% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0 / 0.2 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  0.8 / 1.7 / 2.2 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
5.3 / 7.4 Watt |
    
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro 5020 mAh | Samsung Galaxy M51 7000 mAh | Realme 6 Pro 4300 mAh | Oppo A91 4025 mAh | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC 5160 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 4% | 11% | -2% | 18% | -15% | 0% | -5% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.8 | 0.75 6% | 0.8 -0% | 0.92 -15% | 0.82 -3% | 0.93 -16% | 0.84 ? -5% | 0.88 ? -10% |
| Idle Average * | 1.7 | 2.19 -29% | 1.3 24% | 1.79 -5% | 1.73 -2% | 2.47 -45% | 1.953 ? -15% | 1.444 ? 15% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.2 | 2.24 -2% | 1.8 18% | 1.88 15% | 1.75 20% | 2.51 -14% | 2.26 ? -3% | 1.6 ? 27% |
| Load Average * | 5.3 | 3.88 27% | 4.8 9% | 5.41 -2% | 2.33 56% | 5.62 -6% | 4.51 ? 15% | 6.57 ? -24% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.4 | 5.97 19% | 7 5% | 7.59 -3% | 5.97 19% | 6.93 6% | 6.63 ? 10% | 9.91 ? -34% |
* ... smaller is better
| Motorola Moto G9 Plus 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro 5020 mAh | Samsung Galaxy M51 7000 mAh | Realme 6 Pro 4300 mAh | Oppo A91 4025 mAh | Xiaomi Poco X3 NFC 5160 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 0% | 29% | 7% | -37% | -1% | |
| Reader / Idle | 2732 | 2336 -14% | 2642 -3% | 2427 -11% | ||
| H.264 | 1352 | 1096 -19% | 1685 25% | 1188 -12% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 968 | 1175 21% | 1508 56% | 1031 7% | 605 -37% | 1116 15% |
| Load | 267 | 303 13% | 365 37% | 280 5% |
För
Emot
Omdöme: Moto G9 Plus - Motorolas mobil saknar det lilla extra
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
G9 Plus lämnade ett blandat intryck i vår recension. Å ena sidan har Motorolas mittenskiktsmodell riktigt bra ljudkvalitet, snabba laddningstider och lämplig prestanda för sin prisklass. Konstruktionskvaliteten är också ett plus.
Moto G9 Plus är en rejäl mittenskiktstelefon - varken mer eller mindre.
Däremot var Moto G en besvikelse på ett väldigt viktigt område: skärmen. Kameran övertygade inte riktigt heller. LTPS-panelen har bara stöd för 60 Hz och är inte särskilt ljusstark, vilket i kombination med höga nivåer av svärta resulterar i en kontrastnivå under genomsnittet. Dessutom lider den av typiska LCD-fenomen som glorior och ojämn ljusstyrkefördelning runt skärmens kanter.
Även om Moto G9 Plus bara kostar runt 2.890 kronor finns det också LC-skärmar med snabb bilduppdatering (exempelvis Poco X3 NFC) och OLED-paneler (exempelvis Samsung Galaxy M51) i mittensegmentet.
Motorola Moto G9 Plus
- 10/13/2020 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
