Breve análisis del Smartphone Doogee Shoot 1
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 | |
Huawei P9 | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Huawei P9 | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
Huawei P9 | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
LG X Cam | |
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
Huawei P9 | |
Ulefone Metal | |
LG X Cam | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play |
|
iluminación: 89 %
Brillo con batería: 488 cd/m²
Contraste: 2122:1 (Negro: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.4
Doogee Shoot 1 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | ZTE Blade A510 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | ZTE Blade V7 Lite IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Archos 50 Platinum 4G IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Ulefone Metal IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Wiko Lenny 3 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | TP-Link Neffos C5 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Lenovo Moto G4 Play IPS, 1280x720, 5" | LG X Cam IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Huawei P9 IPS-NEO, JDI, 1920x1080, 5.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -29% | -38% | -47% | -55% | -40% | -42% | -29% | -30% | -3% | |
Brightness middle | 488 | 528 8% | 312 -36% | 344 -30% | 312 -36% | 374 -23% | 508 4% | 412 -16% | 362 -26% | 582 19% |
Brightness | 462 | 524 13% | 302 -35% | 349 -24% | 315 -32% | 343 -26% | 491 6% | 414 -10% | 348 -25% | 563 22% |
Brightness Distribution | 89 | 94 6% | 79 -11% | 89 0% | 87 -2% | 85 -4% | 89 0% | 94 6% | 94 6% | 91 2% |
Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.62 -170% | 0.15 35% | 0.65 -183% | 0.56 -143% | 0.47 -104% | 0.58 -152% | 0.42 -83% | 0.25 -9% | 0.38 -65% |
Contrast | 2122 | 852 -60% | 2080 -2% | 529 -75% | 557 -74% | 796 -62% | 876 -59% | 981 -54% | 1448 -32% | 1532 -28% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5 | 5.2 -4% | 8.2 -64% | 5.8 -16% | 6.8 -36% | 6 -20% | 7 -40% | 5.6 -12% | 6.8 -36% | 4.4 12% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.3 | 8.7 -5% | 16.5 -99% | 10.7 -29% | 14 -69% | 11.9 -43% | 14.1 -70% | 9.7 -17% | 11.9 -43% | 7.4 11% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.8 | 5.7 -19% | 9.2 -92% | 5.7 -19% | 7.1 -48% | 6.7 -40% | 6.1 -27% | 6.9 -44% | 8.4 -75% | 4.8 -0% |
Gamma | 2.4 92% | 1.99 111% | 2.29 96% | 2.1 105% | 2.77 79% | 2.19 100% | 2.15 102% | 2.4 92% | 2.22 99% | 2.2 100% |
CCT | 7427 88% | 6631 98% | 9017 72% | 7792 83% | 7402 88% | 8073 81% | 8068 81% | 8422 77% | 8242 79% | 6175 105% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 77.78 | |||||||||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.44 |
* ... 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 8774 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. |
Tiempos de respuesta del display
↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
---|---|---|
30 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 7 ms subida | |
↘ 23 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. » 78 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (21 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
67 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 28 ms subida | |
↘ 39 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. » 98 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
Geekbench 4.0 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei P9 | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei P9 |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
Octane V2 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (ordenar por valor) | |
Doogee Shoot 1 | |
ZTE Blade A510 | |
ZTE Blade V7 Lite | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Wiko Lenny 3 | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Lenovo Moto G4 Play | |
LG X Cam | |
Huawei P9 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.1 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.5 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Doogee Shoot 1 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.6% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (17.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | very high mids - on average 18% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (43.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 85% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 95% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
ZTE Blade A510 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 32.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | very high mids - on average 15.8% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (16.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (45.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 85% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 95% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 8.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 77% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 87% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.05 / 0.25 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.73 / 1.48 / 1.58 Watt |
Carga |
3.11 / 4.37 Watt |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Doogee Shoot 1 3300 mAh | ZTE Blade A510 2200 mAh | ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh | Archos 50 Platinum 4G 2200 mAh | Ulefone Metal 3050 mAh | Wiko Lenny 3 2000 mAh | TP-Link Neffos C5 2200 mAh | Lenovo Moto G4 Play 2800 mAh | LG X Cam 2500 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -16% | 9% | -8% | -73% | -34% | -39% | 0% | -1% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.73 | 0.61 16% | 0.63 14% | 0.59 19% | 1.41 -93% | 0.76 -4% | 0.72 1% | 0.68 7% | 0.64 12% |
Idle Average * | 1.48 | 1.75 -18% | 1.37 7% | 1.68 -14% | 2.46 -66% | 2.16 -46% | 1.87 -26% | 1.58 -7% | 1.38 7% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.58 | 1.83 -16% | 1.71 -8% | 1.79 -13% | 2.83 -79% | 2.35 -49% | 2 -27% | 1.61 -2% | 1.43 9% |
Load Average * | 3.11 | 4.49 -44% | 2.82 9% | 4.22 -36% | 5.15 -66% | 4.65 -50% | 5.99 -93% | 3.36 -8% | 3.99 -28% |
Load Maximum * | 4.37 | 5.14 -18% | 3.36 23% | 4.26 3% | 7.05 -61% | 5.35 -22% | 6.45 -48% | 3.91 11% | 4.49 -3% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Doogee Shoot 1 3300 mAh | ZTE Blade A510 2200 mAh | ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh | Archos 50 Platinum 4G 2200 mAh | Ulefone Metal 3050 mAh | Wiko Lenny 3 2000 mAh | TP-Link Neffos C5 2200 mAh | Lenovo Moto G4 Play 2800 mAh | LG X Cam 2500 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Duración de Batería | |||||||||
WiFi v1.3 | 501 | 416 -17% | 517 3% | 384 -23% | 403 -20% | 549 10% | 453 -10% | 630 26% | 457 -9% |
Pro
Contra
En nuestros tests, el Doogee Shoot 1 demostró ser un buen smartphone básico del segmento de precios más bajo. Con 16 GB de ROM y 2 GB de RAM, la cantidad de almacenamiento interno es razonable para us precio. Junto con el SoC MediaTek, el paquete hardware ofrece rendimiento de sobras para que el sistema vaya fluido. Además, el Doogee Shoot 1 ofrece un panel IPS de gran contraste y resolución - y un buen aguante de batería.
La característica especial del smartphone básico, el sistema de cámara dual de la trasera del dispositivo, por desgracia es algo decepcionante. El software no usa muy bien la información extra de profundidad - el efecto bokeh que produce es impreciso y tiende a emborronar partes del objeto de las fotos. Con todo, empero, la calidad de las fotos "normales" ciertamente puede igualar el de la competencia en este nivel de precios.
No nos gustó tanto la mala calidad del altavoz, el deficiente módulo GPS, y las temperaturas algo altas bajo carga. La carcasa también debería ser más elegante a nuestro parecer.
El Doogee Shoot 1 es una alternativa interesante en el mercado de gama baja - pero el segundo módulo de la cámara trasera no está bien implementado.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Doogee Shoot 1
-
03/13/2017 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich