Breve análisis del Smartphone Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S
Top 10 Análisis
» Top 10 Portátiles Multimedia
» Top 10 Portátiles de Juego
» Top 10 Portátiles de Juego ligeros
» Top 10 Portátiles Asequibles de Oficina/Empresa
» Top 10 Portátiles de Juego Ligeros
» Top 10 Portátiles de Oficina/Empresa Premium
» Top 10 Estaciones de Trabajo
» Top 10 Subportátiles
» Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Top 10 Convertibles
» Top 10 Tablets
» Top 10 Tablets Windows
» Top 10 Tablets de menos de 250 Euros
» Top 10 Phablets (>5.5")
» Top 10 Smartphones
» Top 10 Smartphones (≤5")
» Top 10 Smartphones de menos de 300 Euros
» Top 10 Smartphones de menos de 120 Euros
» Top 10 Portátiles de menos de 1000 Euros
» Top 10 Portátiles de menos de 500 Euros
» Top 10 Portátiles de menos de 300 Euros
» Los Mejores Displays de Portátiles Analizados por Notebookcheck
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
UMI Max | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
UMI Max | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Honor 5C | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Vernee Mars |
|
iluminación: 84 %
Brillo con batería: 445 cd/m²
Contraste: 4450:1 (Negro: 0.1 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 9.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 10 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.87
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Vernee Mars IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Honor 5C IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | ZTE Blade V7 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | UMI Max IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | UMI Super Euro Edition IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Acer Liquid Zest Plus IPS, 1280x720, 5.5" | Lenovo Moto G4 Play IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Lenovo Moto Z AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -5% | -40% | -45% | -9% | -13% | -32% | -34% | 43% | |
Brightness middle | 445 | 345 -22% | 515 16% | 409 -8% | 522 17% | 418 -6% | 414 -7% | 412 -7% | 485 9% |
Brightness | 424 | 339 -20% | 498 17% | 411 -3% | 498 17% | 410 -3% | 420 -1% | 414 -2% | 490 16% |
Brightness Distribution | 84 | 85 1% | 93 11% | 96 14% | 86 2% | 85 1% | 94 12% | 94 12% | 92 10% |
Black Level * | 0.1 | 0.14 -40% | 0.49 -390% | 0.38 -280% | 0.23 -130% | 0.31 -210% | 0.33 -230% | 0.42 -320% | |
Contrast | 4450 | 2464 -45% | 1051 -76% | 1076 -76% | 2270 -49% | 1348 -70% | 1255 -72% | 981 -78% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 9.8 | 7.1 28% | 6.2 37% | 9.4 4% | 6.9 30% | 4.4 55% | 8.1 17% | 5.6 43% | 2.1 79% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 18.4 | 13.9 24% | 11.4 38% | 17.6 4% | 12.3 33% | 6.5 65% | 13.8 25% | 9.7 47% | 5.5 70% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 10 | 6.7 33% | 7.4 26% | 11.6 -16% | 9.2 8% | 3.6 64% | 9.6 4% | 6.9 31% | 2.6 74% |
Gamma | 2.87 77% | 2.47 89% | 2.28 96% | 2.25 98% | 2.38 92% | 2.36 93% | 2 110% | 2.4 92% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 7990 81% | 7711 84% | 8664 75% | 9597 68% | 8687 75% | 6993 93% | 7754 84% | 8422 77% | 6843 95% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 88.14 | ||||||||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM no detectado | |||
Comparación: 53 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 8706 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. |
Tiempos de respuesta del display
↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
---|---|---|
36 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 9 ms subida | |
↘ 27 ms bajada | ||
La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta lentos en nuestros tests y podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 93 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (20.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
88 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 40 ms subida | |
↘ 48 ms bajada | ||
La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta lentos en nuestros tests y podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 99 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.8 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Geekbench 3 | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Geekbench 4.0 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench | |
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Octane V2 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (ordenar por valor) | |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S | |
Vernee Mars | |
Honor 5C | |
ZTE Blade V7 | |
UMI Max | |
UMI Super Euro Edition | |
Acer Liquid Zest Plus | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.4 °C / 103 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 39.7 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.8 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 0.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
ZTE Blade V7 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 46.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 11% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 80% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 90% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Honor 5C audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (31.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 80% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 89% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 9% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.18 / 0.32 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.93 / 1.41 / 2.36 Watt |
Carga |
3.79 / 5.39 Watt |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S 2960 mAh | Vernee Mars 3000 mAh | Honor 5C 3000 mAh | ZTE Blade V7 2540 mAh | UMI Max 4000 mAh | UMI Super Euro Edition 4000 mAh | Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh | Lenovo Moto G4 Play 2800 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -10% | -4% | 18% | 16% | -23% | 0% | 17% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.93 | 1.02 -10% | 0.89 4% | 0.73 22% | 1.02 -10% | 0.84 10% | 0.83 11% | 0.68 27% |
Idle Average * | 1.41 | 1.69 -20% | 2.07 -47% | 0.92 35% | 1.53 -9% | 1.94 -38% | 2.06 -46% | 1.58 -12% |
Idle Maximum * | 2.36 | 1.82 23% | 2.15 9% | 0.93 61% | 1.62 31% | 2.07 12% | 2.08 12% | 1.61 32% |
Load Average * | 3.79 | 4.39 -16% | 3.46 9% | 4.47 -18% | 2.91 23% | 5.88 -55% | 3.53 7% | 3.36 11% |
Load Maximum * | 5.39 | 6.79 -26% | 5.18 4% | 5.96 -11% | 2.93 46% | 7.67 -42% | 4.49 17% | 3.91 27% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S 2960 mAh | Vernee Mars 3000 mAh | Honor 5C 3000 mAh | ZTE Blade V7 2540 mAh | UMI Max 4000 mAh | UMI Super Euro Edition 4000 mAh | Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh | Lenovo Moto G4 Play 2800 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Duración de Batería | ||||||||
WiFi v1.3 | 531 | 427 -20% | 584 10% | 519 -2% | 588 11% | 638 20% | 815 53% | 630 19% |
Pro
Contra
El Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S es un dispositivo bien construido de gama media con una configuración decente. Nos gustó particularmente el altavoz, que es uno de los mejores de este segmento de precios. En general, el Alcatel no convence por completo debido a problemas en el uso diario.
La mayoría de controles físicos están bien hechos, pero su posición (botón de encendido) es incómoda de usar con una mano. El panel IPS es de alta resolución, muy brillante, y tiene un alto contraste - pero en un fondo de blanco puro solamente. El brillo de la pantalla es claramente inferior en la práctica, lo que hace necesiario en ocasiones usar el brillo máximo del LCD en interiores - su alto contraste, empero, se mantiene. Aunque el rendimiento del SoC MediaTek es mayormente atractivo en las pruebas, su rendimiento de sistema subjetivo no está a la par con los rivales. Desbloquear el dispositivo por huella digital también podria ser una buena característica, pero la mala tasa de indetificación del lector de huellas en el Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S no ofrece un auténtico valor añadido en el uso diario.
El Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S es un smartphone gama media sólido que no está bien pensado en algunos aspectos.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Alcatel One Touch Pop 4S
- 12/05/2016 v5.1 (old)
Marcus Herbrich