Test: Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite - Smartphone med kraftfullt batteri (Sammanfattning)
Jämförelseenheter
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
86 % v7 (old) | 03/2020 | Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite SD 855, Adreno 640 | 186 g | 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 | |
87.4 % v7 (old) | 03/2019 | Samsung Galaxy S10 Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12 | 157 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.10" | 3040x1440 | |
86.4 % v7 (old) | 05/2019 | Huawei P30 Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10 | 165 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.10" | 2340x1080 | |
86.2 % v7 (old) | 04/2019 | Xiaomi Mi 9 SD 855, Adreno 640 | 173 g | 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.39" | 2340x1080 | |
85.7 % v7 (old) | 07/2019 | LG G8s ThinQ SD 855, Adreno 640 | 181 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.20" | 2248x1080 |
Topp 10...
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara allround/multimediadatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara speldatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara budget/kontorsdatorer
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara kontors/premiumdatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara arbetsstationer
» Topp 10: De bästa små/kompakta bärbara datorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa ultrabooks
» Topp 10: Bästa hybriddatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa surfplattorna
» Topp 10: Marknadens bästa smartphones
Storleksjämförelse
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Huawei P30 | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Huawei P30 |
|
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 96 %
Mitt på batteriet: 622 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.09
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite Super AMOLED Plus, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy S10 OLED, 3040x1440, 6.1" | Samsung Galaxy S10e AMOLED, 2280x1080, 5.8" | Huawei P30 OLED, 2340x1080, 6.1" | Xiaomi Mi 9 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | LG G8s ThinQ P-OLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -5% | 7% | 20% | 28% | -11% | |
Brightness middle | 622 | 701 13% | 426 -32% | 561 -10% | 593 -5% | 539 -13% |
Brightness | 630 | 705 12% | 427 -32% | 560 -11% | 587 -7% | 556 -12% |
Brightness Distribution | 96 | 98 2% | 96 0% | 95 -1% | 94 -2% | 88 -8% |
Black Level * | ||||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 3.7 -37% | 2.14 21% | 1.5 44% | 0.9 67% | 3.78 -40% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.9 | 10.3 -75% | 3.29 44% | 2.5 58% | 2 66% | 6.95 -18% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3 | 1.4 53% | 1.8 40% | 1.8 40% | 1.5 50% | 2.2 27% |
Gamma | 2.09 105% | 2.1 105% | 2.111 104% | 2.2 100% | 2.27 97% | 2.274 97% |
CCT | 6246 104% | 6553 99% | 6329 103% | 6512 100% | 6548 99% | 6013 108% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8710 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
2.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.6 ms rise | |
↘ 1.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise | |
↘ 1.6 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Huawei P30 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10330 - 14439, n=19) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Huawei P30 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8342 - 11440, n=19) |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Huawei P30 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (27 - 58, n=20) | |
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 166, n=173, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 | |
Huawei P30 | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (35 - 71, n=20) | |
Average of class Smartphone (8.3 - 365, n=173, last 2 years) |
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (376698 - 451559, n=8) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=16) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (84.4 - 120, n=17) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chome 75) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=15) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Huawei P30 (Chrome 73) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite | Samsung Galaxy S10 | Huawei P30 | Xiaomi Mi 9 | LG G8s ThinQ | Average 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -35% | -16% | -27% | -43% | 1% | 83% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1489 | 832 -44% | 909 -39% | 666 -55% | 791 -47% | 1520 ? 2% | 1894 ? 27% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 525 | 193.2 -63% | 186 -65% | 388.3 -26% | 182.4 -65% | 546 ? 4% | 1476 ? 181% |
Random Read 4KB | 191.7 | 137.4 -28% | 138.8 -28% | 149.4 -22% | 138 -28% | 206 ? 7% | 278 ? 45% |
Random Write 4KB | 173.5 | 24.44 -86% | 195.3 13% | 165.3 -5% | 29.6 -83% | 193.9 ? 12% | 312 ? 80% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 76 ? | 77.9 ? 3% | 82.8 ? 9% | 67.5 ? -11% | 67.3 ? -11% | ||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 61 ? | 64.8 ? 6% | 71.3 ? 17% | 46.7 ? -23% | 55.7 ? -9% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.1 °C / 95 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 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei P30 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 38% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Av/Standby | 0.01 / 0.27 Watt |
Låg belastning | 0.58 / 1.55 / 1.64 Watt |
Hög belastning |
4.29 / 8.03 Watt |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 3400 mAh | Huawei P30 3650 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -3% | -21% | 4% | -35% | -18% | -24% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.58 | 0.61 -5% | 0.69 -19% | 0.67 -16% | 1.2 -107% | 0.939 ? -62% | 0.883 ? -52% |
Idle Average * | 1.55 | 1.27 18% | 2.41 -55% | 1.26 19% | 1.6 -3% | 1.506 ? 3% | 1.467 ? 5% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.64 | 1.3 21% | 2.51 -53% | 1.29 21% | 2 -22% | 1.799 ? -10% | 1.621 ? 1% |
Load Average * | 4.29 | 6.17 -44% | 3.86 10% | 3.71 14% | 5 -17% | 4.61 ? -7% | 6.58 ? -53% |
Load Maximum * | 8.03 | 8.55 -6% | 6.96 13% | 9.3 -16% | 10 -25% | 9.04 ? -13% | 9.91 ? -23% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 3400 mAh | Huawei P30 3650 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -38% | -14% | -24% | -24% | |
Reader / Idle | 2504 | 1259 -50% | 1914 -24% | 1650 -34% | 1689 -33% |
H.264 | 1183 | 842 -29% | 1050 -11% | 1008 -15% | 753 -36% |
WiFi v1.3 | 823 | 427 -48% | 715 -13% | 546 -34% | 693 -16% |
Load | 222 | 170 -23% | 208 -6% | 194 -13% | 203 -9% |
För
Emot
Omdöme - Äntligen mer ström
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite har mer än man kan tänka sig vid en första anblick och är inte bara en billig version av de till namnet dyrare S10-modellerna. Först och främst kan den tillslut leverera övertygande batteritid, vilket i huvudsak kommer av det stora batteriet men beror också till viss del på att den inte längre använder en Exynos-processor. Lite-modellens syskon framstår inte som särskilt bra vid jämförelse i den här viktiga kategorin.
Men några kompromisser behövde göras vilket har resulterat i att S10 Lite har en lägre skärmupplösning än flaggskeppsenheterna och saknar stöd för moderna kommunikationsstandarder som WiFi 6 och 5G. Dessutom har Samsung tagit bort trådlös laddning och Bluetooth Dual audio-funktionen.
Även om Galaxy S10 Lite kanske inte är den bästa Galaxy S10-modellen är det den mest uthålliga. Detta gör det lätt att ha förbiseende med de få funktioner som saknas.
När det gäller kameran har Samsung valt en annan väg som förklarar varför telefonen är billigare. Även om S10 Lite har högre kameraupplösning är bildkvaliteten inte lika bra som på de andra S10-modellerna som har modulära bländare. På samma sätt har besparingar gjorts på den framåtriktade kameran där högt antal megapixlar har prioriterats framför kvalitet och autofokus. Även om Super Steady OIS fungerar skapligt resulterar den i ett alldeles för stort tapp i bildkvalitet. Totalt sett har S10 Lite fortfarande en bra kamera, men den kan inte slå sina toppskiktssyskon.
Samsung gör det inte lätt för intresserade köpare, särskilt inte med nuvarande priser. Även om Galaxy S10 helt enkelt är billigare rekommenderar vi inte S10e till det nuvarande priset. Galaxy S10 Lite kan redan nu vara rätt val för den som är särskilt intresserad av en stor skärm och riktigt lång batteritid och inte är lika lockad av de övriga modellernas toppskiktsfunktioner. Men för övriga rekommenderar vi att vänta tålmodigt några månader eftersom den här telefonen troligen kommer gå ner i pris och antagligen hamnar på under 5.000 kronor i en nära framtid.
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
- 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt