Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarElephone A5 Smartphone Review
Chinese company Elephone specializes in inexpensive Android devices that attempt to incorporate features often found on flagship smartphones for cheaper starting prices. Case and point, the Elephone A5 includes a fingerprint reader, large 6.2-inch 1080p notched display, 4 GB RAM, and a face-unlock IR sensor all for $200 USD.
So, what's the catch to having all these high-end features on such an affordable smartphone? For this review, we'll be taking a closer look at its performance and display from all angles to try and find any potential weak spots.
More specifications on the Elephone A5 can be found on the Coolicool product page here.
(Editor's note: The MicroSD reader on our test unit is inoperable. We are awaiting a second unit in order to retest MicroSD performance. Furthermore, we will be expanding our camera and GPS tests in the coming weeks.)
Case
Chassis design and quality are impressive given the low price. The Elephone A5 utilizes glass on both the front and back with stainless steel edges and corners for strong first impressions. Applying pressure on its surfaces causes no flexing and the unit is resistant to twisting with no creaking.
Construction quality is excellent on our unit as we can notice no uneven gaps or crevices. The bright tri-color back is a mixed bag for users who prefer solid colors, but it does a good a job at hiding fingerprints and providing a relatively strong grip when held on the palm.
In terms of size and weight, the Elephone is surprisingly very close to the iPhone XR and even a fraction of a millimeter thinner (8.1 mm vs. 8.3 mm). It's about 4 mm taller, however, in part due to its slightly larger display (6.18-inch vs. 6.1-inch).
Connectivity
Both USB Type-C and a 3.5 mm audio jack are available. The dual standby nano-SIM tray on the side supports MicroSD as well. Lastly, the Power button and volume rocker have satisfyingly firm feedback with an audible click when pressed.
Software
Our European review model runs a slightly modified version of Android 8.1. However, not everything has been translated, and we found an English/German mix. Security Updates were as of October 2018 and in dire need of an update.
Communication and GPS
We didn't experience any connectivity issues during our time with the test unit. For what it's worth, wireless speeds appear to be 1x1 for half the speeds of the OnePlus 6T.
Since this is an imported smartphone, its bands are incompatible with major 4G networks in the United States even though the unit carries a 4G radio. Maximum network speeds are limited to 3G on our T-Mobile SIM card. Our European review model supported all LTE bands required for Europe, and then some. Cellular reception was mediocre, and more often than not we found just around 50 % signal strength indoors.
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Apple iPhone XR | |
| Honor Magic 2 | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Elephone A5 | |
| HTC U12 Life | |
| Huawei P Smart 2019 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Honor Magic 2 | |
| Apple iPhone XR | |
| Elephone A5 | |
| HTC U12 Life | |
| Huawei P Smart 2019 | |
Indoors, the Elephone A5 was unable to obtain GPS lock. Outdoors it took a while, and when lock was finally obtained location accuracy was determined to be around 6 m. However, the number of satellites that the unit connected to was fairly low overall.
On our usual bike trip around the block where we compare every device to a professional Garmin Edge 520 satnav we found that the Elephone A5 was everything but accurate. For example, the roundabout was ignored completely whereas the Edge at least noticed some sort of circular movement. In addition, it was fairly inaccurate when zig-zagging through the historic center of our town. The GPS modem is thus barely good enough for occasional navigation, however you should not expect accuracy and precision.
Security
The Elephone is notable for carrying both an edge fingerprint reader and an IR camera. Unfortunately for the fingerprint reader, it works only about two-thirds of the time as we often found ourselves retrying at least once before a successful login. We suspect that its small size is partly responsible for its lower reliability when compared to the larger and rounder fingerprint readers as found on the Mate 10 Pro or older iPhone models.
The IR camera fares better in terms of reliability and speed for unlocking the phone. There are slight frame skips and a small performance delay immediately after unlocking that we believe could have been smoother. Otherwise, it works very well and better than we were anticipating.
If the IR camera fails on the first try, then users must tap on a very small onscreen icon to try again. The problem is that there is no haptic feedback when tapping the small icon and so there is no clear indication that the IR camera is reactivated. It's a great annoyance that makes the IR experience less than smooth at times.
Cameras
The triple-camera at the back, however the description found on the manufacturer’s website is pretty confusing. It mentions a 12 MP camera referred to as “12x2”, aka 24 photosensitive units. Apparently, a pair of these forms a single pixel, which is supposed to improve low-light and backlight quality. This main sensor is further supported by a 5 MP and a 0.3 MP sensor for improved depth perception, which can be adjusted with a live preview while taking a photo.
Normal photos turned out fairly decent overall, however we found that higher-quality smartphones tended to offer a higher contrast ratio. Details were okay. Landscape photos suffered from dynamic range in bright areas as well as a lack of focus – the entire image was slightly blurry. And contrary to the manufacturer’s claims we saw no improvement in low-light quality, neither in exposure nor in details.
Videos are recorded in FHD at 60 FPS. Quality was decent and changes in lighting were smooth and caused no issues whatsoever.
At the front, we found a total of two lenses that are designed to improve upon the bokeh effect. Focus was mediocre overall, and we advise against enlarging these photos.
Under normalized conditions we noticed that the Elephone A5 displayed colored surfaces somewhat pixalted and blotted. Colors, on the other hand, were spot on most of the time. When looking at our test chart focus was decent but black text on red background was visibly suffering from low contrast.
Accessories and Warranty
Included extras are a SIM tray key, USB Type-C data/charging cable, and a clear plastic back cover.
The standard one-year limited warranty applies. Nonetheless, owners would likely have to ship the device overseas for potentially lengthy turnaround times. Please see our Guarantees, Return policies and Warranties article for country-specific information.
Input Devices
Keyboard
The touchscreen is responsive and accurate everywhere with satisfactory haptic feedback. Text appears onscreen quickly without any delay even if typing very quickly.
Interestingly, the capacitive touchscreen can recognize up to five points only whereas most mainstream smartphones can recognize up to 10 fingers at a time. This was likely a small cut corner that most users will not notice since there are rarely any applications requiring more than five-finger inputs.
Display
The A5 carries a large 6.18-inch IPS display with a surprisingly high native resolution of 2246 x 1080 pixels and a deep black level for a very high contrast ratio. Even the much more expensive iPhone XR has a lower native resolution of 1792 x 828 for texts and images that aren't as crisp.
When studying the display a little deeper, however, we can notice some cut corners. Colors and grayscale are not as nearly as accurate as on the iPhone XR and the backlight is noticeably dimmer when on the maximum setting. Black-white and gray-gray response times are longer on the Elephone as well for more ghosting. Users accustomed to AMOLED smartphones may find the slow response times on the A5 distracting especially when scrolling through long web pages.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 422.4 cd/m²
Contrast: 2485:1 (Black: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.06 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
Gamma: 2.3
| Elephone A5 IPS, 6.18, 2246x1080 | Apple iPhone XR IPS, 6.10, 1792x828 | OnePlus 6T Optic AMOLED, 6.41, 2340x1080 | Huawei P Smart 2019 IPS, 6.20, 2340x1080 | Honor Magic 2 AMOLED, 6.39, 2340x1080 | HTC U12 Life IPS, 6.00, 2160x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | 5% | 74% | -15% | 79% | -23% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 38.4 ? | 45.6 ? -19% | 12 ? 69% | 50.8 ? -32% | 8 ? 79% | 48 ? -25% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 28 ? | 20 ? 29% | 6 ? 79% | 27.2 ? 3% | 6 ? 79% | 34 ? -21% |
| PWM Frequency | 240 ? | 235.8 | ||||
| Screen | 23% | 29% | 4% | 11% | -53% | |
| Brightness middle | 422.4 | 672 59% | 437 3% | 458 8% | 594 41% | 468 11% |
| Brightness | 414 | 641 55% | 442 7% | 440 6% | 539 30% | 452 9% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 92 6% | 95 9% | 85 -2% | 85 -2% | 90 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.17 | 0.35 -106% | 0.35 -106% | 0.62 -265% | ||
| Contrast | 2485 | 1920 -23% | 1309 -47% | 755 -70% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.06 | 1.3 68% | 2.21 46% | 1.4 66% | 5.37 -32% | 6.09 -50% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.57 | 2.7 68% | 4.27 50% | 3.8 56% | 8.32 3% | 10.23 -19% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.8 | 2.2 54% | 2.1 56% | 2.4 50% | 3.7 23% | 6.8 -42% |
| Gamma | 2.3 96% | 2.3 96% | 2.307 95% | 2.22 99% | 2.127 103% | 2.708 81% |
| CCT | 7003 93% | 6868 95% | 6353 102% | 6235 104% | 7212 90% | 6972 93% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 14% /
19% | 52% /
40% | -6% /
0% | 45% /
28% | -38% /
-47% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 13.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 67 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 38.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 52 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17924 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Outdoor visibility is similar to the OnePlus 6T or Huawei P Smart since all three smartphones have similar brightness levels. Direct sunlight will easily overwhelm onscreen content and so shade is recommended if possible. Viewing angles are otherwise excellent for viewing in landscape or portrait mode.
Performance
The MediaTek Helio P60 is a relatively new upper-mainstream SoC that can also be found on the Ulefone Armor 6 and Umidigi Z2 Pro. Although GeekBench 4 refuses to launch on our Elephone, AnTuTu 7 ranks it about 15 percent faster than the mid-range Qualcomm Snapdragon 660.
System performance is generally smooth. Some slight slowdown and frame skips can be observed when switching between applications as expected from a mainstream smartphone.
See our dedicated page on the Helio P60 for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.
| Basemark GPU 1.1 | |
| 1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 () | |
| Vulkan Medium Native | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 () | |
| 1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (7.98 - 11.7, n=2) | |
* ... smaller is better
Storage Devices
The 64 GB ROM performs similarly to the 64 GB ROM in the HTC U12 Life. Pricier flagship smartphones may have sequential read rates 2x or 3x faster.
The MicroSD reader shares the same slot as the second SIM card. Unfortunately on our test unit, the MicroSD reader appears to be inoperable.
| Elephone A5 64 GB eMMC Flash | OnePlus 6T 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Huawei P Smart 2019 64 GB eMMC Flash | Honor Magic 2 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | HTC U12 Life 64 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 67% | 27% | 315% | -7% | 153% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 59.6 | 66.9 12% | 60.9 2% | 72.4 21% | ||
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 80.8 | 76.2 -6% | 82.3 2% | 83.2 3% | ||
| Random Write 4KB | 24.35 | 22 -10% | 70.7 190% | 250 927% | 16.2 -33% | 157.8 548% |
| Random Read 4KB | 60.4 | 138.5 129% | 45.66 -24% | 143 137% | 56.7 -6% | 157.4 161% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 213.9 | 204.4 -4% | 191.4 -11% | 185 -14% | 209.4 -2% | 196.4 -8% |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 291.9 | 735 152% | 288.3 -1% | 908 211% | 272.8 -7% | 853 192% |
GPU Performance
The ARM Mali-G72 MP3 GPU in the Elephone is comparable to the old Adreno 420 according to 3DMark benchmarks. It's still powerful enough to run 3D titles in the Play store at playable frame rates. Smooth 60 FPS on demanding titles like Asphalt 9 is unattainable on our budget device.
| 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited | 1054 points | |
Help | ||
Emissions
Temperature
Surface temperatures are warmest near the top of the smartphone. During heavier loads like gaming, the hot spot can reach up to 38 C to be similar to the Honor Magic 2 or HTC U12 Life. The warmth can be felt if using the device in landscape mode, but it's thankfully never uncomfortable.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.2 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.4 °C / 76 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Speakers
The mono speaker is louder than we were expecting for excellent speakerphone use. Bass, of course, is lacking and so music sounds unbalanced when on high volume.
Elephone A5 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 72% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 85% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Energy Management
Power Consumption
The smartphone draws between 1 W and 3.3 W depending on the brightness setting when idling on the Home screen to be slightly less power efficient than many competing 6-inch models. When video streaming, consumption averages about 4.4 W. Results are quite similar to the iPhone XR even though the latter is able to outperform our Elephone by over 400 or 500 percent in 3DMark benchmarks.
| Off / Standby |   1.44 / 0.37 Watt |
| Idle |  1.08 / 3.3 / 3.3 Watt |
| Load |
4.4 / 5 Watt |
    
| |
| Elephone A5 Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18 | Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 128 GB NVMe, IPS, 1792x828, 6.10 | OnePlus 6T SD 845, Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41 | Huawei P Smart 2019 Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 2340x1080, 6.20 | Honor Magic 2 Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39 | HTC U12 Life SD 636, Adreno 509, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 2160x1080, 6.00 | Huawei Mate 20 Pro Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, OLED, 3120x1440, 6.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 14% | 15% | 7% | 15% | 12% | 11% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.08 | 0.61 44% | 0.7 35% | 0.84 22% | 0.6 44% | 0.7 35% | 0.95 12% |
| Idle Average * | 3.3 | 2.67 19% | 1.1 67% | 2.21 33% | 0.9 73% | 1.5 55% | 2.17 34% |
| Idle Maximum * | 3.3 | 2.69 18% | 2.1 36% | 2.23 32% | 1.9 42% | 2.5 24% | 2.25 32% |
| Load Average * | 4.4 | 4.34 1% | 4.2 5% | 4.2 5% | 6.3 -43% | 4.7 -7% | 4.47 -2% |
| Load Maximum * | 5 | 5.66 -13% | 8.3 -66% | 7.86 -57% | 7.05 -41% | 7.4 -48% | 6.15 -23% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery Life
Runtimes from the 4000 mAh non-removable battery is disappointing. Expect just 7 hours of real-world WLAN use compared to almost twice that on the OnePlus 6T or Honor Magic 2.
| Elephone A5 Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 15.2 Wh | Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 11.16 Wh | OnePlus 6T SD 845, Adreno 630, 14.06 Wh | Huawei P Smart 2019 Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, Wh | Honor Magic 2 Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, Wh | HTC U12 Life SD 636, Adreno 509, Wh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 117% | 106% | 20% | 84% | 44% | 83% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 420 | 910 117% | 865 106% | 506 20% | 773 84% | 603 44% | 767 83% |
| Reader / Idle | 2969 | 1936 | 1293 | 1747 | |||
| Load | 270 | 261 | 257 | 282 |
Verdict
Pros
Cons
The Elephone A5 is a lot of a smartphone for not a lot of money. Users get a large display, high resolution, solid build, MicroSD reader, fingerprint reader, IR camera, 802.11ac wireless, dual-SIM, and a decent mid-range processor all for $200 USD. Perhaps most surprisingly, the IR face unlock actually works with no strings attached. The value proposition is incredible for its category.
There are a number of drawbacks that potential buyers should keep in mind. Black-white response times are slow for noticeably more ghosting and battery life is just average at best. Outdoor visibility is limited and certain hardware features like NFC, VoLTE, IR remote, and wireless charging are nowhere to be found. Both the fingerprint reader and cameras could have been better as well, but this is nitpicking considering the low asking price. Users who can live without these extras will find plenty to like about the Elephone A5.
We'll be giving our final rating for the Elephone A5 once we complete the GPS and camera tests in the coming weeks.
A $200 Android that feels like something twice the price. The Elephone A5 is aggressively priced without any significant cuts in features and performance.
ll things considered the Elephone A5 might be worth a closer look if the price is right as it offers quite a lot. However, the warranty situation might be a downer for many potential buyers.
Pricecompare
