Notebookcheck

Kort testrapport Motorola Razr 2019 Smartphone – Opvouwbare telefoon met retro charme

And... cut! Met de nieuwe Motorola Razr staat opnieuw een legendarische naam in het middelpunt van de belangstelling: de Razr 2019 is een smartphone met een opvouwbaar display. In ons testrapport gaan we kijken hoe het presteert bij dagelijks gebruik en of het concept geschikt is voor langdurig gebruik.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn,
Motorola Razr 2019 (RAZR Serie)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 8 x 2.2 GHz, Kryo 360
Grafische kaart
Qualcomm Adreno 616
Geheugen
6144 MB 
Beeldscherm
6.2 inch 22:9, 2142 x 876 pixel 373 PPI, capacitief touchscreen, P-OLED, Secundair beeldscherm: 2.7", 800x600 pixels, OLED, capacitief touchscreen, glimmend: ja, 60 Hz
Opslag
128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 128 GB 
, 113 GB beschikbaar
Verbindingen
1 USB 3.0, Audio Verbindingen: audio output via USB Type-C, 1 Vingerafdruklezer, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensoren: Versnellingsmeter, gyroscoop, naderingssensor, kompas
Netwerkmogelijkheden
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B13/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B66) , LTE, GPS
Afmetingen
hoogte x breedte x diepte (in mm): 6.9 x 172 x 72
Batterij
2510 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Besturingssysteem
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 16 MPix f/​1.7, phase detection AF (dual pixel), laser AF, dual LED flash, video @2160p/​30FPS
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix f/​2.0
Bijkomende functionaliteiten
Luidsprekers: Monoluidspreker aan de onderkant, Toetsenbord: virtueel toetsenbord, Snellader, USB-kabel, headset, 3.5 mm adapter, standaard, 24 Maanden Garantie, eSIM only; LTE-Speed 800 Mb/s (download)/ 150 Mb/s (upload); SAR value: 0.289 W/kg (head), 0.971 W/kg (body), fanless
Gewicht
205 g, Voeding: 79 g
Prijs
1499 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Evaluatie
Datum
Model
Gewicht
Drive
Formaat
Resolutie
Best Price
76 %
07-2020
Motorola Razr 2019
SD 710, Adreno 616
205 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.2"2142x876
86 %
10-2019
Samsung Galaxy Fold
SD 855, Adreno 640
276 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash7.3"2152x1536
82 %
03-2020
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
SD 855+, Adreno 640
183 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"2636x1080
82 %
04-2020
Huawei Mate Xs
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
300 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash8"2480x2200
84 %
10-2019
LG G8X ThinQ
SD 855, Adreno 640
192 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2340x1080
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Motorola Razr 2019
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate Xs
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
963 (min: 471, max: 1110) MBit/s ∼100% +69%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Adreno 640, SD 855, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
662 (min: 623, max: 679) MBit/s ∼69% +16%
LG G8X ThinQ
Adreno 640, SD 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
651 (min: 539, max: 678) MBit/s ∼68% +14%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
605 (min: 299, max: 640) MBit/s ∼63% +6%
Motorola Razr 2019
Adreno 616, SD 710, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
569 (min: 236, max: 657) MBit/s ∼59%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=562)
267 MBit/s ∼28% -53%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Motorola Razr 2019
Adreno 616, SD 710, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
619 (min: 447, max: 657) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Adreno 640, SD 855, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
576 (min: 544, max: 601) MBit/s ∼93% -7%
Huawei Mate Xs
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
542 (min: 479, max: 631) MBit/s ∼88% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
474 (min: 405, max: 541) MBit/s ∼77% -23%
LG G8X ThinQ
Adreno 640, SD 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
343 (min: 290, max: 411) MBit/s ∼55% -45%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=562)
253 MBit/s ∼41% -59%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø568 (236-657)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø619 (447-657)
Garmin Edge 520 – Overzicht
Garmin Edge 520 – Overzicht
Garmin Edge 520 – Keerpunt
Garmin Edge 520 – Keerpunt
Garmin Edge 520 – Brug
Garmin Edge 520 – Brug
Motorola Razr 2019 – Overzicht
Motorola Razr 2019 – Overzicht
Motorola Razr 2019 – Keerpunt
Motorola Razr 2019 – Keerpunt
Motorola Razr 2019 – Brug
Motorola Razr 2019 – Brug

Beeldvergelijking

Bekijk een scène en navigeer binnen het eerste beeld. Eén klik wijzigt het zoomniveau. Eén klik op het ingezoomde beeld opent het origineel in een nieuw venster. Het eerste beeld toont de verschaalde foto van het testtoestel.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
ColorChecker
28.1 ∆E
49 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
35.2 ∆E
41.8 ∆E
58.3 ∆E
49.5 ∆E
32.3 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
26.2 ∆E
59.8 ∆E
60.9 ∆E
28.4 ∆E
46 ∆E
34.1 ∆E
68.7 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
43.2 ∆E
70.4 ∆E
66.4 ∆E
49.5 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
13 ∆E
ColorChecker Motorola Razr 2019: 43.06 ∆E min: 12.99 - max: 70.36 ∆E
ColorChecker
10.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
10.8 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
9 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
8 ∆E
ColorChecker Motorola Razr 2019: 8.56 ∆E min: 4.15 - max: 14.15 ∆E
403
cd/m²
432
cd/m²
453
cd/m²
404
cd/m²
428
cd/m²
453
cd/m²
405
cd/m²
428
cd/m²
448
cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 453 cd/m² Gemiddelde: 428.2 cd/m² Minimum: 3.28 cd/m²
Helderheidsverdeling: 89 %
Helderheid in Batterij-modus: 428 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Zwart: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.39 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25
Motorola Razr 2019
P-OLED, 2142x876, 6.2
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Infinity Flex-Display (Dynamic AMOLED, 7,3") und Super AMOLED (4,6"), 2152x1536, 7.3
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Dynamic AMOLED, 2636x1080, 6.7
Huawei Mate Xs
OLED, 2480x2200, 8
LG G8X ThinQ
OLED, 2340x1080, 6.4
Screen
43%
48%
26%
11%
Brightness middle
428
531
24%
705
65%
417
-3%
570
33%
Brightness
428
532
24%
709
66%
418
-2%
581
36%
Brightness Distribution
89
97
9%
97
9%
99
11%
90
1%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.39
2.3
64%
3.1
51%
2.6
59%
6.27
2%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.83
3.7
66%
5.4
50%
7.7
29%
9.75
10%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5
1.5
70%
2.7
46%
2
60%
5.7
-14%
Gamma
2.25 98%
2.15 102%
2.11 104%
2.31 95%
2.37 93%
CCT
7649 85%
6631 98%
6264 104%
6276 104%
7309 89%

* ... kleiner is beter

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Om de schermhelderheid te verlagen schakelen sommige laptops het backlight erg snel aan en uit. Dit gebeurt aan een dergelijk hoge frequentie dat het niet zichtbaar is voor het menselijk oog. Als de frequentie te laag is kunnen personen met gevoelige ogen geïrriteerd geraken, hoofdpijn krijgen en zelfs flickering waarnemen.
Screen flickering / PWM waargenomen 231.5 Hz

Het backlight van het scherm flikkert aan 231.5 Hz (hoogstwaarschijnlijk met PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) .

De frequentie van 231.5 Hz is redelijk laag en de meeste mensen die gevoelig zijn aan flickering kunnen dit dus waarnemen of geïrriteerde ogen krijgen (gebruikmakend van de vermelde helderheid en lager).

Ter vergelijking: 51 % van alle geteste toestellen maakten geen gebruik van PWM om de schermhelderheid te verlagen. Als het wel werd gebruikt, werd een gemiddelde van 17916 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz waargenomen.

Responstijd Scherm

De responstijden van het scherm tonen hoe snel het scherm in staat is om van één kleur naar de andere te veranderen. Trage responstijden kunnen aanleiding geven tot 'nabeelden' rond bewegende objecten of het scherm wazig maken (blur). Vooral spelers van snelle 3D-games hebben baat bij een scherm met snelle responstijden.
       Responstijd Zwart naar Wit
8 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 5 ms stijging
↘ 3 ms daling
Het scherm vertoonde snelle responstijden in onze tests en zou geschikt moeten zijn voor games.
Ter vergelijking: alle testtoestellen variëren van 0.8 (minimum) tot 240 (maximum) ms. » 7 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (24.6 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
       Responstijd 50% Grijs naar 80% Grijs
7 ms ... stijging ↗ en daling ↘ gecombineerd↗ 3 ms stijging
↘ 4 ms daling
Het scherm vertoonde erg snelle responstijden in onze tests en zou zeer geschikt moeten zijn voor snelle games.
Ter vergelijking: alle testtoestellen variëren van 0.9 (minimum) tot 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % van alle toestellen zijn beter.
Dit betekent dat de gemeten responstijd beter is dan het gemiddelde (39 ms) van alle geteste toestellen.
Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
634 Points ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2096 Points ∼76% +231%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2757 Points ∼100% +335%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (634 - 694, n=2)
664 Points ∼24% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=66)
1633 Points ∼59% +158%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
838 Points ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2365 Points ∼66% +182%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3600 Points ∼100% +330%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (833 - 838, n=2)
836 Points ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=61)
1759 Points ∼49% +110%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1448 Points ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
2665 Points ∼90% +84%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2972 Points ∼100% +105%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1448 - 1508, n=2)
1478 Points ∼50% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (445 - 3531, n=89)
1990 Points ∼67% +37%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
394 Points ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
738 Points ∼96% +87%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
766 Points ∼100% +94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (392 - 394, n=2)
393 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=89)
567 Points ∼74% +44%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
7460 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
9655 Points ∼94% +29%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10261 Points ∼100% +38%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8512 Points ∼83% +14%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9259 Points ∼90% +24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (6453 - 7460, n=6)
6824 Points ∼67% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 13202, n=490)
5834 Points ∼57% -22%
Work performance score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
9345 Points ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
12276 Points ∼97% +31%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
12665 Points ∼100% +36%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10628 Points ∼84% +14%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
11795 Points ∼93% +26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (7041 - 9345, n=6)
8137 Points ∼64% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19711, n=648)
6373 Points ∼50% -32%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2406 Points ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
3228 Points ∼89% +34%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3259 Points ∼90% +35%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3638 Points ∼100% +51%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3128 Points ∼86% +30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2129 - 2406, n=3)
2291 Points ∼63% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=149)
2636 Points ∼72% +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1635 Points ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
5884 Points ∼100% +260%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4250 Points ∼72% +160%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4046 Points ∼69% +147%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5733 Points ∼97% +251%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1579 - 1635, n=3)
1615 Points ∼27% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=149)
2916 Points ∼50% +78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1760 Points ∼35%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4974 Points ∼100% +183%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3981 Points ∼80% +126%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3948 Points ∼79% +124%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4838 Points ∼97% +175%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1675 - 1760, n=3)
1727 Points ∼35% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6644, n=149)
2626 Points ∼53% +49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2720 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4336 Points ∼100% +59%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4348 Points ∼100% +60%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2497 Points ∼57% -8%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3866 Points ∼89% +42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1840 - 2720, n=6)
2330 Points ∼54% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=496)
2175 Points ∼50% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1866 Points ∼26%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
7114 Points ∼100% +281%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5424 Points ∼76% +191%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5672 Points ∼80% +204%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6857 Points ∼96% +267%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1842 - 1875, n=6)
1860 Points ∼26% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=496)
2075 Points ∼29% +11%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2006 Points ∼32%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
6227 Points ∼100% +210%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5141 Points ∼83% +156%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4422 Points ∼71% +120%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5851 Points ∼94% +192%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1867 - 2006, n=6)
1941 Points ∼31% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=497)
1926 Points ∼31% -4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2634 Points ∼54%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4228 Points ∼87% +61%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4344 Points ∼90% +65%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4836 Points ∼100% +84%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3308 Points ∼68% +26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1862 - 2634, n=6)
2362 Points ∼49% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=526)
2085 Points ∼43% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2931 Points ∼30%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
9489 Points ∼98% +224%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7751 Points ∼80% +164%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4064 Points ∼42% +39%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9724 Points ∼100% +232%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2841 - 2931, n=6)
2875 Points ∼30% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=526)
2762 Points ∼28% -6%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2859 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
7434 Points ∼100% +160%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6601 Points ∼89% +131%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4213 Points ∼57% +47%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6795 Points ∼91% +138%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2544 - 2859, n=6)
2736 Points ∼37% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=526)
2321 Points ∼31% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2847 Points ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4250 Points ∼96% +49%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4201 Points ∼95% +48%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4305 Points ∼97% +51%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4429 Points ∼100% +56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2054 - 2847, n=6)
2457 Points ∼55% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=576)
2062 Points ∼47% -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1764 Points ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
6350 Points ∼100% +260%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6314 Points ∼99% +258%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6265 Points ∼99% +255%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6275 Points ∼99% +256%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1698 - 1764, n=6)
1716 Points ∼27% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=576)
1735 Points ∼27% -2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1927 Points ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
5722 Points ∼100% +197%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5679 Points ∼99% +195%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5689 Points ∼99% +195%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5743 Points ∼100% +198%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1774 - 1927, n=6)
1837 Points ∼32% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7323, n=577)
1658 Points ∼29% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2780 Points ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4019 Points ∼96% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4133 Points ∼99% +49%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4192 Points ∼100% +51%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3260 Points ∼78% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1878 - 2780, n=6)
2410 Points ∼57% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=618)
1924 Points ∼46% -31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2857 Points ∼29%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
9918 Points ∼100% +247%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
9480 Points ∼96% +232%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4044 Points ∼41% +42%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9806 Points ∼99% +243%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2725 - 2857, n=6)
2767 Points ∼28% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=617)
2277 Points ∼23% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2840 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
7479 Points ∼100% +163%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7363 Points ∼98% +159%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4076 Points ∼54% +44%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6780 Points ∼91% +139%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2490 - 2840, n=6)
2670 Points ∼36% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=620)
1961 Points ∼26% -31%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
18181 Points ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
30743 Points ∼73% +69%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
42240 Points ∼100% +132%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
24989 Points ∼59% +37%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
31384 Points ∼74% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (13595 - 18181, n=6)
14925 Points ∼35% -18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=766)
15263 Points ∼36% -16%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
40461 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
106066 Points ∼98% +162%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
108418 Points ∼100% +168%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60860 Points ∼56% +50%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
103509 Points ∼95% +156%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (37157 - 40461, n=6)
39183 Points ∼36% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=764)
25897 Points ∼24% -36%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
31801 Points ∼40%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
68675 Points ∼85% +116%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
80419 Points ∼100% +153%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46141 Points ∼57% +45%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
68517 Points ∼85% +115%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (26967 - 31801, n=6)
28731 Points ∼36% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=764)
20366 Points ∼25% -36%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
65 fps ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
115 fps ∼69% +77%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
166 fps ∼100% +155%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
139 fps ∼84% +114%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
151 fps ∼91% +132%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (56 - 65, n=6)
63.5 fps ∼38% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=772)
43.9 fps ∼26% -32%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
57 fps ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
58 fps ∼97% +2%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (54 - 65, n=6)
57.3 fps ∼96% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=781)
30.5 fps ∼51% -46%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
32 fps ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
90 fps ∼100% +181%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
73 fps ∼81% +128%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
81 fps ∼90% +153%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
85 fps ∼94% +166%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (32 - 33, n=6)
32.3 fps ∼36% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=677)
25.8 fps ∼29% -19%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
40 fps ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
58 fps ∼97% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
56 fps ∼93% +40%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
47 fps ∼78% +18%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (20 - 40, n=6)
29.7 fps ∼50% -26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=685)
21.8 fps ∼36% -45%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
23 fps ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
62 fps ∼100% +170%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
51 fps ∼82% +122%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
51 fps ∼82% +122%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51 fps ∼82% +122%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (23 - 23, n=6)
23 fps ∼37% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=540)
20.8 fps ∼34% -10%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
30 fps ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
46 fps ∼100% +53%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼89% +37%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
26 fps ∼57% -13%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼78% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (19 - 30, n=6)
22.3 fps ∼48% -26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=542)
18.9 fps ∼41% -37%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
11 fps ∼24%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
21 fps ∼46% +91%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
34 fps ∼74% +209%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46 fps ∼100% +318%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
25 fps ∼54% +127%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5.9 - 11, n=6)
8.03 fps ∼17% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=288)
11.2 fps ∼24% +2%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
5.2 fps ∼8%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
17 fps ∼25% +227%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
39 fps ∼57% +650%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
68 fps ∼100% +1208%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼24% +208%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (4.9 - 7.8, n=6)
5.53 fps ∼8% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=286)
8.07 fps ∼12% +55%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
17 fps ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
32 fps ∼53% +88%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
23 fps ∼38% +35%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼100% +253%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
38 fps ∼63% +124%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (11 - 17, n=6)
13 fps ∼22% -24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=292)
16.6 fps ∼28% -2%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
14 fps ∼8%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
42 fps ∼25% +200%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
16 fps ∼10% +14%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
165 fps ∼100% +1079%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼25% +200%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (13 - 14, n=6)
13.8 fps ∼8% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=291)
19.3 fps ∼12% +38%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
13 fps ∼31%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
42 fps ∼100% +223%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
31 fps ∼74% +138%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
32 fps ∼76% +146%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼86% +177%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (13 - 13, n=6)
13 fps ∼31% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=465)
14 fps ∼33% +8%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
16 fps ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
32 fps ∼97% +100%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
25 fps ∼76% +56%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
17 fps ∼52% +6%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33 fps ∼100% +106%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (11 - 16, n=6)
12.7 fps ∼38% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=469)
12.5 fps ∼38% -22%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
205722 Points ∼44%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
463291 Points ∼98% +125%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
470692 Points ∼100% +129%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
418779 Points ∼89% +104%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (172068 - 205722, n=2)
188895 Points ∼40% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=94)
315184 Points ∼67% +53%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
1307 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
1317 Points ∼91% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
1446 Points ∼100% +11%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
950 Points ∼66% -27%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1256 Points ∼87% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1070 - 1307, n=6)
1140 Points ∼79% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=709)
807 Points ∼56% -38%
Graphics (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
3112 Points ∼33%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
9510 Points ∼100% +206%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
9334 Points ∼98% +200%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8570 Points ∼90% +175%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9339 Points ∼98% +200%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2906 - 3112, n=6)
3060 Points ∼32% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=709)
2428 Points ∼26% -22%
Memory (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
3368 Points ∼52%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4945 Points ∼77% +47%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5434 Points ∼84% +61%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6453 Points ∼100% +92%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5140 Points ∼80% +53%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2872 - 3575, n=6)
3138 Points ∼49% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=709)
1805 Points ∼28% -46%
System (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
5678 Points ∼62%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
8825 Points ∼97% +55%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8507 Points ∼93% +50%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8823 Points ∼97% +55%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9113 Points ∼100% +60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5603 - 5813, n=6)
5698 Points ∼63% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=709)
3374 Points ∼37% -41%
Overall (sorteer op waarde)
Motorola Razr 2019
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 6144
2970 Points ∼59%
Samsung Galaxy Fold
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 12288
4835 Points ∼97% +63%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4998 Points ∼100% +68%
Huawei Mate Xs
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4640 Points ∼93% +56%
LG G8X ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4841 Points ∼97% +63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2731 - 2970, n=6)
2808 Points ∼56% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=709)
1716 Points ∼34% -42%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
LG G8X ThinQ (Chrome 78)
63.096 Points ∼100% +64%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
63.087 Points ∼100% +64%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
55.781 Points ∼88% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samung Browser 10.1)
53.761 Points ∼85% +40%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=171)
40.2 Points ∼64% +4%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chrome 83)
38.507 Points ∼61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (29 - 38.5, n=3)
34.7 Points ∼55% -10%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
113.88 Points ∼100% +110%
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1)
113.68 Points ∼100% +110%
LG G8X ThinQ (Chrome 78)
106.73 Points ∼94% +97%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
103.59 Points ∼91% +91%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (50.5 - 66.6, n=6)
61.4 Points ∼54% +13%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chrome 83)
54.208 Points ∼48%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=600)
46.3 Points ∼41% -15%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
LG G8X ThinQ (Chome 78)
66.8 runs/min ∼100% +130%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
63.1 runs/min ∼94% +118%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
62.5 runs/min ∼94% +116%
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1)
61.5 runs/min ∼92% +112%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=155)
43.1 runs/min ∼65% +49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (29 - 38.7, n=3)
34.8 runs/min ∼52% +20%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chome 83)
29 runs/min ∼43%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1)
129 Points ∼100% +126%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
98 Points ∼76% +72%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
98 Points ∼76% +72%
LG G8X ThinQ (Chrome 78)
90 Points ∼70% +58%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=236)
69.8 Points ∼54% +22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (57 - 72, n=6)
66.2 Points ∼51% +16%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chrome 83)
57 Points ∼44%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1)
24128 Points ∼100% +147%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
23781 Points ∼99% +143%
LG G8X ThinQ (Chrome 78)
23506 Points ∼97% +141%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
20917 Points ∼87% +114%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (9771 - 12802, n=6)
11817 Points ∼49% +21%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chrome 83)
9771 Points ∼40%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=767)
7690 Points ∼32% -21%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=793)
9892 ms * ∼100% -178%
Motorola Razr 2019 (Chrome 83)
3557.6 ms * ∼36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (3035 - 3800, n=6)
3370 ms * ∼34% +5%
Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1)
2219.3 ms * ∼22% +38%
LG G8X ThinQ (Chrome 78)
2201.2 ms * ∼22% +38%
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip (Chrome 80)
2076.8 ms * ∼21% +42%
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1)
2002.8 ms * ∼20% +44%

* ... kleiner is beter

Motorola Razr 2019Samsung Galaxy FoldSamsung Galaxy Z FlipHuawei Mate XsLG G8X ThinQAverage 128 GB UFS 2.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
72%
160%
179%
56%
8%
-42%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
72.05 (Nano Memory Card)
47.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
54 (28.6 - 70.2, n=15)
50.7 (1.7 - 87.1, n=509)
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
82.56 (Nano Memory Card)
68.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
69.7 (30.2 - 86, n=15)
68.7 (8.1 - 96.5, n=509)
Random Write 4KB
80.1
34.41
-57%
212.87
166%
259.08
223%
30.2
-62%
76.2 (13.5 - 180, n=20)
-5%
33.1 (0.14 - 319, n=856)
-59%
Random Read 4KB
88.6
158.38
79%
184.51
108%
202.85
129%
160.5
81%
122 (88.4 - 173, n=20)
38%
57.1 (1.59 - 324, n=856)
-36%
Sequential Write 256KB
186.4
394.51
112%
523.39
181%
402.67
116%
497.1
167%
192 (143 - 257, n=20)
3%
122 (2.99 - 911, n=856)
-35%
Sequential Read 256KB
510.2
1302.76
155%
1442.56
183%
1766.63
246%
704.8
38%
494 (409 - 733, n=20)
-3%
329 (12.1 - 1802, n=856)
-36%
010203040Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 0.18.0: Ø29.9 (27-31)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 0.18.0: Ø29.7 (25-32)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 2.2.2a: Ø27.4 (19-31)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 2.2.2a: Ø29.8 (22-31)
Max. Belasting
 27.2 °C31.4 °C43.5 °C 
 26.8 °C33.3 °C43.4 °C 
 27.2 °C34.1 °C42 °C 
Maximum: 43.5 °C
Gemiddelde: 34.3 °C
40.3 °C32.3 °C26.6 °C
40.6 °C33.8 °C26.2 °C
41.4 °C33.2 °C26.6 °C
Maximum: 41.4 °C
Gemiddelde: 34.6 °C
Stroomadapter (max.)  43.2 °C | Kamertemperatuur 21.8 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.3 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.5 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.4 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.7 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2043.838.3254138.13133.234.14033.4345036.134.96329.431.28027.525.310025.724.312521.230.816020.441.720019.24525018.246.831517.652.34001757.550017.762.263018.261.480016.765.410001770.4125015.268.316001666.7200015.368.4250015.769315015.363.6400015.858.5500016.26663001671.8800016.1751000016.771.41250016.564.41600016.769.9SPL59.828.580.6N12.41.147.1median 16.7median 64.4Delta18.432.432.230.727.126.424.124.233.529.232.221.825.919.421.922.621.51926.818.444.717.148.516.654.718.357.814.858.815.66315.263.414.466.114.169.414.470.713.372.113.774.614.276.214.676.114.478.914.677.114.973.514.774.514.973.414.969.115.560.526.786.40.864.1median 14.9median 69.11.410.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseMotorola Razr 2019Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Motorola Razr 2019 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 42% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 76% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 42% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Stroomgebruik
Uit / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.2 Watt
Inactiefdarkmidlight 0.7 / 1.2 / 1.8 Watt
Belasting midlight 3.2 / 5.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Motorola Razr 2019
2510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Fold
4235 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
3300 mAh
Huawei Mate Xs
4500 mAh
LG G8X ThinQ
4000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-5%
-5%
-133%
-37%
-8%
-26%
Idle Minimum *
0.7
0.6
14%
0.59
16%
2.22
-217%
1.1
-57%
0.772 (0.7 - 0.8, n=5)
-10%
0.887 (0.2 - 3.4, n=866)
-27%
Idle Average *
1.2
0.85
29%
0.88
27%
3.94
-228%
1.49
-24%
1.474 (1.2 - 2.07, n=5)
-23%
1.754 (0.6 - 6.2, n=865)
-46%
Idle Maximum *
1.8
1
44%
0.95
47%
4.01
-123%
1.76
2%
1.882 (1.6 - 2.31, n=5)
-5%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=866)
-13%
Load Average *
3.2
4.47
-40%
4.97
-55%
4.34
-36%
4.2
-31%
3.33 (2.6 - 3.97, n=5)
-4%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=860)
-28%
Load Maximum *
5.2
9.02
-73%
8.37
-61%
8.46
-63%
9.2
-77%
5.2 (4.5 - 5.82, n=5)
-0%
6.04 (1.2 - 14.2, n=860)
-16%

* ... kleiner is beter

Batterijduur
Inactief (zonder WLAN, minimale helderheid)
16h 28min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
7h 49min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
9h 46min
Belast (maximale helderheid)
4h 56min
Motorola Razr 2019
2510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Fold
4235 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
3300 mAh
Huawei Mate Xs
4500 mAh
LG G8X ThinQ
4000 mAh
Batterijduur
46%
14%
16%
98%
Reader / Idle
988
1724
74%
1741
76%
1071
8%
H.264
586
1027
75%
527
-10%
762
30%
WiFi v1.3
469
600
28%
647
38%
481
3%
930
98%
Load
296
316
7%
157
-47%
357
21%

Pro

+ strak ontwerp
+ innovatief opvouwbaar display
+ nuttig secundair beeldscherm
+ nauwkeurige GPS
+ mooie accessoires
+ warme geluid van de luidsprekers
+ responsieve vingerafdruksensor
+ USB 3.1 Gen 1
+ Standaard Android

Contra

- erg duur in vergelijking met de functies
- langzame opslag
- alleen eSIM
- korte batterijduur
- matige gesprekskwaliteit
- camerabeelden zijn enigszins wazig
- touchscreen met merkbare oneffenheden
- plastic behuizing

Samenvatting – Te duur, technisch gezien...

Getest: Motorola Razr 2019
Getest: Motorola Razr 2019

Voor het volledige, Engelse testrapport, klik hier.

De Motorola Razr draagt ​​een bekende naam en zijn slanke vormfactor en zijn iconische ontwerp zijn behoorlijk indrukwekkend. Bij nadere beschouwing blijkt echter dat de fabrikant bij het ontwerpen van het apparaat op het randje moest balanceren om het vouwmechanisme en het secundaire beeldscherm in het budget te kunnen passen. Hoewel de prijs van de smartphone slechts 1500 euro bedraagt ​​($1500 in de VS), wordt hij geleverd met een plastic behuizing, zonder moderne standaarden zoals Wi-Fi 6 of 5G, relatief trage prestaties, een kleine batterij en een enkele camera.

Bovendien zullen gebruikers te maken krijgen met kraken, een scherm met een redelijk lage resolutie, aanzienlijke beperking onder belasting en trage opslag. Daarnaast zijn er natuurlijk twijfels over de levensduur van het opvouwbare display.

Dat gezegd hebbende, de smartphone is zeer geschikt voor dagelijks gebruik, er is geen voorgeïnstalleerde, opdringerige advertentiesoftware, de prestaties zijn voldoende voor de meeste situaties en de kwaliteit van de accessoires is hoog.

De Motorola Razr 2019 is een opvouwbare smartphone die wordt geleverd met een flink prijskaartje voor zijn functies. Ondanks alle tekortkomingen is het slanke silhouet fascinerend om naar te kijken.

Aangezien de hardware en prestaties de prijsklasse verre van waard zijn, moeten we een aankoop afraden. Hoewel we dit model nog steeds niet aanbevelen aan de meeste gebruikers, zullen degenen die gefascineerd zijn door de innovatie en verleid worden door de retro-aantrekkingskracht van de Razer-smartphone zeker een apparaat ontvangen dat leuk is om naar te kijken. Potentiële kopers zouden geen high-end functies nodig moeten hebben en de Motorola Razr 2019 kunnen en willen betalen.

Motorola Razr 2019 - 08-06-2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Behuizing
73%
Toetsenbord
65 / 75 → 87%
Aanwijsapparaat
94%
Aansluitmogelijkheden
44 / 70 → 63%
Gewicht
88%
Batterij
81%
Beeldscherm
82%
Gaming-performance
22 / 64 → 34%
Applicatie-performance
64 / 86 → 74%
Temperatuur
89%
Luidheid
100%
Audio
66 / 90 → 73%
Camera
55%
Gemiddelde
71%
76%
Smartphone - Gewogen Gemiddelde

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Overzichten en testrapporten over laptops en mobieltjes > Testrapporten > Kort testrapport Motorola Razr 2019 Smartphone – Opvouwbare telefoon met retro charme
Florian Schmitt, 2020-07-14 (Update: 2020-07-14)