Notebookcheck

Recensione breve dello Smartphone Xiaomi Mi Max 2

Marcus Herbrich (traduzione a cura di G. De Luca), 09/08/2017

China Import per gli appassionati di phablet. Lo Xiaomi Mi Max 2 ha uno schermo da oltre 6,4" - il che potrebbe piacere o non piacere. Ma se cercate uno smartphone XXL, questo ha molto da offrire per appena $370.

Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Mi Serie)
Processore
Scheda grafica
Qualcomm Adreno 506
Memoria
4096 MB 
Schermo
6.44 pollici 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 342 PPI, capacitive, LCD, IPS, lucido: si
Harddisk
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 51.54 GB libera
Porte di connessione
1 USB 2.0, 1 Infrarossi, Connessioni Audio: 3.5 mm audio jack, Lettore schede: microSD, fino a 128 GB (usa uno slot SIM 1), 1 Lettore impronte digitali, Sensore luminosità, Sensori: giroscopio, sensore Hall, accelerometro, sensore prossimità, bussola, Miracast, OTG, Status LED
Rete
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, 4G network standard : FDD LTE - 1800 / 2100 / 2600 (Bands 1, 3, 7); 3G network standard : WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100MHz; 2G network standard : GSM 850/900/1800/1900MHz, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Dimensioni
altezza x larghezza x profondità (in mm): 7.6 x 174 x 88.7
Batteria
5300 mAh ioni di litio, Autonomia della batteria (dichiarata dal produttore): 57 ore
Sistema Operativo
Android 7.1 Nougat
Camera
Fotocamera Principale: 12 MPix f/2.2 apertura, large 1.25μm pixels, two-tone flash, PDAF autofocus, enhanced low-light photography, HDR adjustment technology, Panorama Mode, Burst Mode, facial recognition, real-time camera filters
Fotocamera Secondaria: 5 MPix Beautify con 36 profili smart beauty, f/2.0 apertura, 85° angolazione, filtri real-time per video chat, selfie timer, riconoscimento facciale
Altre caratteristiche
Casse: casse dual, Tastiera: virtuale, Illuminazione Tastiera: si, alimentatore (per la Cina), cavo USB, MiUi 8, 12 Mesi Garanzia, senza ventola
Peso
211 gr, Alimentazione: 34 gr
Prezzo
360 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
Adreno 506, 625, 64 GB eMMC Flash
344 MBit/s ∼100%
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro
Adreno 510, 652 MSM8976, 64 GB eMMC Flash
313 MBit/s ∼91% -9%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
259 MBit/s ∼75% -25%
Nokia 5
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
122 MBit/s ∼35% -65%
ZTE Blade V8
Adreno 505, 435, 32 GB eMMC Flash
54.5 MBit/s ∼16% -84%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 32 GB eMMC Flash
47.4 MBit/s ∼14% -86%
LG X power2
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750, 16 GB eMMC Flash
45.7 MBit/s ∼13% -87%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro
Adreno 510, 652 MSM8976, 64 GB eMMC Flash
261 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
Adreno 506, 625, 64 GB eMMC Flash
253 MBit/s ∼97%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
165 MBit/s ∼63% -35%
Nokia 5
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
112 MBit/s ∼43% -56%
ZTE Blade V8
Adreno 505, 435, 32 GB eMMC Flash
53.2 MBit/s ∼20% -79%
LG X power2
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750, 16 GB eMMC Flash
51.2 MBit/s ∼20% -80%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 32 GB eMMC Flash
49.7 MBit/s ∼19% -80%
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
Xiaomi Mi Max 2

Confronto immagini

Scegliete una scena e navigate nella prima immagine. Un click cambia lo zoom. Un click sulla immagine zoommata apre quella originale in una nuova finestra. La prima immagine mostra la fotografia ridimensionata del dispositivo di test.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click per caricare le immagini
510
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
532
cd/m²
516
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
537
cd/m²
500
cd/m²
510
cd/m²
542
cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Massima: 542 cd/m² Media: 523 cd/m² Minimum: 1.28 cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità: 92 %
Al centro con la batteria: 530 cd/m²
Contrasto: 1262:1 (Nero: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.9 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 4.1 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.28
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
IPS, 1920x1080, 6.44
Nokia 5
IPS, 1280x720, 5.2
ZTE Blade V8
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
LG X power2
IPS, 1280x720, 5.5
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
IPS, 1280x720, 5.2
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro
IPS, 2560x1440, 6.4
Huawei Mate 9
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.9
Screen
-14%
-12%
3%
-11%
-26%
12%
Brightness
523
635
21%
448
-14%
237
-55%
474
-9%
479
-8%
680
30%
Brightness Distribution
92
90
-2%
79
-14%
92
0%
85
-8%
93
1%
93
1%
Black Level *
0.42
0.57
-36%
0.64
-52%
0.13
69%
0.53
-26%
0.482
-15%
0.42
-0%
Contrast
1262
1105
-12%
753
-40%
1823
44%
957
-24%
980
-22%
1657
31%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.9
5
15%
4
32%
5.5
7%
4.7
20%
7
-19%
4.3
27%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.1
6.9
-68%
3.4
17%
6.1
-49%
4.8
-17%
7.9
-93%
4.8
-17%
Gamma
2.28 105%
2.37 101%
2.13 113%
2.07 116%
2.25 107%
2.34 103%
2.33 103%
CCT
7129 91%
8736 74%
6774 96%
7943 82%
6441 101%
7826 83%
7255 90%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 2232 Hz17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2232 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2232 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6272 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Tempi di risposta del Display

I tempi di risposta del display mostrano quanto sia veloce lo schermo a cambaire da un colore all'altro. Tempi di risposta lenti poccono creare sovrapposizioni negloi oggetti in movimento. Specialmente i giocatori patiti del 3D dovrebbero usare uno schermo con rempi di risposta bassi.
       Tempi di risposta dal Nero al Bianco
16.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms Incremento
↘ 7.6 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra buoni tempi di risposta durante i nostri tests, ma potrebbe essere troppo lento per i gamers competitivi.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Tempo di risposta dal 50% Grigio all'80% Grigio
22.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.8 ms Incremento
↘ 11.6 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra buoni tempi di risposta durante i nostri tests, ma potrebbe essere troppo lento per i gamers competitivi.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.8 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
62488 Points ∼27%
Nokia 5
45274 Points ∼20% -28%
ZTE Blade V8
45868 Points ∼20% -27%
LG X power2
38547 Points ∼17% -38%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
30365 Points ∼13% -51%
Huawei Mate 9
124087 Points ∼54% +99%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
4734 Points ∼69%
Nokia 5
3807 Points ∼56% -20%
ZTE Blade V8
3815 Points ∼56% -19%
LG X power2
3191 Points ∼47% -33%
Huawei Mate 9
6299 Points ∼92% +33%
Work performance score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
5361 Points ∼65%
Nokia 5
5060 Points ∼61% -6%
ZTE Blade V8
4978 Points ∼60% -7%
LG X power2
4157 Points ∼50% -22%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
2517 Points ∼30% -53%
Huawei Mate 9
7403 Points ∼89% +38%
BaseMark OS II
Web (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
792 Points ∼51%
Nokia 5
671 Points ∼44% -15%
ZTE Blade V8
744 Points ∼48% -6%
LG X power2
601 Points ∼39% -24%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
703 Points ∼46% -11%
Huawei Mate 9
1076 Points ∼70% +36%
Graphics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
1004 Points ∼12%
Nokia 5
740 Points ∼9% -26%
ZTE Blade V8
787 Points ∼9% -22%
LG X power2
489 Points ∼6% -51%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
210 Points ∼2% -79%
Huawei Mate 9
3939 Points ∼46% +292%
Memory (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
931 Points ∼21%
Nokia 5
788 Points ∼18% -15%
ZTE Blade V8
812 Points ∼18% -13%
LG X power2
693 Points ∼16% -26%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
780 Points ∼18% -16%
Huawei Mate 9
3850 Points ∼87% +314%
System (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
3150 Points ∼48%
Nokia 5
2154 Points ∼33% -32%
ZTE Blade V8
1562 Points ∼24% -50%
LG X power2
1758 Points ∼27% -44%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
1041 Points ∼16% -67%
Huawei Mate 9
3616 Points ∼55% +15%
Overall (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
1236 Points ∼33%
Nokia 5
958 Points ∼25% -22%
ZTE Blade V8
928 Points ∼24% -25%
LG X power2
773 Points ∼20% -37%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
588 Points ∼16% -52%
Huawei Mate 9
2772 Points ∼73% +124%
Geekbench 4.1
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
4190 Points ∼23%
Nokia 5
2849 Points ∼15% -32%
LG X power2
2297 Points ∼12% -45%
Huawei Mate 9
6445 Points ∼35% +54%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
877 Points ∼18%
Nokia 5
671 Points ∼14% -23%
LG X power2
593 Points ∼12% -32%
Huawei Mate 9
1866 Points ∼39% +113%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
1976 Points ∼65%
Nokia 5
1227 Points ∼41% -38%
ZTE Blade V8
1214 Points ∼40% -39%
LG X power2
1074 Points ∼35% -46%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
699 Points ∼23% -65%
Huawei Mate 9
2117 Points ∼70% +7%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
382 Points ∼7%
Nokia 5
245 Points ∼5% -36%
ZTE Blade V8
263 Points ∼5% -31%
LG X power2
254 Points ∼5% -34%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
83 Points ∼2% -78%
Huawei Mate 9
2294 Points ∼43% +501%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
465 Points ∼12%
Nokia 5
298 Points ∼8% -36%
ZTE Blade V8
318 Points ∼8% -32%
LG X power2
306 Points ∼8% -34%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
103 Points ∼3% -78%
Huawei Mate 9
2240 Points ∼58% +382%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
1964 Points ∼65%
Nokia 5
1268 Points ∼42% -35%
ZTE Blade V8
1127 Points ∼37% -43%
LG X power2
1053 Points ∼35% -46%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
741 Points ∼25% -62%
Huawei Mate 9
2123 Points ∼70% +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
720 Points ∼9%
Nokia 5
503 Points ∼7% -30%
ZTE Blade V8
542 Points ∼7% -25%
LG X power2
379 Points ∼5% -47%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
128 Points ∼2% -82%
Huawei Mate 9
2448 Points ∼32% +240%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
838 Points ∼17%
Nokia 5
581 Points ∼12% -31%
ZTE Blade V8
613 Points ∼12% -27%
LG X power2
442 Points ∼9% -47%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
157 Points ∼3% -81%
Huawei Mate 9
2367 Points ∼48% +182%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
15887 Points ∼22%
Nokia 5
9023 Points ∼13% -43%
ZTE Blade V8
8905 Points ∼12% -44%
LG X power2
8213 Points ∼11% -48%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
7298 Points ∼10% -54%
Huawei Mate 9
15104 Points ∼21% -5%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
13193 Points ∼3%
Nokia 5
9684 Points ∼2% -27%
ZTE Blade V8
10271 Points ∼2% -22%
LG X power2
8140 Points ∼2% -38%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
3369 Points ∼1% -74%
Huawei Mate 9
35626 Points ∼8% +170%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
13710 Points ∼7%
Nokia 5
9529 Points ∼5% -30%
ZTE Blade V8
9932 Points ∼5% -28%
LG X power2
8156 Points ∼4% -41%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
3827 Points ∼2% -72%
Huawei Mate 9
27364 Points ∼14% +100%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
23 fps ∼2%
Nokia 5
17 fps ∼1% -26%
ZTE Blade V8
11 fps ∼1% -52%
LG X power2
13 fps ∼1% -43%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
5.9 fps ∼0% -74%
Huawei Mate 9
80 fps ∼6% +248%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
22 fps ∼5%
Nokia 5
27 fps ∼6% +23%
ZTE Blade V8
9.7 fps ∼2% -56%
LG X power2
22 fps ∼5% 0%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
10 fps ∼2% -55%
Huawei Mate 9
60 fps ∼13% +173%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
9.7 fps ∼2%
Nokia 5
7.2 fps ∼1% -26%
ZTE Blade V8
4.6 fps ∼1% -53%
LG X power2
5.3 fps ∼1% -45%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
2.2 fps ∼0% -77%
Huawei Mate 9
34 fps ∼6% +251%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
9.9 fps ∼3%
Nokia 5
14 fps ∼4% +41%
ZTE Blade V8
4.5 fps ∼1% -55%
LG X power2
11 fps ∼3% +11%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
4.7 fps ∼1% -53%
Huawei Mate 9
37 fps ∼10% +274%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
6.5 fps ∼2%
Nokia 5
4.6 fps ∼1% -29%
ZTE Blade V8
2.4 fps ∼1% -63%
LG X power2
3.5 fps ∼1% -46%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
1.4 fps ∼0% -78%
Huawei Mate 9
24 fps ∼6% +269%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
6.4 fps ∼4%
Nokia 5
10 fps ∼6% +56%
ZTE Blade V8
4.9 fps ∼3% -23%
LG X power2
8.6 fps ∼5% +34%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
3.4 fps ∼2% -47%
Huawei Mate 9
28 fps ∼16% +338%
GFXBench 4.0
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
3.5 fps ∼1%
Nokia 5
2.5 fps ∼1% -29%
ZTE Blade V8
2.1 fps ∼1% -40%
LG X power2
1.9 fps ∼1% -46%
Huawei Mate 9
fps ∼0% -100%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (ordina per valore)
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
3.1 fps ∼0%
Nokia 5
5.2 fps ∼0% +68%
ZTE Blade V8
2.7 fps ∼0% -13%
LG X power2
4.3 fps ∼0% +39%
Huawei Mate 9
14 fps ∼0% +352%

Legenda

 
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 625, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 430, Qualcomm Adreno 505, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
ZTE Blade V8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 435, Qualcomm Adreno 505, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG X power2 Mediatek MT6750, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Mate 9 HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
68.6 Points ∼100% +176%
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Chrome Version 60)
24.84 Points ∼36%
Nokia 5 (Chrome 56.0.2924.87)
21.48 Points ∼31% -14%
ZTE Blade V8 (Chrome 57.0.2987.132)
17.524 Points ∼26% -29%
LG X power2 (Chrome 59)
16.743 Points ∼24% -33%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL (Chrome 55)
16.471 Points ∼24% -34%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
11897 Points ∼100% +180%
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Chrome Version 60)
4250 Points ∼36%
Nokia 5 (Chrome 56.0.2924.87)
3138 Points ∼26% -26%
ZTE Blade V8 (Chrome 57.0.2987.132)
2826 Points ∼24% -34%
LG X power2 (Chrome 59)
2712 Points ∼23% -36%
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL (Chrome 55)
2534 Points ∼21% -40%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL (Chrome 55)
14983 ms * ∼100% -60%
LG X power2 (Chrome 59)
13762.8 ms * ∼92% -47%
ZTE Blade V8 (Chrome 57.0.2987.132)
12297.4 ms * ∼82% -31%
Nokia 5 (Chrome 56.0.2924.87)
10396 ms * ∼69% -11%
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Chrome Version 60)
9382.9 ms * ∼63%
Huawei Mate 9 (Chrome 54)
2733.7 ms * ∼18% +71%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Xiaomi Mi Max 2Nokia 5ZTE Blade V8LG X power2Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TLHuawei Mate 9
AndroBench 3-5
-13%
4%
-24%
-43%
27%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.45 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62
-1%
87.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
40%
58.09 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-7%
29.59 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-53%
29.53 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-53%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.9
0%
96.47 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
15%
76.59 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-8%
47.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-43%
53.97 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-35%
Random Write 4KB
12.81
8.39
-35%
12.69
-1%
10.7
-16%
9.1
-29%
8.77
-32%
Random Read 4KB
37.1
40.54
9%
39.89
8%
25.3
-32%
20.9
-44%
94.69
155%
Sequential Write 256KB
139.57
74.86
-46%
77.7
-44%
41.7
-70%
65.15
-53%
142.92
2%
Sequential Read 256KB
265.68
255.56
-4%
278.06
5%
243.8
-8%
174.2
-34%
594.23
124%
Carico massimo
 35.4 °C35 °C35 °C 
 35.1 °C33.5 °C35 °C 
 34.6 °C34.6 °C34.7 °C 
Massima: 35.4 °C
Media: 34.8 °C
32.2 °C32.9 °C33.7 °C
32 °C32.9 °C33.9 °C
32.1 °C32.6 °C33.6 °C
Massima: 33.9 °C
Media: 32.9 °C
Alimentazione (max)  31.4 °C | Temperatura della stanza 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.635.42525.4283125.328.34032.932.35033.632.56331.6368028.431.81002730.812520.832.11602241.920021.353.325020.858.231521.260.240019.465.250019.566.763017.768.480017.969.8100017.870.7125017.373.2160017.471.7200016.774.2250017.275.3315018.273.3400017.971.3500017.671630017.774.1800017.873.61000017.972.41250018.166.81600018.254.5SPL3084N1.361.8median 17.9Xiaomi Mi Max 2median 69.8Delta1.38.431.636.525.43325.333.432.932.233.634.331.631.128.426.22728.520.829.42229.421.33020.831.521.231.719.437.619.544.917.754.917.964.217.87317.377.917.477.116.778.117.276.518.273.917.977.317.676.617.779.917.884.417.980.918.172.218.262.33089.41.372.3median 17.9LG X power2median 72.21.317.9hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Xiaomi Mi Max 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

LG X power2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 42.1% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (1.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 13.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 84% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo di corrente
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.09 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.6 / 1.75 / 1.87 Watt
Sotto carico midlight 2.76 / 4.51 Watt
 color bar
Leggenda: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
5300 mAh
Nokia 5
3000 mAh
ZTE Blade V8
2730 mAh
LG X power2
4500 mAh
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
4100 mAh
Huawei Mate 9
4000 mAh
Power Consumption
-4%
-18%
-30%
-41%
-48%
Idle Minimum *
0.6
0.52
13%
0.98
-63%
0.63
-5%
0.74
-23%
0.78
-30%
Idle Average *
1.75
1.78
-2%
1.76
-1%
1.42
19%
2.04
-17%
2.13
-22%
Idle Maximum *
1.87
1.96
-5%
1.79
4%
1.47
21%
2.22
-19%
2.17
-16%
Load Average *
2.76
3.23
-17%
2.89
-5%
5.89
-113%
5.57
-102%
6.32
-129%
Load Maximum *
4.51
4.88
-8%
5.62
-25%
7.85
-74%
6.59
-46%
6.49
-44%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Autonomia della batteria
Navigazione WiFi v1.3
18ore 11minuti
Xiaomi Mi Max 2
5300 mAh
Nokia 5
3000 mAh
ZTE Blade V8
2730 mAh
LG X power2
4500 mAh
Asus Zenfone 3 Max ZC520TL
4100 mAh
Huawei Mate 9
4000 mAh
Autonomia della batteria
WiFi v1.3
1091
713
-35%
700
-36%
982
-10%
814
-25%
758
-31%

Pro

+ luminoso display IPS
+ Wi-Fi veloce
+ buona costruzione
+ buona fotocamera
+ casse stereo
+ autonomia molto ampia
+ performance

Contro

- Importazione (nessuna banda LTE 20)
- APL 50
- PWM
- stesso SoC del predecessore
Recensione: Xiaomi Mi Max 2. Modello fornito da Trading Shenzhen.
Recensione: Xiaomi Mi Max 2. Modello fornito da Trading Shenzhen.

Xiaomi ha realizzato uno smartphone interessante. Se accettate le dimensioni enormi di 6,44" del Mi Max 2, avrete un pacchetto decente per circa $360. Considerando il prezzo, questo dispositivo di fascia media ha davvero poche pecche degne di nota.

Chapeau, Xiaomi. Possiamo di sicuro raccomandare il Mi Max 2 a tutti quelli che apprezzano gli smartphones con displays grandi e possono accettare le limitazioni di un dispositivo di importazione.

Sfortunatamente, il produttore Cinese non ha aggiornato la seconda generazione della serie Mi Max con un SoC più recente ed un design più moderno (senza bordi).

Nota: si tratta di una recensione breve, con alcune sezioni non tradotte, per la versione integrale in inglese guardate qui.

 

 

Xiaomi Mi Max 2 - 09/04/2017 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
88%
Tastiera
72 / 75 → 95%
Dispositivo di puntamento
91%
Connettività
48 / 60 → 80%
Peso
88%
Batteria
100%
Display
85%
Prestazioni di gioco
28 / 63 → 44%
Prestazioni Applicazioni
50 / 70 → 71%
Temperatura
91%
Rumorosità
100%
Audio
68 / 91 → 74%
Fotocamera
70%
Media
75%
84%
Smartphone - Media ponderata

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Recensioni e prove de portatili e telefoni cellulari > Recensioni e prove > Recensioni e prove > Recensione breve dello Smartphone Xiaomi Mi Max 2
Marcus Herbrich, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09- 8)