Test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro) - Inte ytterligare en Mi 9 med uppfällbar kamera
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 91 %
Mitt på batteriet: 594 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.51 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
142.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.219
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Xiaomi Mi 9 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | OnePlus 7 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL IPS, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Google Pixel 3a XL OLED, 2160x1080, 6" | Samsung Galaxy A80 AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7" | LG G8s ThinQ P-OLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 23% | -35% | -50% | 7% | -44% | -36% | |
| Brightness middle | 594 | 593 0% | 603 2% | 569 -4% | 409 -31% | 478 -20% | 539 -9% |
| Brightness | 607 | 587 -3% | 605 0% | 537 -12% | 410 -32% | 486 -20% | 556 -8% |
| Brightness Distribution | 91 | 94 3% | 94 3% | 79 -13% | 96 5% | 96 5% | 88 -3% |
| Black Level * | 0.31 | ||||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.51 | 0.9 40% | 3.5 -132% | 3.5 -132% | 1.3 14% | 2.97 -97% | 3.78 -150% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.27 | 2 53% | 7.7 -80% | 6 -41% | 2.3 46% | 10.18 -138% | 6.95 -63% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.6 | 1.5 42% | 2.7 -4% | 5.1 -96% | 1.5 42% | 2.5 4% | 2.2 15% |
| Gamma | 2.219 99% | 2.27 97% | 2.266 97% | 2.36 93% | 2.22 99% | 2.031 108% | 2.274 97% |
| CCT | 6390 102% | 6548 99% | 6775 96% | 6827 95% | 6621 98% | 6533 99% | 6013 108% |
| Contrast | 1835 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 223 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 223 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 223 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 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. » 15 % 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 | ||
| 7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 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. » 16 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=16) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73) | |
| LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75) | |
| Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chome 74) | |
| Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| LG G8s ThinQ (Chome 75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=15) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chome 75) | |
| Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75) | |
| LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75) | |
| Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75) | |
| LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75) | |
| Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19) | |
| LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
| Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro | Xiaomi Mi 9 | OnePlus 7 | Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL | Google Pixel 3a XL | Samsung Galaxy A80 | LG G8s ThinQ | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 24% | 31% | 5% | -37% | -36% | -23% | 10% | 247% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 809 | 666 -18% | 1463 81% | 831 3% | 315.6 -61% | 502 -38% | 791 -2% | 760 ? -6% | 1894 ? 134% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 196.9 | 388.3 97% | 392 99% | 195.6 -1% | 179.1 -9% | 190.4 -3% | 182.4 -7% | 297 ? 51% | 1476 ? 650% |
| Random Read 4KB | 142.5 | 149.4 5% | 175.3 23% | 153.3 8% | 92.1 -35% | 117.5 -18% | 138 -3% | 152.9 ? 7% | 278 ? 95% |
| Random Write 4KB | 148.5 | 165.3 11% | 28.7 -81% | 160.2 8% | 87 -41% | 21.6 -85% | 29.6 -80% | 131.6 ? -11% | 312 ? 110% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 87 ? | 67.5 ? | 76 ? | ||||||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 62.5 ? | 46.7 ? | 59.6 ? |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.1 °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 41.7 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 80.4% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 80.4% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 80.4% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (115.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 3% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Mi 9 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0 / 0.1 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  0.7 / 1 / 1.3 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
5.2 / 10 Watt |
    
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | OnePlus 7 3700 mAh | Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL 5000 mAh | Google Pixel 3a XL 3700 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A80 3700 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 3% | -1% | -44% | 2% | 4% | -36% | -20% | -25% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.7 | 0.67 4% | 0.6 14% | 0.81 -16% | 0.7 -0% | 0.6 14% | 1.2 -71% | 0.939 ? -34% | 0.883 ? -26% |
| Idle Average * | 1 | 1.26 -26% | 1.1 -10% | 2.35 -135% | 1.63 -63% | 1.2 -20% | 1.6 -60% | 1.506 ? -51% | 1.467 ? -47% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.3 | 1.29 1% | 2 -54% | 2.37 -82% | 1.67 -28% | 1.4 -8% | 2 -54% | 1.799 ? -38% | 1.621 ? -25% |
| Load Average * | 5.2 | 3.71 29% | 4 23% | 5.33 -3% | 2.64 49% | 5 4% | 5 4% | 4.61 ? 11% | 6.58 ? -27% |
| Load Maximum * | 10 | 9.3 7% | 8 20% | 8.55 14% | 4.62 54% | 7.1 29% | 10 -0% | 9.04 ? 10% | 9.91 ? 1% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | OnePlus 7 3700 mAh | Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL 5000 mAh | Google Pixel 3a XL 3700 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A80 3700 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -14% | 10% | 52% | 2% | -8% | -14% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1768 | 1650 -7% | 1989 13% | 2114 20% | 1822 3% | 1796 2% | 1689 -4% |
| H.264 | 987 | 1008 2% | 933 -5% | 2138 117% | 960 -3% | 902 -9% | 753 -24% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 762 | 546 -28% | 901 18% | 801 5% | 709 -7% | 713 -6% | 693 -9% |
| Load | 249 | 194 -22% | 278 12% | 409 64% | 289 16% | 200 -20% | 203 -18% |
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Mi 9T Pro, eller Redmi K20 Pro beroende på var du bor, är ytterligare en kraftfull men ändå billig smartphone från Xiaomi. Om Xiaomi släpper Mi 9T Pro över hela världen för runt 4.000 kronor, vilket återförsäljare tar för Redmi K20 Pro, rekommenderar vi att du överväger den om du letar efter en telefon för under 5.000 kronor.
En av enhetens största höjdpunkter är den tjusiga AMOLED-skärmen som knappt har någon infattning alls tack vare den utfällbara framåtriktade kameran. En Snapdragon 855 och 8 GB RAM finns på plats för att leverera utmärkt prestanda samtidigt som lagringen på 128 GB är bland den snabbaste UFS 2.1-lagringen som finns på marknaden. Vi uppskattar också att Xiaomi har hållt kvar vid en optisk fingeravtrycksläsare inbyggd i skärmen då det gör att enheten känns mer framtidssäkrad än många andra aktuella modeller.
Men Mi 9T Pro har också sina brister, även om den internationella modellen skulle åtgärda en del av problemen vi har med enheten. Den begränsade LTE-täckningen och Widevine L3-certifieringen borde inte påverka den internationella modellen, men monohögtalaren samt att den saknar utökningsbar lagring, trådlös laddning och IP-certifiering stör oss. Vi tror heller inte att en internationell modell skulle åtgärda problemen med att processorn stryps och MIUI är en fråga om smak.
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro, mer känd som Redmi K20 Pro i en del områden, är en utmärkt allt-i-allo, men den saknar den polering som Mi 9 har.
Den motordriva utfällbara selfiekameran och den jackfria designen hjälper definitivt Mi 9T Pro att stå ut från sina konkurrenter, men det verkar kortsiktigt av Xiaomi att marknadsföra enheten som en del av Mi 9-serien. Även om Mi 9T Pro kostar ungefär lika mycket som Mi 9 gör en långsammare WiFi-modul, monohögtalaren, långsammare flashlagring, en dåligt kalibrerad skärm och sämre temperaturhantering att den är svårare att sälja än sin motsvarighet med nästan samma namn. Den förstnämnda har dock ett större batteri, bättre batteritid och en 3.5 mm ljudanslutning, vilket för vissa kan få skalan att tippa över till fördel för Mi 9T Pro.
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
- 07/30/2019 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
