Breve análisis del Smartphone Sony Xperia XZ
| Networking | |
| iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 93 %
Brillo con batería: 544 cd/m²
Contraste: 1470:1 (Negro: 0.37 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 7.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.18
| Sony Xperia XZ IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | OnePlus 3 Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Apple iPhone 7 IPS, 1334x750, 4.7" | Samsung Galaxy S7 SAMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.1" | HTC 10 Super LCD 5, 2560x1440, 5.2" | Sony Xperia Z5 Premium IPS, 3840x2160, 5.5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 2% | 30% | 24% | 12% | -25% | |
| Brightness middle | 544 | 419 -23% | 556 2% | 350 -36% | 445 -18% | 560 3% |
| Brightness | 521 | 431 -17% | 519 0% | 351 -33% | 434 -17% | 541 4% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 84 -10% | 90 -3% | 98 5% | 93 0% | 85 -9% |
| Black Level * | 0.37 | 0.34 8% | 0.36 3% | 0.45 -22% | ||
| Contrast | 1470 | 1635 11% | 1236 -16% | 1244 -15% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.8 | 4.1 29% | 1.3 78% | 2.04 65% | 2.8 52% | 9.19 -58% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.8 | 12 -22% | 2.6 73% | 3.25 67% | 5.8 41% | 15.01 -53% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.2 | 3.3 54% | 1.9 74% | 1.63 77% | 3.7 49% | 10.58 -47% |
| Gamma | 2.18 101% | 2.1 105% | 2.26 97% | 2.07 106% | 2.31 95% | 2.7 81% |
| CCT | 8619 75% | 6550 99% | 6818 95% | 6391 102% | 7164 91% | 9760 67% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 89.38 | 63.15 | 86.86 | 73.19 | ||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 | 99.71 | 99.35 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 60 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 21 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 240 (máximo) ms. » 100 % 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 | ||
| 52 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 22 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 30 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. » 87 % 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. | ||
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 8715 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. | |||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| PCMark for Android - Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Geekbench 4.0 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Compute RenderScript Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| AndroBench 3-5 | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Sequential Write 256KB (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Random Read 4KB (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Random Write 4KB (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ | |
| OnePlus 3 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| HTC 10 | |
| Sony Xperia Z5 Premium | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
| very low | 30 fps | ||
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.5 °C / 101 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 33.8 °C / 93 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Sony Xperia XZ audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.3% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (21.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 65% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone 7 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy S7 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
OnePlus 3 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HTC 10 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 68% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
LG G5 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.09 / 0.18 Watt |
| Ocioso |  1.76 / 3.6 / 4.06 Watt |
| Carga |
7 / 9.52 Watt |
    
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Sony Xperia XZ 2900 mAh | OnePlus 3 3000 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 1960 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh | HTC 10 3000 mAh | Sony Xperia Z5 Premium 3430 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 41% | 56% | 52% | 33% | 25% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.76 | 0.57 68% | 0.54 69% | 0.68 61% | 0.68 61% | 0.83 53% |
| Idle Average * | 3.6 | 1.24 66% | 1.51 58% | 1.02 72% | 1.49 59% | 2.36 34% |
| Idle Maximum * | 4.06 | 1.36 67% | 1.54 62% | 1.14 72% | 1.91 53% | 2.42 40% |
| Load Average * | 7 | 5.92 15% | 3.75 46% | 4.73 32% | 7.4 -6% | 7.27 -4% |
| Load Maximum * | 9.52 | 10.53 -11% | 5.01 47% | 7.16 25% | 9.71 -2% | 9.18 4% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Sony Xperia XZ 2900 mAh | OnePlus 3 3000 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 1960 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh | HTC 10 3000 mAh | Sony Xperia Z5 Premium 3430 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | 56% | 22% | 43% | 11% | -2% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1125 | 1338 19% | 1770 57% | 1810 61% | 1273 13% | 1277 14% |
| H.264 | 502 | 847 69% | 722 44% | 892 78% | 648 29% | 411 -18% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 438 | 840 92% | 517 18% | 456 4% | 413 -6% | 372 -15% |
| Load | 187 | 268 43% | 126 -33% | 242 29% | 203 9% | 210 12% |
Pro
Contra
El visionario, el Xperia XZ, por desgracia no es bastante potente para iniciar una revolución. En muchos sentidos, este modelo de pruebas es demasiado conservador y no se arriesga. Es más fiable que "revolucionario".
La cámara es un punto especial de la campaña publiciaria: ofrece muchas características buenas, pero decididamente está en la media respecto a la competeición. Lo que es más, al dispositivo le falta un estabilizador de imagen, que mejoraría la calidad de imagen con poca iluminación. El Xperia XZ puede hacer fotos como el resto de la competencia.
Respecto al aguante de la batería, la precisión del color, las velocidades del módulo WLAN, y el consumo de energía, el el Xperia XZ es insuficiente. Habríamos esperado más de un smartphone de 700 Euros. La lenta velocidad de la memoria es particularmente ofensiva, ya que alargan notablemente los tiempos de carga de los juegos.
Sony ha hecho muchas cosas bien: el software tiene muchas opciones útiles para los usuarios nuevos y las herramientas ofrecidas pueden incluso mejorar el sonido y los colores mostrados. El estiloso diseño del teléfono es definitivamente un punto a favor. Los altavoces y las temperaturas de la superficie también son bastante buenas. Nos gusta particularmente las ofertas de la app de fidelización del cliente, la Xperia Lounge.
Al final, el Xperia XZ queda definitivamente en la media en muchos aspectos. Como tal, no puede sobresalir como smartphone de gama alta. A Sony le falta la innovación real, pero ha creado un buen smartphone.
Sabemos que Sony es capaz de revolucionar el mercado smartphone: el Xperia Z5 Premium y otros modelos compactos de gama alta son prueba de su creatividad. Sin embargo, el Xperia XZ no reta los estándares establecidos para los smartphones. A pesar de ser un dispositivo fiable de gama alta, sus características pueden no merecer 700 Euros, ya que hay muchos competidores, com OnePlus 3, Galaxy S7 o iPhone 7, que rinden mucho mejor.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Sony Xperia XZ
- 11/02/2016 v5.1 (old)
Florian Wimmer
Price comparison
