Asus ZenFone 4 ZE554KL
Specifications

Secondary Camera: 8 MPix (84° wide-angle, 24mm, f/2.0)
Price comparison
Average of 36 scores (from 56 reviews)
Reviews for the Asus ZenFone 4 ZE554KL
Ambitious. With the fourth generation of the ZenFone series, Asus challenges a fiercely contested submarket by not only offering competitive pricing but also by providing their latest offering with a strong camera. Moreover, ZenUI has taken a great leap forward, making it seem positively grown up!
Source: Mobile Syrup
Archive.org versionThe ZenFone 4 marks yet another quality addition to Asus’s ZenFone line. While its lack of carrier support may mean it’s destined to remain an obscure brand for most consumers, those seeking quality inexpensive options online would do well to consider this handset.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/08/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Hexus
Archive.org versionThe Asus ZenFone 4 is something of a Marmite smartphone. Slim, relatively light and possessing an above-average main camera, punchy audio, solid battery life and decent build quality, Asus gets a number of important factors right for this upper-midrange handset. However, the list of potential gripes is equally as long, with the ZenFone 4 outfitted with a slippy back, average screen, and, for the price, only a Snapdragon 630 chipset.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/07/2018
Source: Cool Smartphone
Archive.org versionOverall, I really top handset. I’m only sorry that it’s not available on the big networks here in the UK, so you’ll need to go through Amazon or Tesco for £449.99 or perhaps on a plan via Carphone Warehouse. It is a fantastic handset and priced well considering the quality and speed of it.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/20/2017
Rating: Total score: 90% price: 91% workmanship: 91%
Source: Kitguru
Archive.org versionAll in all, it is definitely a good phone for £450. It doesn’t really do anything special, but if you want a solid mid-range phone that doesn’t have any serious weaknesses, the ASUS ZenFone 4 will likely appeal.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/11/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Phone Arena
Archive.org versionAll in all, The Zenfone 4 and Zenfone 4 Pro are both improvements over previous Zenfones. The ZenFone 4, in particular, is a solid option in its price point, so we’re pretty confident in saying that there’s never been a better time to try out a Zenfone – especially if it’s the Zenfone 4.
Comparison, online available, Long, Date: 12/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Android Central
Archive.org versionAnd that's where I feel it comes to a sad conclusion. The ZenFone 4 is an excellent phone, but it's one that many may pass over because of its price. If the ASUS thing takes your fancy, the entry-level ZenFone 4 Max with an enormous battery is £200 less. But at £449, you're paying a fairly high price for a mid-range device. Ultimately, that's where it comes unstuck.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/30/2017
Source: Tech Nave
Archive.org versionOverall, the ZenFone 4 is still a pretty good phone. My favourite features have to be the beautifully compact design, excellent battery performance and the camera is quite good too and it handles games quite well. The 8MP wide-angle is still okay in certain situations, but seriously, they really need to fix the connectivity performance. You may also find that your ZenFone 4 lags at times, so always be sure to check if there are any software updates because during my three weeks review, I've updated it three times already and I'm sure they will continue to roll out more.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/30/2017
Source: Unbox
Archive.org versionHere’s the thing — the ASUS Zenfone 4 is underrated. People don’t get to see how good it really is because they’re immediately turned off by the price. Other flagship devices are just a few thousand pesos more so it’s hard to not consider other options. The hard reality is that the ZenFone 4 faces a tough competition at its current price point.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/26/2017
Source: Stuff TV
Archive.org versionProbably doesn't signal the start of an Asus assault on our phone-buying habits, but the ZenFone 4 is perfectly potent - if a little too stuck in its ways when it comes to software.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/08/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Yugatech
Archive.org versionAll-in-all, the Zenfone 4 (SD630) is pretty much similar to its more powerful twin – same attractive and premium build, Super IPS display, and good camera quality. The only difference is the slight decrease in performance. Still, this device is capable of handling multiple tasks and a worthy addition to the Zenfone 4 lineup.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/03/2017
Foreign Reviews
Source: Inside Handy
DE→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/28/2017
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Tech Stage
DE→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/25/2017
Source: Android Mag
DE→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/23/2017
Rating: Total score: 87% price: 90% performance: 80% features: 60% display: 80% mobility: 60%
Source: Android Pit
DE→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/19/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: El Androide Libre
ES→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/14/2017
Rating: Total score: 85%
Source: Xataka
ES→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/11/2017
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 83% workmanship: 85%
Source: Game IT
ES→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Stylish design; decent cameras; nice speakers; good price.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/29/2018
Source: Tuexperto
ES→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Decent hardware; nice performance; good price.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/27/2017
Source: Geeknetic
ES→EN Archive.org versionPositive: No bloatware; great built quality; nice display; decent cameras. Negative: High price; weak processor; no NFC.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/10/2017
Source: Noticias 3D
ES→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice performance; beautiful design; good cameras.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/23/2017
Source: PC Guia
PT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 02/15/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: AndroidPit.it
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/04/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Chimera Revo
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/26/2017
Rating: Total score: 79% price: 75% features: 82% display: 80% mobility: 70% workmanship: 80% ergonomy: 80%
Source: Ridble
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/21/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Key for web
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/16/2017
Rating: Total score: 88% price: 80% features: 90% display: 90% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Techzilla.it
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/12/2017
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 70% display: 80% mobility: 85% workmanship: 80%
Source: Geek 4 You
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/09/2017
Rating: Total score: 81%
Source: Tutto Android
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/07/2017
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 72% features: 88% display: 84% mobility: 85% ergonomy: 76%
Source: Smartphone Italia
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/05/2017
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 70% features: 80% display: 90% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90% ergonomy: 90%
Source: AndroidWorld.it
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/02/2017
Rating: Total score: 78% price: 60% features: 80% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80% ergonomy: 80%
Source: HDblog.it
IT→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 09/29/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Pianeta Cellulare
IT→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice design; decent cameras; long battery life. Negative: Poor display; weak processor.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/28/2017
Source: Notebook Italia
IT→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Excellent cameras; fast system; large battery capacity; fast fingerprint sensor; good price.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/17/2017
Source: Leonardo.it Tech
IT→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice display; high performance; metal case. Negative: Mediocre design; high price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/07/2017
Source: Androidiani
IT→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Good cameras; nice performance; great built quality; decent display. Negative: Mediocre design; poor Wifi connection; high price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/19/2017
Source: XGN
NL→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/18/2017
Rating: Total score: 75%
Source: Computer Totaal
NL→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/11/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: AndroidWorld.nl
NL→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice design; good cameras. Negative: Short battery life; mediocre speakers; relatively high price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/26/2017
Source: Hitek
FR→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 12/19/2017
Rating: Total score: 70% price: 60% performance: 60% display: 80% mobility: 70%
Source: Top for Phone
FR→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Beautiful design; great built quality; nice display; long battery life; fast charging. Negative: Low performance; high DAS.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 12/17/2017
Source: CNet France
FR→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Lovely design; good dual cameras; nice display; decent speakers. Negative: Short battery life.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/15/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Chip Online TR
TR→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/19/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Log.com.tr
TR→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 85%
Source: Teknokulis
TR→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice design; high performance.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 02/15/2018
Source: Product Test
RU→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/10/2017
Rating: Total score: 82% performance: 78% display: 92% mobility: 64%
Source: Hi-Tech Mail
RU→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/04/2017
Rating: Total score: 59% performance: 70% display: 60% mobility: 50% workmanship: 60%
Source: Product Test
RU→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Nice cameras; rich set of ports. Negative: High price; sim and microSD are on the same slot.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/01/2017
Source: CZC
CZ→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/03/2017
Source: Dinside
NO→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Long battery life; great built quality; good price. Negative: Average performance; poor cameras.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/28/2017
Source: Alt om Data
DA→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 02/23/2018
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 90% performance: 50% display: 70% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80%
Source: Input
DA→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/15/2017
Rating: Total score: 70% price: 80% performance: 60% workmanship: 80%
Source: Lyd og Billede
DA→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 11/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Mere Mobil.dk
DA→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/20/2017
Rating: Total score: 50%
Source: Lyd og Billede
DA→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/18/2017
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Mobil.se
SV→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/13/2017
Rating: Total score: 74%
Source: Computerblog.ro
→EN Archive.org versionPositive: Premium design; nice main camera; high autonomy; good display. Negative: Weak processor; high price.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 02/15/2018
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 508: Integrated graphics card in the Snapdragon 630 SoC based on the Adreno 500 architecture. According to Qualcomm "up to 30% faster graphics rendering than previous designs".
Only some 3D games with very low demands are playable with these cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
SD 630: Mid-range octa-core SoC with eight ARM Cortex-A53 cpu cores at up to 2.2 GHz, an Adreno 508 GPU, a LPDDR4-2666 memory controller and a X12 LTE (Cat 13/12, 300 / 150 MBit) modem. Manufactured in the modern 14nm process. » Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.