Notebookcheck

Recensione breve dello smartphone Samsung Galaxy J3 2017

Florian Wimmer (traduzione a cura di Alessandro Seren Rosso), 08/09/2017

Piccolo, ma Galaxy.Samsung presenta uno smartphone di fascia medio-bassa con il suo 5 pollici Galaxy J3 (2017) Duo. I modelli dello scorso anno hanno venduto moltissimo e molti dei nostri lettori erano interessati. Siamo quindi curiosi di scoprire se Samsung ha fatto centro anche quest'anno.

Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 (Galaxy J Serie)
Processore
Samsung Exynos 7570 Quad
Scheda grafica
Memoria
2048 MB 
Schermo
5 pollici 16:9, 1280x720 pixel 294 PPI, touchscreen capacitivo, PLS, lucido: si
Harddisk
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, 10.3 GB libera
Porte di connessione
1 USB 2.0, Connessioni Audio: jack audio da 3.5 mm, Lettore schede: micro-SD max. 256 GB, NFC, Sensori: accelerometro, sensore di prossimità, Wi-Fi Direct, USB-OTG
Rete
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM (850/​900/​1800/​1900), UMTS (850/​900/​1800/​2100), LTE (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B40), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Dimensioni
altezza x larghezza x profondità (in mm): 8.2 x 143.2 x 70.3
Batteria
9.1 Wh, 2400 mAh ioni di litio
Sistema Operativo
Android 7.0 Nougat
Camera
Fotocamera Principale: 13 MPix f/​1.9, contrast-AF, flash LED, video @1080p/​30fps
Fotocamera Secondaria: 5 MPix f/​2.2, flash LED
Altre caratteristiche
Casse: altoparlante mono laterale, Tastiera: tastiera virtuale, auricolari, caricatore, cavo USB, strumento SIM, Microsoft Office, meinGalaxy, S Health, Galaxy Apps, 24 Mesi Garanzia, radio FM; banda (download/​upload): 150Mbps/​50Mbps (LTE); valori SAR: 0.658W/​kg (testa), 1.32W/​kg (corpo)
Peso
148 gr, Alimentazione: 43 gr
Prezzo
219 (~$190) Euro

 

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017)

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
278 MBit/s ∼100% +493%
Lenovo Moto G5
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
121 MBit/s ∼44% +158%
Sony Xperia XA1
Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 32 GB eMMC Flash
108 MBit/s ∼39% +130%
Nokia 3
Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash
81.1 MBit/s ∼29% +73%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
Mali-T720 MP2, 7570 Quad, 16 GB eMMC Flash
46.9 MBit/s ∼17%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
281 MBit/s ∼100% +425%
Sony Xperia XA1
Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 32 GB eMMC Flash
112 MBit/s ∼40% +109%
Lenovo Moto G5
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
110 MBit/s ∼39% +106%
Nokia 3
Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash
76.6 MBit/s ∼27% +43%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
Mali-T720 MP2, 7570 Quad, 16 GB eMMC Flash
53.5 MBit/s ∼19%
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Woods
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Woods
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Overview
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Woods
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Woods
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Bridge
GPS Samsung Galaxy J3 – Bridge

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
459
cd/m²
473
cd/m²
514
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
512
cd/m²
496
cd/m²
498
cd/m²
508
cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Massima: 514 cd/m² Media: 493.9 cd/m² Minimum: 5.01 cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità: 89 %
Al centro con la batteria: 502 cd/m²
Contrasto: 1434:1 (Nero: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.6 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | - Ø
99.9% sRGB (Calman)
Gamma: 2.29
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
PLS, 1280x720, 5
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 5.2
Lenovo Moto G5
IPS, 1920x1080, 5
Nokia 3
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Sony Xperia XA1
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 5
Screen
18%
1%
-40%
-51%
-37%
Brightness
494
451
-9%
625
27%
469
-5%
499
1%
299
-39%
Brightness Distribution
89
91
2%
92
3%
84
-6%
92
3%
96
8%
Black Level *
0.35
0.29
17%
0.22
37%
0.74
-111%
Contrast
1434
2276
59%
2186
52%
705
-51%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.6
2.7
41%
4.9
-7%
8.1
-76%
4.2
9%
5.8
-26%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.5
1.6
36%
4.8
-92%
8.5
-240%
6.4
-156%
4.8
-92%
Gamma
2.29 105%
2.06 117%
2.18 110%
2.16 111%
2.18 110%
1.84 130%
CCT
6351 102%
6557 99%
7357 88%
9014 72%
7044 92%
6252 104%

* ... 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 not detected

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
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17 ms Incremento
↘ 11 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta relativamente lenti nei nostri tests e potrebbe essere troppo lento per i gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 58 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Tempo di risposta dal 50% Grigio all'80% Grigio
37 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21 ms Incremento
↘ 16 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta lenti nei nostri tests e sarà insoddisfacente per i gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 30 % 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)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
35669 Points ∼16%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
45613 Points ∼20% +28%
Lenovo Moto G5
44653 Points ∼20% +25%
Nokia 3
27703 Points ∼12% -22%
Sony Xperia XA1
59082 Points ∼26% +66%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
24748 Points ∼11% -31%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
3436 Points ∼50%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
3889 Points ∼57% +13%
Lenovo Moto G5
3583 Points ∼52% +4%
Nokia 3
2568 Points ∼38% -25%
Sony Xperia XA1
Points ∼0% -100%
Work performance score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
5006 Points ∼60%
Lenovo Moto G5
4730 Points ∼57%
Nokia 3
3439 Points ∼41%
Sony Xperia XA1
4759 Points ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
3350 Points ∼40%
BaseMark OS II
Web (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
662 Points ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
737 Points ∼48% +11%
Lenovo Moto G5
686 Points ∼44% +4%
Nokia 3
575 Points ∼37% -13%
Sony Xperia XA1
847 Points ∼55% +28%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
569 Points ∼37% -14%
Graphics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
252 Points ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
534 Points ∼6% +112%
Lenovo Moto G5
722 Points ∼8% +187%
Nokia 3
211 Points ∼2% -16%
Sony Xperia XA1
1016 Points ∼12% +303%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
158 Points ∼2% -37%
Memory (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
1055 Points ∼24%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
1249 Points ∼28% +18%
Lenovo Moto G5
538 Points ∼12% -49%
Nokia 3
703 Points ∼16% -33%
Sony Xperia XA1
1063 Points ∼24% +1%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
315 Points ∼7% -70%
System (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
1395 Points ∼21%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
2218 Points ∼34% +59%
Lenovo Moto G5
1656 Points ∼25% +19%
Nokia 3
1081 Points ∼16% -23%
Sony Xperia XA1
2969 Points ∼45% +113%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
1134 Points ∼17% -19%
Overall (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
704 Points ∼19%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
1022 Points ∼27% +45%
Lenovo Moto G5
815 Points ∼22% +16%
Nokia 3
551 Points ∼15% -22%
Sony Xperia XA1
1284 Points ∼34% +82%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
423 Points ∼11% -40%
Geekbench 4.1
Compute RenderScript Score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
1135 Points ∼13%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
2332 Points ∼27% +105%
Lenovo Moto G5
1731 Points ∼20% +53%
Nokia 3
1045 Points ∼12% -8%
Sony Xperia XA1
2747 Points ∼32% +142%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
1858 Points ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
3704 Points ∼20% +99%
Lenovo Moto G5
2563 Points ∼14% +38%
Nokia 3
1520 Points ∼8% -18%
Sony Xperia XA1
3621 Points ∼20% +95%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
634 Points ∼13%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
732 Points ∼15% +15%
Lenovo Moto G5
619 Points ∼13% -2%
Nokia 3
556 Points ∼11% -12%
Sony Xperia XA1
828 Points ∼17% +31%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
923 Points ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
1727 Points ∼57% +87%
Lenovo Moto G5
1245 Points ∼41% +35%
Nokia 3
686 Points ∼23% -26%
Sony Xperia XA1
1804 Points ∼60% +95%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
63 Points ∼1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
185 Points ∼3% +194%
Lenovo Moto G5
243 Points ∼5% +286%
Nokia 3
85 Points ∼2% +35%
Sony Xperia XA1
574 Points ∼11% +811%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
79 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
231 Points ∼6% +192%
Lenovo Moto G5
296 Points ∼8% +275%
Nokia 3
106 Points ∼3% +34%
Sony Xperia XA1
677 Points ∼17% +757%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
925 Points ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
1685 Points ∼56% +82%
Lenovo Moto G5
1243 Points ∼41% +34%
Nokia 3
745 Points ∼25% -19%
Sony Xperia XA1
1892 Points ∼63% +105%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
92 Points ∼1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
277 Points ∼4% +201%
Lenovo Moto G5
496 Points ∼6% +439%
Nokia 3
124 Points ∼2% +35%
Sony Xperia XA1
827 Points ∼11% +799%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
115 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
340 Points ∼7% +196%
Lenovo Moto G5
572 Points ∼11% +397%
Nokia 3
152 Points ∼3% +32%
Sony Xperia XA1
945 Points ∼19% +722%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
11426 Points ∼16%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
12605 Points ∼18% +10%
Lenovo Moto G5
9089 Points ∼13% -20%
Nokia 3
7925 Points ∼11% -31%
Sony Xperia XA1
16394 Points ∼23% +43%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
8322 Points ∼12% -27%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
3725 Points ∼1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
7484 Points ∼2% +101%
Lenovo Moto G5
9617 Points ∼2% +158%
Nokia 3
3177 Points ∼1% -15%
Sony Xperia XA1
13125 Points ∼3% +252%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
3037 Points ∼1% -18%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
4381 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
8227 Points ∼4% +88%
Lenovo Moto G5
9494 Points ∼5% +117%
Nokia 3
3665 Points ∼2% -16%
Sony Xperia XA1
13734 Points ∼7% +213%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
3535 Points ∼2% -19%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
6.8 fps ∼1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
12 fps ∼1% +76%
Lenovo Moto G5
16 fps ∼1% +135%
Nokia 3
6 fps ∼0% -12%
Sony Xperia XA1
22 fps ∼2% +224%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
4.6 fps ∼0% -32%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
11 fps ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
20 fps ∼4% +82%
Lenovo Moto G5
14 fps ∼3% +27%
Nokia 3
10 fps ∼2% -9%
Sony Xperia XA1
33 fps ∼7% +200%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
7.6 fps ∼2% -31%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
2.6 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
5.1 fps ∼1% +96%
Lenovo Moto G5
7.1 fps ∼1% +173%
Nokia 3
2.2 fps ∼0% -15%
Sony Xperia XA1
9.6 fps ∼2% +269%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
5.4 fps ∼1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
10 fps ∼3% +85%
Lenovo Moto G5
7.4 fps ∼2% +37%
Nokia 3
4.5 fps ∼1% -17%
Sony Xperia XA1
19 fps ∼5% +252%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
1.7 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
3.2 fps ∼1% +88%
Lenovo Moto G5
4.6 fps ∼1% +171%
Nokia 3
1.4 fps ∼0% -18%
Sony Xperia XA1
3.4 fps ∼1% +100%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordina per valore)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
3.8 fps ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
7.4 fps ∼4% +95%
Lenovo Moto G5
5 fps ∼3% +32%
Nokia 3
3.2 fps ∼2% -16%
Sony Xperia XA1
15 fps ∼9% +295%

Legenda

 
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 Samsung Exynos 7570 Quad, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, ARM Mali-T830 MP1, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo Moto G5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 430, Qualcomm Adreno 505, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 3 Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Sony Xperia XA1 Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, ARM Mali-T880 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 Spreadtrum SC9830A, ARM Mali-400 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Sony Xperia XA1
28.45 Points ∼100% +66%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
26.37 Points ∼93% +54%
Lenovo Moto G5
20.36 Points ∼72% +19%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
17.17 Points ∼60%
Nokia 3
13.97 Points ∼49% -19%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
4968 Points ∼100% +70%
Sony Xperia XA1
3956 Points ∼80% +35%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
2921 Points ∼59%
Lenovo Moto G5
2604 Points ∼52% -11%
Nokia 3
2269 Points ∼46% -22%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Nokia 3
16759 ms * ∼100% -31%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
12791 ms * ∼76%
Lenovo Moto G5
11358 ms * ∼68% +11%
Sony Xperia XA1
9506.4 ms * ∼57% +26%
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
6784.4 ms * ∼40% +47%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
80 Points ∼100% +33%
Sony Xperia XA1
78 Points ∼98% +30%
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
60 Points ∼75%
Lenovo Moto G5
57 Points ∼71% -5%
Nokia 3
49 Points ∼61% -18%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Samsung Galaxy J3 2017Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) DuosLenovo Moto G5Nokia 3Sony Xperia XA1
AndroBench 3-5
-0%
64%
-17%
72%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
59.6
44.21
-26%
57.98
-3%
62.9
6%
68.04
14%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
70.3
72.22
3%
78.51
12%
64.3
-9%
78.37
11%
Random Write 4KB
9.5
9.9
4%
37.9
299%
5.5
-42%
13.2
39%
Random Read 4KB
24
24.07
0%
37.6
57%
17.7
-26%
66.2
176%
Sequential Write 256KB
51
51.96
2%
45.6
-11%
34
-33%
127.8
151%
Sequential Read 256KB
177.7
204.45
15%
230.6
30%
181
2%
248.5
40%
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettaggiValore
 high14 fps
 very low30 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 SettaggiValore
 high30 fps
Carico massimo
 31 °C30 °C29.3 °C 
 32.5 °C30.5 °C29.5 °C 
 32.5 °C30.7 °C29.8 °C 
Massima: 32.5 °C
Media: 30.6 °C
29.7 °C30 °C29.8 °C
30 °C30.6 °C29.9 °C
30.1 °C31.4 °C31.2 °C
Massima: 31.4 °C
Media: 30.3 °C
Alimentazione (max)  34.2 °C | Temperatura della stanza 22.4 °C | Voltcraft IR-350
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.231.128.22530.330.130.33129.329.929.34033.634.433.6502834.6286327.229.327.28029.232.229.210031.934.131.912539.836.939.816036.423.836.420048.421.548.425051.720.951.731557.121.357.140059.819.759.850065.820.165.863067.618.567.680067.719.367.7100069.517.869.5125067.817.467.8160067.516.467.5200067.616.467.6250067.916.667.931507116.171400074.716.174.750007116.1716300611661800058.716.158.71000058.916.158.91250051.31651.31600039.81639.8SPL80.930.180.9N47.91.447.9median 61Samsung Galaxy J3 2017median 17.4median 61Delta8.73.78.731.63225.438.425.33432.93033.629.631.628.528.429.32731.820.834.92243.421.349.120.855.521.260.719.463.719.567.417.770.217.971.417.868.917.37017.472.616.775.117.277.418.278.117.981.417.676.717.775.417.874.517.970.518.161.818.258.43086.81.370median 17.9Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duosmedian 701.39.5hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo di corrente
Off / Standbydarklight 0.12 / 0.23 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.82 / 1.94 / 2.06 Watt
Sotto carico midlight 3.31 / 3.89 Watt
 color bar
Leggenda: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
2400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
3000 mAh
Lenovo Moto G5
2800 mAh
Nokia 3
2630 mAh
Sony Xperia XA1
2300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
2600 mAh
Power Consumption
38%
-4%
17%
38%
23%
Idle Minimum *
0.82
0.52
37%
0.73
11%
0.67
18%
0.64
22%
0.96
-17%
Idle Average *
1.94
1.17
40%
1.64
15%
1.35
30%
0.81
58%
1.14
41%
Idle Maximum *
2.06
1.24
40%
1.68
18%
1.39
33%
0.86
58%
1.23
40%
Load Average *
3.31
1.66
50%
3.46
-5%
3.1
6%
2.09
37%
2.45
26%
Load Maximum *
3.89
2.94
24%
6.13
-58%
4.02
-3%
3.31
15%
2.92
25%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Autonomia della batteria
Idle (senza WLAN, min luminosità)
23ore 45minuti
Navigazione WiFi v1.3
12ore 02minuti
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13ore 39minuti
Sotto carico (max luminosità)
5ore 05minuti
Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
2400 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Duos
3000 mAh
Lenovo Moto G5
2800 mAh
Nokia 3
2630 mAh
Sony Xperia XA1
2300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
2600 mAh
Autonomia della batteria
18%
-23%
-17%
-8%
-8%
Reader / Idle
1425
1564
10%
1243
-13%
1258
-12%
1433
1%
1212
-15%
H.264
819
917
12%
616
-25%
628
-23%
751
-8%
590
-28%
WiFi v1.3
722
738
2%
561
-22%
552
-24%
675
-7%
502
-30%
Load
305
449
47%
207
-32%
283
-7%
256
-16%
433
42%

Pro

+ case robusto ed elegante
+ NFC, USB OTG
+ modulo GPS molto preciso
+ discreta qualità della fotocamera
+ molte opzioni a disposizione dell'utente
+ schermo luminoso in modalità all'aperto
+ scarso sviluppo delle temperature
+ ottima autonomia della batteria

Contro

- batteria non removibile
- mancanza di Wi-Fi 5 GHz
- Wi-Fi lento
- scarsa qualità del microfono
In review: Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017). Review sample courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017). Review sample courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de

Samsung è riuscito a sviluppare bene il vendutissimo Galaxy J3. La fotocamera è ottima e la risoluzione è aumentata rispetto al predecessore. Anche se lo schermo non è più AMOLED, è effettivamente più luminoso. Le prestazioni corrispondono alla categoria, il software è completo ed elegante, il modulo GPS è preciso e il design del case, anche se un po' minimizzato, è comunque piacevole alla vista. Lo smartphone è dual-SIM ed è possibile inserire una scheda microSD.

Sono solo i dettagli ad attirarsi le critiche: La batteria non è removibile, e ciò farà storcere il naso a molti. Altri saranno un po' infastiditi dalla grande quantità di app pre-installate, ma basta un po' di pazienza per liberarsene. Sarebbe stato bello avere a disposizione il wi-fi 5 GHz, e il microfono avrebbe potuto essere di qualità superiore.

Il Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017) Duo è uno smartphone ben congegnato e che spicca all'interno del segmento della fascia medio-bassa. Il rapporto qualità-prezzo è ottimo.

Per concludere, il Galaxy J3 ci ha lasciato una buona impressione, se si tengono in considerazione le restrizioni tipiche di un dispositivo di questa fascia di prezzo. Non è realistico aspettarsi prestazioni al top per poco più di 200 Euro (~$190). Tuttavia, Samsung riesce a sfruttare quasi al massimo il budget ridotto e offre uno smartphone con un ottimo rapporto qualità-prezzo.

Samsung Galaxy J3 2017 - 08/04/2017 v6
Florian Wimmer

Chassis
89%
Tastiera
67 / 75 → 90%
Dispositivo di puntamento
85%
Connettività
34 / 60 → 57%
Peso
93%
Batteria
95%
Display
88%
Prestazioni di gioco
6 / 63 → 10%
Prestazioni Applicazioni
37 / 70 → 53%
Temperatura
93%
Rumorosità
100%
Audio
54 / 91 → 59%
Fotocamera
79%
Media
71%
82%
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 Samsung Galaxy J3 2017
Florian Wimmer, 2017-08- 9 (Update: 2017-08-10)