Test: Xiaomi Mi 11 - Kraftfullt flaggskepp med vissa begränsningar (Sammanfattning)
Testgrupp
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 87.3 % v7 (old) | 02/2021 | Xiaomi Mi 11 SD 888 5G, Adreno 660 | 196 g | 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.81" | 3200x1440 | |
| 88.5 % v7 (old) | 04/2020 | OnePlus 8 Pro SD 865, Adreno 650 | 199 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.78" | 3168x1440 | |
| 89.4 % v7 (old) | 04/2020 | Huawei P40 Pro Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16 | 209 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.58" | 2640x1200 | |
| 84.6 % v7 (old) | 11/2020 | Google Pixel 5 SD 765G, Adreno 620 | 151 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.00" | 2340x1080 | |
| 83.4 % v7 (old) | 07/2020 | Oppo Reno4 Pro SD 765G, Adreno 620 | 172 g | 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.50" | 2400x1080 | |
| 89.6 % v7 (old) | 03/2021 | Samsung Galaxy S21+ Exynos 2100 5G, Mali-G78 MP14 | 200 g | 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 |
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.
Wide-angleWide-angleLow-lightUltra wide-angle5x zoom
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 98 %
Mitt på batteriet: 840 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
| Xiaomi Mi 11 LED DotDisplay, 3200x1440, 6.8" | OnePlus 8 Pro AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.8" | Huawei P40 Pro OLED, 2640x1200, 6.6" | Google Pixel 5 OLED, 2340x1080, 6" | Oppo Reno4 Pro AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5" | Samsung Galaxy S21+ Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 2400x1080, 6.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 19% | -5% | 3% | -81% | -13% | |
| Brightness middle | 840 | 796 -5% | 584 -30% | 635 -24% | 790 -6% | 814 -3% |
| Brightness | 845 | 779 -8% | 576 -32% | 636 -25% | 789 -7% | 814 -4% |
| Brightness Distribution | 98 | 94 -4% | 95 -3% | 97 -1% | 95 -3% | 97 -1% |
| Black Level * | ||||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.2 | 0.68 43% | 1.1 8% | 0.8 33% | 2.8 -133% | 2 -67% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.7 | 1.55 43% | 2.3 15% | 2.2 19% | 7.7 -185% | 3.6 -33% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2 | 1.1 45% | 1.8 10% | 1.7 15% | 5 -150% | 1.4 30% |
| Gamma | 2.26 97% | 2.237 98% | 2.16 102% | 2.23 99% | 2.29 96% | 2.12 104% |
| CCT | 6492 100% | 6310 103% | 6355 102% | 6492 100% | 6716 97% | 6568 99% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 485.4 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 485.4 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 485.4 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.6 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % 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 | ||
| 3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 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 0.165 (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). | ||
| AImark - Score v2.x (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 | |
| Huawei P40 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (171404 - 264766, n=15) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (61.3 - 125.1, n=13) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (77 - 223, n=19) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (46.9 - 121, n=12) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chome 80) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (103 - 182, n=18) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (23491 - 47543, n=20) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86) | |
| Google Pixel 5 (Chrome 86.0.4240.110) | |
| OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
| Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ (Chrome 88.0.4324.152) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 (Chrome 88) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (891 - 1841, n=20) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 11 | OnePlus 8 Pro | Huawei P40 Pro | Google Pixel 5 | Oppo Reno4 Pro | Samsung Galaxy S21+ | Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -15% | -16% | -55% | -44% | 12% | -8% | 30% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 1615 | 1627 1% | 1775 10% | 851 -47% | 943 -42% | 1623 0% | 1602 ? -1% | 1887 ? 17% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 754 | 730 -3% | 395.7 -48% | 190 -75% | 473.7 -37% | 1037 38% | 748 ? -1% | 1471 ? 95% |
| Random Read 4KB | 278.5 | 208.3 -25% | 228.1 -18% | 138.9 -50% | 159.4 -43% | 309.6 11% | 243 ? -13% | 278 ? 0% |
| Random Write 4KB | 289.3 | 197.7 -32% | 271.8 -6% | 155.9 -46% | 139.6 -52% | 283.3 -2% | 244 ? -16% | 311 ? 8% |
| 3DMark - Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Huawei P40 Pro | |
| Google Pixel 5 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S21+ | |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.6 °C / 100 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 37.5 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.2 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 11 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 81% 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, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy S21+ audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.3% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0.02 / 0.24 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  1.57 / 1.92 / 1.94 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
6.32 / 11.65 Watt |
    
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 4600 mAh | OnePlus 8 Pro 4510 mAh | Huawei P40 Pro 4200 mAh | Google Pixel 5 4080 mAh | Oppo Reno4 Pro 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S21+ 4800 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -33% | 37% | 58% | 14% | 27% | 18% | 20% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.57 | 2.2 -40% | 0.92 41% | 0.69 56% | 0.95 39% | 0.74 53% | 1.066 ? 32% | 0.88 ? 44% |
| Idle Average * | 1.92 | 3.3 -72% | 1.41 27% | 0.82 57% | 2.49 -30% | 1.27 34% | 1.58 ? 18% | 1.444 ? 25% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.94 | 3.7 -91% | 1.47 24% | 0.85 56% | 2.58 -33% | 1.33 31% | 1.733 ? 11% | 1.6 ? 18% |
| Load Average * | 6.32 | 5.9 7% | 3.35 47% | 2.73 57% | 3.52 44% | 6.32 -0% | 5.46 ? 14% | 6.57 ? -4% |
| Load Maximum * | 11.65 | 8.3 29% | 6.37 45% | 4.4 62% | 5.9 49% | 9.61 18% | 9.79 ? 16% | 9.91 ? 15% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 11 4600 mAh | OnePlus 8 Pro 4510 mAh | Huawei P40 Pro 4200 mAh | Google Pixel 5 4080 mAh | Oppo Reno4 Pro 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S21+ 4800 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 51% | 20% | 64% | 80% | 33% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1144 | 2103 84% | 1474 29% | 2245 96% | 1780 56% | |
| H.264 | 971 | 1023 5% | 1137 17% | 1466 51% | 1174 21% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 527 | 923 75% | 743 41% | 808 53% | 950 80% | 651 24% |
| Load | 214 | 296 38% | 198 -7% | 333 56% | 282 32% |
För
Emot
Omdöme: Xiaomi Mi 11 - Fortfarande riktigt lockande i förhållande till dess konkurrenter
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Den senaste avkomman från Mi-serien är en riktigt bra smartphone, men förväntningarna på Xiaomis flaggskepp har också lett till en justering av prissättningen, som har ändrats sen förra året. Med undantag för riktigt kraftig värmeutveckling under vissa prestandatester, vilket troligen inte kommer spela någon roll vid vardagsbruk, har Mi 11 väldigt få förbättringsområden.
Riktigt bra, men tyvärr inte längre billig.
Xiaomis telefon har ett ganska oregelbundet WLAN-modem som drar mycket energi, vilket resulterar i suboptimal batteritid. Kamerans kvalitet lämnar också utrymme för mjukvaru-uppdateringar. Xiaomi kanske borde fokuserat mindre på att marknadsföra 108 MP-kameran, för i vårt test gillade vi 48 MP-linsen på Mi 10 Ultra bättre. USB 2.0 och avsaknad av IP-certifiering passar heller inte för en telefon med ett utgångspris på nästan 8.000 kronor.
Trots detta erbjuder Mi 11 (fortfarande) riktigt mycket smartphone för pengarna, särskilt med tanke på vad Galaxy S21-modellerna kostar och vilka funktioner de har. Framför allt är den ljusstarka och högupplösta AMOLED-skärmen i kombination med snabbladdningsfunktioner svårt att hitta i det här prisskiktet.
Xiaomi Mi 11
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
