Breve análisis del smartphone Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 93 %
Brillo con batería: 660 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Negro: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.28
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Huawei Nova Plus IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | ZTE Axon 7 AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5" | OnePlus 3T Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Lenovo Moto Z Play AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Honor 8 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -21% | -102% | -137% | -206% | -34% | -150% | |
| Brightness middle | 539 | 378 -30% | 485 -10% | 328 -39% | 421 -22% | 509 -6% | 451 -16% |
| Brightness | 542 | 380 -30% | 481 -11% | 334 -38% | 430 -21% | 511 -6% | 443 -18% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 91 -2% | 90 -3% | 88 -5% | 84 -10% | 93 0% | 93 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.5 | 0.4 | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.6 | 1.95 -22% | 4.2 -163% | 4.6 -188% | 7.1 -344% | 2.2 -38% | 5.4 -238% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.6 | 3.09 -19% | 7.9 -204% | 14.7 -465% | 15.3 -488% | 5.8 -123% | 9.9 -281% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 1.86 -24% | 4.8 -220% | 2.8 -87% | 6.8 -353% | 2 -33% | 6.7 -347% |
| Gamma | 2.28 96% | 2.13 103% | 2.36 93% | 2.29 96% | 2.23 99% | 2.25 98% | 2.33 94% |
| CCT | 6422 101% | 6376 102% | 7568 86% | 6612 98% | 7866 83% | 6768 96% | 8262 79% |
| Contrast | 970 | 1128 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM detectado | 250 Hz |  | |
La retroiluminación del display parpadea a 250 Hz (seguramente usa PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) . La frecuencia de 250 Hz es relativamente baja, por lo que la gente sensible debería ver parpadeos y padecer fatiga visual por la pantalla (usado al brillo indicado a continuación). 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. | |||
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.6 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 2 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 1.6 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta muy rápidos en nuestros tests y debería ser adecuada para juegos frenéticos. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 12 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (20.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 3.6 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 2 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 1.6 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta muy rápidos en nuestros tests y debería ser adecuada para juegos frenéticos. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 10 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (32.8 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| Geekbench 4.0 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| PCMark for Android - Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (ordenar por valor) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
| Huawei Nova Plus | |
| Lenovo Moto Z Play | |
| Honor 8 | |
| ZTE Axon 7 | |
| OnePlus 3T | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | Huawei Nova Plus | Lenovo Moto Z Play | Honor 8 | ZTE Axon 7 | OnePlus 3T | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -3% | 27% | 63% | 36% | 115% | 305% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 182 | 209.4 15% | 241.6 33% | 254.8 40% | 247.5 36% | 406.5 123% | 436.4 140% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 77.1 | 60.4 -22% | 82.1 6% | 73.1 -5% | 119.3 55% | 150.9 96% | 165.3 114% |
| Random Read 4KB | 22.41 | 22.9 2% | 35.64 59% | 38.78 73% | 34.16 52% | 121.1 440% | 123.6 452% |
| Random Write 4KB | 12.13 | 11.2 -8% | 30.12 148% | 45.58 276% | 31.5 160% | 16.22 34% | 74.4 513% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 73.7 | 41.64 -44% | 74.6 1% | 53.7 -27% | 78.4 6% | ||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 56 | 33.32 -40% | 50.6 -10% | 23.59 -58% | 51.3 -8% |
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 29 fps | ||
| very low | 30 fps | ||
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.4 °C / 92 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 34 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.1 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 9.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% 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 (23.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Nova Plus audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.5% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 55% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 56% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Moto Z Play audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0 / 0.14 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.64 / 1.36 / 1.4 Watt |
| Carga |
2.53 / 3.63 Watt |
    
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 2900 mAh | Huawei Nova Plus 3340 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z Play 3510 mAh | Honor 8 3000 mAh | ZTE Axon 7 3250 mAh | OnePlus 3T 3400 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -30% | -16% | 23% | -53% | -50% | -84% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.64 | 0.96 -50% | 0.49 23% | 0.51 20% | 0.78 -22% | 0.64 -0% | 0.61 5% |
| Idle Average * | 1.36 | 1.64 -21% | 1.63 -20% | 0.87 36% | 1.89 -39% | 0.84 38% | 1.77 -30% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.4 | 1.71 -22% | 1.76 -26% | 0.9 36% | 2.02 -44% | 0.87 38% | 1.81 -29% |
| Load Average * | 2.53 | 2.98 -18% | 2.98 -18% | 1.69 33% | 5.28 -109% | 6.02 -138% | 6.67 -164% |
| Load Maximum * | 3.63 | 5.08 -40% | 4.99 -37% | 4 -10% | 5.44 -50% | 10.45 -188% | 10.98 -202% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| PCMark for Android - Work 2.0 battery life | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy J5 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 2900 mAh | Huawei Nova Plus 3340 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z Play 3510 mAh | Honor 8 3000 mAh | ZTE Axon 7 3250 mAh | OnePlus 3T 3400 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -15% | -17% | 16% | -43% | -39% | -35% | |
| Reader / Idle | 2418 | 2323 -4% | 2048 -15% | 2540 5% | 1487 -39% | 1735 -28% | 1423 -41% |
| H.264 | 984 | 672 -32% | 732 -26% | 1190 21% | 526 -47% | 704 -28% | 810 -18% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 843 | 626 -26% | 820 -3% | 824 -2% | 499 -41% | 411 -51% | 494 -41% |
| Load | 467 | 483 3% | 366 -22% | 652 40% | 255 -45% | 245 -48% | 282 -40% |
Pro
Contra
La nueva versión de 2017 del Galaxy A5 (SM-A520F) no es para nada inferior a la competencia - el fabricante coreano ofrece un smartphone realmente bueno. Su diseño y, sobre todo, su duración de batería, son excelentes. Solo el rendimiento no está a la altura y es algo muy importante en este rango de precios. La interfaz de usuario Grace no funciona con la fluidez que debiera, pero es una mejora sobre TouchWiz. Las cámaras toman muy buenas fotografías a pesar de que nos habría gustado una mejor configuración para el video. La resistencia a polvo y agua, que encontramos en otros modelos premium de Samsung, es único en este rango de precios. La pantalla es soberbia. Sin embargo los usuarios que reaccionen negativamente al parpadeo PWM, deberían tenerlo en cuenta.
Samsung ha mejorado puntos claves en su nuevo Galaxy A5, del que nos ha convencido sobre todo la impresionante duración de batería.
El Galaxy A5 (2017) no tiene grandes inconvenientes, solo pequeños detalles como el lento almacenamiento, la ausencia de OTG y dual-SIM podrían resultar decisivos para algunos compradores.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
- 02/07/2017 v6 (old)
Daniel Schmidt
Price comparison
