Notebookcheck

Apple iPhone SE 2020 Review - Small phone with a fast-beating heart

An upgraded classic. With the second generation of the iPhone SE, Apple has visually recreated the iPhone 8. While this has resulted in a - for current standards - relatively compact smartphone with a few high-end features, the screen-to-body ratio is fairly poor. Meanwhile, the low base price is another plus for the iPhone SE 2.
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Marius S.),

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

With a base price of 479 Euros ($399), the 2nd generation iPhone SE is currently the Californian company's cheapest smartphone. Configurations with 64, 128 (529 Euros/$449), or 256 GB (649 Euros/$549) of internal storage are available. The device not only supersedes its namesake from 2016 but also the iPhone 8, the design of which it has inherited.

Compared to the iPhone 8, it comes with the faster Apple A13 chip, which is one of the latest flagship SoCs, more RAM and Wi-Fi 6 support. The smartphones are very similar otherwise both in terms of the visual appearance and the specifications.

We will take a closer look at the internal differences in this review.

Apple iPhone SE 2020
Processor
Apple A13 Bionic 6 x - 2.7 GHz, Lightning and Thunder
Graphics adapter
Memory
3072 MB 
Display
4.7 inch 16:9, 1334 x 750 pixel 326 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Retina HD, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB NVMe, 128 GB 
, 119.3 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: Lightning, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, proximity sensor and 3-axis gyroscope, barometer, digital compass, iBeacon micro-location, Lightning port
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 and 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900 and 2100 MHz), LTE (bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 48 and 66), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.3 x 138.4 x 67.3 ( = 0.29 x 5.45 x 2.65 in)
Battery
6.96 Wh, 1822 mAh Lithium-Ion, 3.82 V
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Apple iOS 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix (f/1.8, 5x digital zoom, OIS, UHD video)
Secondary Camera: 7 MPix (f/2.2, Full HD video)
Additional features
Speakers: two speakers, Keyboard: onscreen, Charger, Lightning cable, sticker, headset, documentation, 12 Months Warranty, IP67, head SAR: 0.98 W/kg, fanless, waterproof
Released
03/01/2020
Weight
148 g ( = 5.22 oz / 0.33 pounds), Power Supply: 45 g ( = 1.59 oz / 0.1 pounds)
Price
529 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
85 %
05/2020
Apple iPhone SE 2020
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
148 g128 GB NVMe4.7"1334x750
86 %
11/2019
Google Pixel 4
SD 855, Adreno 640
162 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash5.7"2280x1080
87 %
09/2019
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU
194 g64 GB SSD6.1"1792x828
83 %
09/2017
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU
148 gApple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)4.7"1334x750
86 %
02/2020
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
SD 855, Adreno 640
186 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"2400x1080
84 %
01/2020
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
SD 730G, Adreno 618
208 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080

Case - iPhone SE Borrows its Design from the iPhone 8

The Apple iPhone SE (2020) is available in white, black or red. Visually, it is difficult to differentiate between the new SE and the iPhone 8, since even the weight and dimensions are identical. The Apple logo on the back, which has been moved to the center, is the only indication of the fact that this is a newer device.

The blend of aluminum and glass makes a very solid impression. Even under heavy pressure, the IPS display does not distort, although the smartphone audibly creaks when attempting to twist it. The clearances are very tight and even the nano-SIM slot is also completely flush with the frame of the case.

The battery of the iPhone SE is fixed and the phone is protected against dust and water as per the IP67 certification.

Size Comparison

162.5 mm / 6.4 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 186 g0.4101 lbs157.8 mm / 6.21 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs150.9 mm / 5.94 inch 75.7 mm / 2.98 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 194 g0.4277 lbs147.1 mm / 5.79 inch 68.8 mm / 2.71 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 162 g0.3571 lbs138.4 mm / 5.45 inch 67.3 mm / 2.65 inch 7.3 mm / 0.2874 inch 148 g0.3263 lbs138.4 mm / 5.45 inch 67.3 mm / 2.65 inch 7.3 mm / 0.2874 inch 148 g0.3263 lbs

Features - Apple Phone with Few New Features

The iPhone SE offers few new features. The Lightning port still transfers data according to the USB 2.0 specification.

Instead of Face ID, the presumed-dead feature Touch ID has been integrated for biometric authentication. Furthermore, there is a limited-functionality NFC chip and Bluetooth 5.0. Meanwhile, the faster processor and Wi-Fi 6 are new additions.

Top
Top
Left: volume buttons, mute button
Left: volume buttons, mute button
Right: power button, SIM slot
Right: power button, SIM slot
Bottom: speaker, Lightning port, microphone
Bottom: speaker, Lightning port, microphone

Software - iPhone with Long Update Cycle

As of this review, the iPhone SE uses Apple iOS 13.4 with all features being available. Positive: The smartphone comes with a long period of guaranteed updates of about four to five years, provided Apple maintains its current update policy. However, there has been no official statement from the manufacturer on this matter.

Communication and GNSS - Gigabit LTE and Wi-Fi 6 for the SE 2

Ideally, the iPhone SE connects to mobile networks via LTE, in which case it is able to achieve download speeds of 1 Gb/s. Although this does not make it faster than the iPhone 8, it at least supports an additional six LTE bands, which should make it a good candidate for global use. In our test, the reception with the smartphone was nothing out of the ordinary.

When it comes to local networks, the Apple smartphone has been upgraded to support the new standard Wi-Fi 6, which allows for theoretical transfer rates of up to 1.2 Gb/s within the home network. In the test with our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX 12, the small phone reaches fast transfer speeds, although the speeds when receiving data were somewhat underwhelming. The range is good however and up to par compared to more-expensive models.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone SE 2020
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
618 (min: 321, max: 653) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Adreno 640, SD 855, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
612 (min: 473, max: 652) MBit/s ∼99% -1%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
563 (min: 490, max: 597) MBit/s ∼91% -9%
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
526 (min: 413, max: 655) MBit/s ∼85% -15%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
329 (min: 284, max: 350) MBit/s ∼53% -47%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=553)
264 MBit/s ∼43% -57%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone SE 2020
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
818 (min: 400, max: 892) MBit/s ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
591 (min: 564, max: 609) MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Apple iPhone 11
A13 Bionic GPU, A13 Bionic, 64 GB SSD
529 (min: 204, max: 603) MBit/s ∼65% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Adreno 640, SD 855, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
327 (min: 155, max: 377) MBit/s ∼40% -60%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
313 (min: 306, max: 319) MBit/s ∼38% -62%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=553)
250 MBit/s ∼31% -69%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø608 (321-653)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø804 (400-892)
GPS Diagnostic

Apple provides little information concerning the supported satellite systems (GNSS) of the iPhone SE. Since the datasheet only specifies "built-in GPS/GNSS", only the US standard GNSS can be taken for granted. However, it is highly likely that GLONASS, Galileo and QZSS are also supported; conversely, support for the Chinese satellite system BeiDou is an uncertainty.

We used the app GPS Diagnostic to test the signal strength. The results are excellent and solid even indoors. On a short bike ride, the iPhone SE competes against the bike computer Garmin Edge 500. At a total track distance of almost nine kilometers, the difference between the two devices only amounts to 100 meters and a glance at the route even attests to the smartphone's more precise locating capabilities.

Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Overview
Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Overview
Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Bridge underpass
Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Bridge underpass
Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Lake
Apple iPhone SE (2020) - Lake
Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
Garmin Edge 500 - Bridge underpass
Garmin Edge 500 - Bridge underpass
Garmin Edge 500 - Lake
Garmin Edge 500 - Lake

Telephony and Call Quality

In terms of the telephony app, users receive the standard iOS features. While the call quality of our test device is satisfactory when held up against the ear, our voice sounds fairly bright and slightly nasal. The ambient noise cancelling takes quite a while to pick up on interfering sounds and is only able to dampen them after a few seconds. Even then, it does not fully filter out everything and there are occasional interruptions when transmitting speech.

While there is a noticeable echo when using the speaker, it is still suitable for use in quiet environments. Furthermore, the iPhone SE supports VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling. Dual-SIM operation can be achieved with an additional eSIM.

Cameras - Only a Single-camera Setup

Selfie taken with the iPhone SE

The front camera once again has a resolution of 7 MP and despite identical specifications on paper, it has been visibly improved. Additionally, it supports all popular portrait modes of its bigger siblings, although the transitions between the object in focus and the background tend to be less clean compared to more-expensive iPhone models. While the image quality in daylight is good, worse lighting conditions quickly introduce noticeable image noise. Video recordings are limited to Full HD at only 30 frames per second.

The main camera captures beautiful and balanced pictures in good lighting conditions, an ultra wide-angle optics or optical zoom is not available, however. Instead, a digital zoom with an up to 5x enhancement is available and produces rather disappointing results.

Although video can also be recorded at Ultra HD with up to 60 FPS, this requires using the high efficiency format (HEIF/HEVC). However, if a better compatibility is desired, video recordings are limited to 2160p and 30 FPS. The audio (mono) quality is clear and sound is recorded very evenly from all directions.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4
click to load images

Tests under controlled lighting conditions confirm our initial subjective impressions. The color accuracy is decent, although brown and green appear significantly brighter than they should. The representation of our test chart is balanced and sharp and even towards the edges the sharpness barely decreases.

ColorChecker
23.7 ∆E
40.1 ∆E
31 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
34.5 ∆E
48 ∆E
37.2 ∆E
25.4 ∆E
29.1 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
46.8 ∆E
47.4 ∆E
21.4 ∆E
33.6 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
45.2 ∆E
31.3 ∆E
32.7 ∆E
41.6 ∆E
43 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
30.8 ∆E
22.3 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Apple iPhone SE 2020: 33.05 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 48 ∆E
ColorChecker
19.8 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
14 ∆E
22.1 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
8 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
11 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Apple iPhone SE 2020: 10.45 ∆E min: 2.9 - max: 22.06 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - Quick Charger Comes at a Premium

The scope of delivery includes no surprises. Aside from the smartphone itself, there is a small 5-watt charger, a USB-to-Lightning cable, a SIM needle, obligatory Apple stickers and documentation in various languages. There are optional cases and a more powerful charger available from the manufacturer.

The warranty period is 12 months and users have the option to expand it with Apple Care+, which costs 99 Euros ($79) for the iPhone SE. The conditions are identical to those of the iPhone 11 and an accidental damage incident incurs a fee of an additional 29 or 99 Euros ($29 or $99).

Input Devices & Handling - iPhone SE without Face ID

The capacitive touchscreen of the iPhone SE (2020) is very responsive and reliable in all areas. While the preinstalled keyboard can be replaced with an alternative layout, it offers all amenities, which users have become familiar with over the years.

Since the introduction of Face ID, Apple has consistently used the new facial recognition - despite this, the presumed-dead feature Touch ID is present on this smartphone, which is likely a remnant from the design that has been adopted from the iPhone 8. The fingerprint sensor works well and reliably recognizes stored fingerprints. Since it is not affected by face masks, Touch ID may even be the more comfortable solution during the ongoing pandemic.

Display - Bright and Color-accurate IPS Panel

Subpixel array

The display of the Apple iPhone SE (2020) measures 4.7 inches diagonally and supports a native resolution of 1334x750 pixels, which results in a clear image. On paper, the panel is identical to that of the iPhone 8, although our test shows that Apple has made small improvements to all aspects of the screen.

For example, the brightness has been increased further, it remains constant during the APL50 test and the full brightness level is available through manual mode. Similarly, a dark mode, the True Tone feature and Night Shift can be enabled. Thanks to the improved black value, the contrast ratio of the display is crisp and there is also no pulse-width modulation (PWM).

630
cd/m²
672
cd/m²
677
cd/m²
647
cd/m²
688
cd/m²
676
cd/m²
633
cd/m²
636
cd/m²
675
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
Retina HD
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 688 cd/m² Average: 659.3 cd/m² Minimum: 2.84 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 688 cd/m²
Contrast: 2457:1 (Black: 0.28 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9
ΔE Greyscale 1.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
99.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25
Apple iPhone SE 2020
IPS, 1334x750, 4.7
Apple iPhone 8
IPS True Tone, 1334x750, 4.7
Apple iPhone 11
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Google Pixel 4
OLED, 2280x1080, 5.7
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Super AMOLED Plus, 2400x1080, 6.7
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Screen
-18%
-19%
2%
-71%
-132%
Brightness middle
688
604
-12%
679
-1%
447
-35%
622
-10%
579
-16%
Brightness
659
580
-12%
671
2%
439
-33%
630
-4%
576
-13%
Brightness Distribution
92
91
-1%
93
1%
93
1%
96
4%
89
-3%
Black Level *
0.28
0.44
-57%
0.68
-143%
Contrast
2457
1373
-44%
999
-59%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1
1.2
-20%
0.8
20%
0.8
20%
2.7
-170%
4.61
-361%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.2
2.3
-5%
2.4
-9%
1.4
36%
5.9
-168%
7.72
-251%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.7
1.6
6%
1.1
35%
1.3
24%
3
-76%
4.2
-147%
Gamma
2.25 98%
2.25 98%
2.24 98%
2.22 99%
2.09 105%
2.244 98%
CCT
6790 96%
6688 97%
6610 98%
6213 105%
6246 104%
7201 90%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18032 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

We performed our color analysis with the CalMAN software with the True Tone feature disabled. The DeltaE values are convincing and there are no severe outliers. Only when displaying red, the DeltaE is slightly too high, which likely stems from the fact that the panel can also display DCI-P3. However, since we were unable to measure this color space using the app, we only tested the color accuracy within the smaller sRGB color space.

The True Tone feature automatically adjusts the color representation to the ambient lighting. This often results in a warmer image, which we found to be more comfortable on the eyes during daily use and particularly in the evening.

Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
ColorChecker (target color space: sRGB)
ColorChecker (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (target color space: sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (target color space: sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
21.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 ms rise
↘ 15.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 27 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms rise
↘ 27.6 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 34 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.2 ms).

Outdoors, using the iPhone SE is an enjoyable experience even on sunny days. Thanks to its high luminosity and contrast, the screen's content remains readable almost regardless of the lighting conditions.

While the observed brightness of the display slightly decreases when viewed from a steep angle and the representation then appears slightly warmer, the overall image still looks excellent overall. Despite the use of IPS technology, we were unable to observe any backlight bleeding even when viewing a fully black picture.

Viewing angles of the iPhone SE

Performance - Apple Phone with A13 Bionic and 3 GB of RAM

Passmark - Storage

The iPhone SE is equipped with Apple's current top-of-the-line processor, the A13 Bionic, as well as 3 GB of RAM. The chipset promises the fastest mobile performance, which is currently available. Despite this, the benchmarks show the performance to be slower compared to Apple's 11 series.

In Geekbench, the single-core performance matches that of the iPhone 11 Pro and only the multi-core scores are slightly lower than those of the flagship smartphone. In 3DMark, this performance deficit is fairly consistent at 6 to 8% and the effects are visible in the GFXBench offscreen tests as well. However, the latter in particular shows that this is not necessarily a disadvantage during day-to-day use, since the iPhone SE is consistently at the top in terms of the onscreen results, where it even outperforms the Pro models.

Browsing the web is a very smooth experience and the benchmarks confirm this impression as well. That being said, more complex web pages can become difficult to navigate due to the smaller screen size.

We tested the speed of the internal storage using Passmark. While the write speeds match those of the iPhone 8, the read speeds are significantly lower with only around one-third of the performance of the older model. The results hint at relatively fast eMMC flash storage, although Apple does not explicitly state which type of memory is used.

Addendum 05.18.2020: The storage appears to be NVMe memory. The benchmark seems to have corrected the scores downwards by a significant margin, due to which the results can no longer be compared directly. Unfortunately, we do not have an iPhone 8 on hand to repeat the test.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
3281 Points ∼93%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2573 Points ∼73% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
2722 Points ∼77% -17%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3531 Points ∼100% +8%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (3281 - 3531, n=2)
3406 Points ∼96% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (445 - 3531, n=84)
1959 Points ∼55% -40%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
1336 Points ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
746 Points ∼56% -44%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
740 Points ∼55% -45%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
1342 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (1336 - 1342, n=2)
1339 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=84)
558 Points ∼42% -58%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
2898 Points ∼66%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4112 Points ∼93% +42%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
1854 Points ∼42% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4418 Points ∼100% +52%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points ∼72% +10%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3018 Points ∼68% +4%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (2898 - 3219, n=3)
3045 Points ∼69% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5766, n=491)
2155 Points ∼49% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
7847 Points ∼94%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6383 Points ∼76% -19%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
2783 Points ∼33% -65%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7148 Points ∼85% -9%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2492 Points ∼30% -68%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
8374 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (7847 - 8374, n=3)
8113 Points ∼97% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=491)
2038 Points ∼24% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
5688 Points ∼91%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5685 Points ∼90% 0%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
2505 Points ∼40% -56%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6285 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2567 Points ∼41% -55%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
6006 Points ∼96% +6%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (5688 - 6067, n=3)
5920 Points ∼94% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=492)
1893 Points ∼30% -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
4052 Points ∼96%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4072 Points ∼97% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4208 Points ∼100% +4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3155 Points ∼75% -22%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3877 Points ∼92% -4%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (3411 - 4052, n=3)
3780 Points ∼90% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5721, n=521)
2066 Points ∼49% -49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
20135 Points ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9217 Points ∼46% -54%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
10410 Points ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3648 Points ∼18% -82%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
20154 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (17853 - 20154, n=3)
19381 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=521)
2712 Points ∼13% -87%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
10699 Points ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7196 Points ∼67% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7842 Points ∼73% -27%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3522 Points ∼33% -67%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
10427 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (9199 - 10699, n=3)
10108 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=521)
2282 Points ∼21% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
2892 Points ∼67%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4199 Points ∼97% +45%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
1989 Points ∼46% -31%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4324 Points ∼100% +50%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points ∼74% +11%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
3218 Points ∼74% +11%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (2429 - 4038, n=4)
3144 Points ∼73% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=571)
2044 Points ∼47% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
4573 Points ∼72%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6214 Points ∼98% +36%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
2581 Points ∼41% -44%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6312 Points ∼100% +38%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2245 Points ∼36% -51%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
5761 Points ∼91% +26%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (4573 - 6088, n=4)
5537 Points ∼88% +21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=571)
1705 Points ∼27% -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
4050 Points ∼71%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5615 Points ∼98% +39%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
2421 Points ∼42% -40%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5727 Points ∼100% +41%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2405 Points ∼42% -41%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
4901 Points ∼86% +21%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (4050 - 5471, n=4)
4706 Points ∼82% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7305, n=572)
1630 Points ∼28% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
2857 Points ∼63%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4540 Points ∼100% +59%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
1774 Points ∼39% -38%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4201 Points ∼93% +47%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3228 Points ∼71% +13%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (2857 - 3839, n=2)
3348 Points ∼74% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5054, n=613)
1908 Points ∼42% -33%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
9218 Points ∼90%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8765 Points ∼85% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
9670 Points ∼94% +5%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3485 Points ∼34% -62%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (9218 - 11302, n=2)
10260 Points ∼100% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=612)
2234 Points ∼22% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
6168 Points ∼82%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7263 Points ∼97% +18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7500 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3424 Points ∼46% -44%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (6168 - 7893, n=2)
7031 Points ∼94% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=615)
1928 Points ∼26% -69%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
33851 Points ∼84%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37641 Points ∼94% +11%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
24131 Points ∼60% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
40137 Points ∼100% +19%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
33925 Points ∼85% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (33851 - 33925, n=4)
33885 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 57583, n=761)
15165 Points ∼38% -55%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
209431 Points ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
102168 Points ∼49% -51%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
112424 Points ∼54% -46%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
108114 Points ∼52% -48%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
208190 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (206190 - 209431, n=4)
208254 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=759)
25420 Points ∼12% -88%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
97290 Points ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
73984 Points ∼76% -24%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
62006 Points ∼64% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
78551 Points ∼81% -19%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
97216 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (96826 - 97290, n=4)
97152 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 110468, n=759)
20080 Points ∼21% -79%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
250 fps ∼81%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
139 fps ∼45% -44%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
161.3 fps ∼52% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
166 fps ∼54% -34%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
309 fps ∼100% +24%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (250 - 322, n=4)
292 fps ∼94% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=767)
43.3 fps ∼14% -83%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼50%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
88 fps ∼73% +47%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
119.8 fps ∼100% +100%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (59 - 60, n=4)
59.8 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=776)
30.3 fps ∼25% -49%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
149 fps ∼89%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
75 fps ∼45% -50%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
70.8 fps ∼42% -52%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
99 fps ∼59% -34%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
168 fps ∼100% +13%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (149 - 175, n=4)
162 fps ∼96% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=672)
25.4 fps ∼15% -83%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼52%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
67 fps ∼59% +12%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
114.5 fps ∼100% +91%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼52% 0%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼52% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (60 - 60, n=4)
60 fps ∼52% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=680)
21.6 fps ∼19% -64%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
93 fps ∼83%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
57 fps ∼51% -39%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
54 fps ∼48% -42%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
69 fps ∼62% -26%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
112 fps ∼100% +20%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (93 - 117, n=4)
106 fps ∼95% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=535)
20.5 fps ∼18% -78%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼55%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51 fps ∼46% -15%
Apple iPhone 8
Apple A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU, 2048
109.7 fps ∼100% +83%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
57 fps ∼52% -5%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
60 fps ∼55% 0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (60 - 60, n=4)
60 fps ∼55% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=537)
18.7 fps ∼17% -69%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼40% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
25 fps ∼42% -58%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼17% -83%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
45 fps ∼75% -25%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (45 - 60, n=4)
52.8 fps ∼88% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=283)
11 fps ∼18% -82%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
31 fps ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
13 fps ∼42% -58%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
17 fps ∼55% -45%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps ∼22% -78%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
29 fps ∼94% -6%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (29 - 33, n=4)
30.5 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=281)
7.97 fps ∼26% -74%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33 fps ∼55% -45%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
38 fps ∼63% -37%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼27% -73%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
57 fps ∼95% -5%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (57 - 60, n=4)
58.8 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=287)
16.4 fps ∼27% -73%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
72 fps ∼94%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32 fps ∼42% -56%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
42 fps ∼55% -42%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼23% -75%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
74 fps ∼96% +3%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (72 - 87, n=4)
77 fps ∼100% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=286)
19 fps ∼25% -74%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
59 fps ∼91%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
34 fps ∼53% -42%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
43 fps ∼67% -27%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
63 fps ∼98% +7%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (59 - 73, n=4)
64.5 fps ∼100% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=460)
13.8 fps ∼21% -77%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼100%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
30 fps ∼50% -50%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
37 fps ∼62% -38%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
49 fps ∼82% -18%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (48 - 60, n=4)
54.3 fps ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=464)
12.3 fps ∼21% -79%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
489463 Points ∼92%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
376698 Points ∼70% -23%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
451559 Points ∼84% -8%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
534558 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
  (489463 - 534558, n=2)
512011 Points ∼96% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=89)
309759 Points ∼58% -37%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1601 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
1414 Points ∼81%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
1745 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=704)
803 Points ∼46%
Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9307 Points ∼55%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
8598 Points ∼51%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
16996 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=704)
2391 Points ∼14%
Memory (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6458 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5287 Points ∼82%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
2350 Points ∼36%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8398, n=704)
1777 Points ∼28%
System (sort by value)
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8058 Points ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
8515 Points ∼60%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
14189 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=704)
3345 Points ∼24%
Overall (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel 4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5277 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4837 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 4096
Points ∼0%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
5607 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6205, n=704)
1695 Points ∼30%
Basemark GPU 1.2
Metal Medium Native (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
211.18 (min: 93.41, max: 435.35) fps ∼100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
211 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80.8 - 211, n=2)
146 fps ∼69% -31%
1920x1080 Metal Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone SE 2020
Apple A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU, 3072
136.56 (min: 72.64, max: 258.13) fps ∼100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
137 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (113 - 137, n=2)
125 fps ∼91% -8%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
139.668 Points ∼100%
Average Apple A13 Bionic (129 - 140, n=4)
133 Points ∼95% -5%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
132.886 Points ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
63.778 Points ∼46% -54%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
56.678 Points ∼41% -59%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=167)
39.6 Points ∼28% -72%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
293.36 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Apple A13 Bionic (279 - 302, n=4)
293 Points ∼100% +5%
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
278.62 Points ∼95%
Apple iPhone 8
206.7 Points ∼70% -26%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
112.3 Points ∼38% -60%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
107.51 Points ∼37% -61%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=594)
45.9 Points ∼16% -84%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
158 runs/min ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
157 runs/min ∼99% -1%
Average Apple A13 Bionic (153 - 158, n=4)
155 runs/min ∼98% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
62.2 runs/min ∼39% -61%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
61.8 runs/min ∼39% -61%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=151)
42.5 runs/min ∼27% -73%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
184 Points ∼100% +26%
Average Apple A13 Bionic (146 - 184, n=4)
174 Points ∼95% +19%
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
146 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
95 Points ∼52% -35%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
94 Points ∼51% -36%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=231)
69.4 Points ∼38% -52%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average Apple A13 Bionic (48819 - 49388, n=4)
49087 Points ∼100% 0%
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
48991 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
48819 Points ∼99% 0%
Apple iPhone 8
34163 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
22942 Points ∼47% -53%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
22572 Points ∼46% -54%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=762)
7617 Points ∼16% -84%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=788)
9938 ms * ∼100% -1707%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite (Chrome 80)
2138.6 ms * ∼22% -289%
Google Pixel 4 (Chrome 78)
2072.2 ms * ∼21% -277%
Apple iPhone 8
730.8 ms * ∼7% -33%
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0)
572.8 ms * ∼6% -4%
Average Apple A13 Bionic (550 - 573, n=4)
566 ms * ∼6% -3%
Apple iPhone SE 2020 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
549.9 ms * ∼6%

* ... smaller is better

Gaming - Excellent Performance, Somewhat Small Display

The Apple iPhone SE (2020) is equipped with a brand-new flagship SoC, which we benchmarked with the help of Gamebench. The results show that the frame rates remain consistent even when playing more-demanding titles such as PUBG Mobile at the highest quality settings. Since the smartphone is limited to the smaller HD resolution despite its high performance, there should be no performance issues for years to come.

The speakers produce decent audio and both the touchscreen and the gyroscope controls work well. Meanwhile, the display can feel fairly crowded in games that benefit from a wider field of view.

PUBG Mobile
Battle Bay
0102030405060Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; 0.18.0: Ø59.5 (58-60)
; Battle Bay; 4.8.22668: Ø59.5 (57-60)

Emissions - The SE 2 Remains Cool Despite Warm Surfaces

Temperature

T-Rex
Manhattan

Even while idling, a few spots on the iPhone SE can feel warm to the touch and under prolonged load, the smartphone can reach up to 41.4 C. While this temperature is fairly high, it is still far from being critical.

As GFXBench's battery test illustrates, things look even better on the inside of the Apple smartphone. The iPhone SE manages to maintain a consistent 60 FPS over the entire duration of both the T-Rex test and the demanding Manhattan test.

Max. Load
 40.5 °C
105 F
40.5 °C
105 F
36.8 °C
98 F
 
 39 °C
102 F
38.6 °C
101 F
36.5 °C
98 F
 
 36.8 °C
98 F
37.2 °C
99 F
36.5 °C
98 F
 
Maximum: 40.5 °C = 105 F
Average: 38 °C = 100 F
37.7 °C
100 F
40.2 °C
104 F
41.4 °C
107 F
36.8 °C
98 F
37.7 °C
100 F
41.3 °C
106 F
36.3 °C
97 F
38.5 °C
101 F
39.2 °C
103 F
Maximum: 41.4 °C = 107 F
Average: 38.8 °C = 102 F
Power Supply (max.)  31 °C = 88 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38 °C / 100 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 40.5 °C / 105 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 32 °C / 90 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

Pink noise diagram

The two speakers on the Apple iPhone SE (2020) produce a fairly decent sound, although they lack higher and lower frequencies and sound somewhat tinny at high volume levels.

For a better audio experience, users have the option to connect wired headphones to the Lightning port. While the included headset is a decent start, users will not find truly good sound here, either. Since Apple unfortunately does not include a headphone jack adapter, most users will likely rely on Bluetooth (SBC, AAC).

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.827.42526.227.43123.322.94021.925502825.86319.924.48019.125.510019.928.612516.53916019.64920017.549.325017.54831513.951.540013.952.850015.858.863015.260.78001466.310001468.6125013.972160013.473.9200013.874.6250014.375.931501477.1400014.576.9500014.677.9630014.576800014.772.61000015.166.5125001558.31600014.847.1SPL26.586.4N0.862.5median 14.6median 66.3Delta112.631.639.125.437.625.336.932.940.833.635.231.633.328.433.82733.520.842.82250.821.351.520.849.821.253.919.45619.558.717.761.617.962.917.866.217.368.217.468.416.768.517.267.318.26817.969.817.668.817.767.517.861.717.959.118.160.618.256.23078.41.343.6median 17.9median 61.61.37.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseApple iPhone SE 2020Apple iPhone 8
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Apple iPhone SE 2020 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.3% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Apple iPhone 8 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 21% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Energy Management - Small, Economical Phone with Wireless Charging

Energy Consumption

The iPhone SE (2020) consumes very little power and makes its competition appear like power-hungry energy monsters.

That being said, the included charger (5 watts) is an immense disappointment, since it requires more than 2 hours to fully recharge the small battery, while also being too weak to charge the iPhone at 100% load. For faster charging, an optional 18-watt charger is available. The option to charge the smartphone wirelessly is a new addition. While this option is not particularly fast, it can at least be practical in some situations.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.44 / 1.56 / 1.63 Watt
Load midlight 2.32 / 4.12 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Apple iPhone SE 2020
1822 mAh
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
4500 mAh
Average Apple A13 Bionic
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-70%
-63%
-27%
-42%
-42%
-52%
Idle Minimum *
0.44
1.01
-130%
0.56
-27%
0.54
-23%
0.58
-32%
0.625 (0.44 - 0.92, n=4)
-42%
0.886 (0.2 - 3.4, n=864)
-101%
Idle Average *
1.56
1.63
-4%
2.99
-92%
1.63
-4%
1.55
1%
2.36 (1.56 - 2.99, n=4)
-51%
1.754 (0.6 - 6.2, n=863)
-12%
Idle Maximum *
1.63
1.69
-4%
3.02
-85%
1.67
-2%
1.64
-1%
2.41 (1.63 - 3.02, n=4)
-48%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=864)
-25%
Load Average *
2.32
4.67
-101%
4.17
-80%
2.74
-18%
4.29
-85%
3.32 (2.32 - 4.17, n=4)
-43%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=858)
-76%
Load Maximum *
4.12
8.78
-113%
5.44
-32%
7.78
-89%
8.03
-95%
5.29 (4.12 - 6.18, n=4)
-28%
6.04 (1.2 - 14.2, n=858)
-47%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

In light of the 1822 mAh battery, the battery life is exceptional. The iPhone SE truly stands out when it comes to efficiency and the battery discharges relatively quickly only when the device is subjected to extreme loads.

Despite this, the runtimes are shorter compared to the competition, which can be traced back to the much bigger batteries of its competitors. Regardless, the battery life is more than sufficient for a full day of use.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
32h 18min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Safari Mobile 13.1)
11h 34min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 21min
Load (maximum brightness)
2h 23min
Apple iPhone SE 2020
1822 mAh
Google Pixel 4
2800 mAh
Apple iPhone 11
3110 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10 Lite
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
5260 mAh
Battery Runtime
-16%
56%
3%
44%
60%
Reader / Idle
1938
1007
-48%
2765
43%
1629
-16%
2504
29%
H.264
681
617
-9%
1147
68%
698
2%
1183
74%
WiFi v1.3
694
460
-34%
866
25%
585
-16%
823
19%
1112
60%
Load
143
185
29%
267
87%
202
41%
222
55%

Pros

+ bright, color-accurate display
+ snappy SoC
+ supports Wi-Fi 6 and a wide range of LTE frequencies
+ IP67 certification
+ wireless charging
+ lightweight and slim
+ good locating capabilities

Cons

- weak power adapter
- non-expandable storage
- poor screen-to-body ratio
- only a single-camera
- mediocre call quality
- only 12 months of warranty

Verdict - The iPhone 8 Refresh Was a Success, but not for Everyone

In review: Apple iPhone SE (2020)
In review: Apple iPhone SE (2020)

With the iPhone SE, Apple has released an attractive smartphone that shines with a fast processor, a great screen, fast Wi-Fi and a long update period. Additionally, it is waterproof and compatible with wireless charging.

The iPhone SE (2020) is currently the cheapest ticket into the Apple universe.

The biggest weaknesses are the poor screen-to-body ratio and the smaller display. However, those coming from an iPhone 6, 7, 8 or the first-generation SE likely will not find the latter to be much of an issue. This is exactly the target group of the iPhone SE2. In contrast, Android users are unlikely to be swayed due to the aforementioned drawbacks and the few possibilities in terms of the camera. For this group, the iPhone 11 will likely be a more appealing option.

The iPhone SE (2020) is a very polished piece of technology. Meanwhile, the Google Pixel 4 is the only real option for prospective buyers who are looking for an Android-based equivalent, which in this case offers a better screen-to-body ratio, a 90-Hz panel, a dual-camera setup and worse battery life at an identical price point.

Apple iPhone SE 2020 - 05/15/2020 v7
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
68 / 75 → 91%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
51 / 70 → 72%
Weight
93%
Battery
89%
Display
90%
Games Performance
60 / 64 → 94%
Application Performance
83 / 86 → 97%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
71 / 90 → 79%
Camera
63%
Average
79%
85%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Apple iPhone SE 2020 Review - Small phone with a fast-beating heart
Daniel Schmidt, 2020-05-18 (Update: 2020-05-21)
Daniel Schmidt
Editor of the original article: Daniel Schmidt - Managing Editor Mobile - @Tellheim
Already as a little dwarf I was fascinated by my Commodore 16 and ignited my enthusiasm for computers. With my first modem I surfed the Btx and later also the World Wide Web. The latest technology trends have always fascinated me and this is especially true for mobile devices like smartphones and tablets. For Notebookcheck, I have been on the ball since 2013 and I am looking forward to the innovations that are still to come and that we will put to the acid test for you.