Breve análisis del Smartphone Oukitel U7 Plus
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 | |
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Archos 50e Neon | |
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Archos 50e Neon |
|
iluminación: 91 %
Brillo con batería: 462 cd/m²
Contraste: 797:1 (Negro: 0.58 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 8.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.54
Oukitel U7 Plus IPS, 1280x720, 5.5" | Ulefone Metal IPS, 1280x720, 5" | TP-Link Neffos C5 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Coolpad Porto S IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Huawei Y5 II IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Wiko Jerry IPS, 854x480, 5" | Archos 50 Platinum 4G IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Archos 50e Neon TFT, 854x480, 5" | UMI Touch IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Lenovo Moto Z AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -9% | 7% | -7% | -13% | 2% | -3% | -30% | 4% | 36% | |
Brightness middle | 462 | 312 -32% | 508 10% | 407 -12% | 465 1% | 432 -6% | 344 -26% | 443 -4% | 424 -8% | 485 5% |
Brightness | 437 | 315 -28% | 491 12% | 403 -8% | 443 1% | 436 0% | 349 -20% | 430 -2% | 415 -5% | 490 12% |
Brightness Distribution | 91 | 87 -4% | 89 -2% | 92 1% | 90 -1% | 91 0% | 89 -2% | 94 3% | 91 0% | 92 1% |
Black Level * | 0.58 | 0.56 3% | 0.58 -0% | 0.5 14% | 0.84 -45% | 0.57 2% | 0.65 -12% | 0.38 34% | 0.54 7% | |
Contrast | 797 | 557 -30% | 876 10% | 814 2% | 554 -30% | 758 -5% | 529 -34% | 1166 46% | 785 -2% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 7.5 | 6.8 9% | 7 7% | 7.9 -5% | 7.8 -4% | 7 7% | 5.8 23% | 13.9 -85% | 6.9 8% | 2.1 72% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 12.8 | 14 -9% | 14.1 -10% | 18.2 -42% | 15.7 -23% | 12.4 3% | 10.7 16% | 29.5 -130% | 10.9 15% | 5.5 57% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 8.5 | 7.1 16% | 6.1 28% | 8.9 -5% | 8.4 1% | 7.6 11% | 5.7 33% | 17.3 -104% | 6.8 20% | 2.6 69% |
Gamma | 2.54 87% | 2.77 79% | 2.15 102% | 2.46 89% | 2.07 106% | 2.1 105% | 2.1 105% | 2.93 75% | 1.99 111% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 8914 73% | 7402 88% | 8068 81% | 8332 78% | 8438 77% | 8368 78% | 7792 83% | 22878 28% | 8131 80% | 6843 95% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 88.14 | |||||||||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Tiempos de respuesta del display
↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
---|---|---|
29 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 10 ms subida | |
↘ 19 ms bajada | ||
La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta relativamente lentos en nuestros tests pero podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 75 % 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 | ||
28 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 13 ms subida | |
↘ 15 ms bajada | ||
La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta relativamente lentos en nuestros tests pero podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 33 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (32.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. |
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. |
AndroBench 3-5 | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Random Write 4KB (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Random Read 4KB (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Sequential Write 256KB (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Sequential Read 256KB (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
BaseMark OS II | |
Overall (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
System (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Memory (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Graphics (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
Web (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Geekbench 4.0 | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Lenovo Moto Z | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
Octane V2 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
Oukitel U7 Plus | |
Ulefone Metal | |
TP-Link Neffos C5 | |
Coolpad Porto S | |
Huawei Y5 II | |
Wiko Jerry | |
Archos 50 Platinum 4G | |
UMI Touch | |
Lenovo Moto Z |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.5 °C / 110 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 42.1 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 35 °C / 95 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Oukitel U7 Plus audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (34.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 82% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 7% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Ulefone Metal audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.6% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 54% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Coolpad Porto S audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 37.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 57% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Wiko Jerry audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 54% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.09 / 0.32 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.86 / 2.68 / 2.78 Watt |
Carga |
5.33 / 6.49 Watt |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Oukitel U7 Plus 2500 mAh | Ulefone Metal 3050 mAh | TP-Link Neffos C5 2200 mAh | Coolpad Porto S 2000 mAh | Huawei Y5 II 2200 mAh | Wiko Jerry 2000 mAh | Archos 50 Platinum 4G 2200 mAh | Archos 50e Neon 2200 mAh | UMI Touch 4000 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z 2600 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -13% | 13% | 16% | 37% | 15% | 32% | 26% | 17% | 29% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.86 | 1.41 -64% | 0.72 16% | 1.16 -35% | 0.54 37% | 0.8 7% | 0.59 31% | 0.56 35% | 0.89 -3% | 0.66 23% |
Idle Average * | 2.68 | 2.46 8% | 1.87 30% | 2.21 18% | 1.58 41% | 2.02 25% | 1.68 37% | 1.58 41% | 2 25% | 1.01 62% |
Idle Maximum * | 2.78 | 2.83 -2% | 2 28% | 2.24 19% | 1.7 39% | 2.19 21% | 1.79 36% | 1.8 35% | 2.1 24% | 1.09 61% |
Load Average * | 5.33 | 5.15 3% | 5.99 -12% | 3.34 37% | 2.98 44% | 5.02 6% | 4.22 21% | 5.22 2% | 3.87 27% | 3.97 26% |
Load Maximum * | 6.49 | 7.05 -9% | 6.45 1% | 3.95 39% | 4.98 23% | 5.52 15% | 4.26 34% | 5.34 18% | 5.79 11% | 8.34 -29% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Oukitel U7 Plus 2500 mAh | Ulefone Metal 3050 mAh | TP-Link Neffos C5 2200 mAh | Coolpad Porto S 2000 mAh | Huawei Y5 II 2200 mAh | Wiko Jerry 2000 mAh | Archos 50 Platinum 4G 2200 mAh | Archos 50e Neon 2200 mAh | UMI Touch 4000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Duración de Batería | |||||||||
WiFi v1.3 | 366 | 403 10% | 453 24% | 504 38% | 503 37% | 475 30% | 384 5% | 498 36% | 553 51% |
Pro
Contra
El Oukitel U7 Plus causó una buena impresión en general en el test. Visto el precio de unos 70 Euros a través de importadores, los compradores potenciales se llevan algo más que un sólido smartphone básico del segmento de bajo presupuesto. El Oukitel U7 Plus tiene bastante que ofrecer para un smartphone tan barato: un brillante panel HD IPS, soporte LTE, un lector de huellas que funciona bien, generosa memoria (16 GB ROM, 2 GB RAM), y gran flexibilidad gracias a la funcionalidad dual-SIM además de la opción de ampliación de almacenamiento y la batería fácil de cambiar.
Si el precio es un factor muy limitante a la hora de comprar un smartphone, el Oukitel es definitivamente una opción.
Por supuesto, hay que hacer sacrificios en el rendimiento (gráfico), la calidad de la cámara, la velocidad de la memoria, y el manejo. Sin embargo, las cualidades positivas del Oukitel U7 Plus predominan, a nuestro parecer.
Podemos recomendar el UleFone Metal como una alternativa interesante y algo más útil al modelo de Oukitel. Su PVP de unos 100 Euros es muy asequible, y también ofrece un paquete mejor en general.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Oukitel U7 Plus
-
10/03/2016 v5.1 (old)
Marcus Herbrich