Notebookcheck

BQ Aquaris X2 Smartphone Review

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Tanja Hinum-Balaz (translated by Katherine Bodner), 07/26/2018

Spanish mid-range smartphone with pure Android. The Spanish manufacturer BQ has launched a new version of its flagship X series. The Aquaris X2 offers pure Android and impressed us during testing with an often-overlooked feature that you can usually only find in top-range smartphones.

The successor of the popular mid-range model Aquaris X, produced by the European manufacturer BQ, whose headquarters are in Madrid, Spain, was presented at the beginning of this year and has been available for purchase for a few weeks now. In exchange for 320 Euros (~$372), you will receive an FHD+ 5.65-inch display in the 18:9 format, 3 GB of RAM and a Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 SoC. 

Please note: This device is not widely available in the US at the time of writing. It can be purchased from the BQ website with an additional delivery fee of 65 Euros (~$80).

Unlike last year's model, BQ has now decided to join the Android One program, which includes the camera recognition software Google Lens. This makes the Aquaris X2 one of the first smartphones that incorporates Google Lens into its camera app. Google Lens uses an AI-based recognition system to give you information about any items that you point your camera at.

There is another version of the Aquaris X2 (the Aquaris X2 Pro) that offers 64 GB of storage and 4 GB of RAM for about 390 Euros (~$460). We were given the smaller version for testing, which has the configuration mentioned above.

Competition is high in this mid-range price segment between $350 and $450, which is why our list of comparison devices is rather long. We have included the Motorola Moto G6 Plus, the Nokia 6, the Xiaomi Redmi Note 5, the Samsung Galaxy A6 (2018) and the Honor 7X. The Nokia 7 Plus, which is only slightly above our test unit's price range, also has Android One and a more powerful Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 SoC. The latter is also used in the Xiaomi Mi 6X imported from China and recently tested on Notebookcheck. The Xiaomi smartphone, however, only costs about $300. In Europe, this phone is marketed as the Xiaomi Mi A2 and also includes Android One.

BQ Aquaris X2 (Aquaris Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
5.65 inch 18:9, 2160 x 1080 pixel 427 PPI, Multitouch - 10 capacitive points, IPS LCD, In-Cell Corning Gorilla Glass, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 20.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm TRRS audio jack (CTIA), Card Reader: microSD card for up to 256 GB (uses second SIM slot), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, eCompass, gyroscope, Hall sensor, USB-OTG, Miracast, WiFi-Calling, Protection against dust and water (IP52)
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, 4G+ (Cat 6):1 (2100) / 3 (1800) / 7 (2600) / 20 (800) 3G: I (2100) / II (1900) / V (850) / VIII (900) 2G: 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.3 x 150.7 x 72.3 ( = 0.33 x 5.93 x 2.85 in)
Battery
3100 mAh, QuickCharge 4+
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual-Camera Samsung S5K2L8, 12 MP + Samsung S5K5E8, 5 MP aperture ƒ/1.8, 1.29 μm/pixel 6 Largan lenses dual-tone flash autofocus with phase detection Dual PD video resolution [email protected] video stabilizer (Vidhance) slow motion ([email protected])
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix Samsung S5K4H7, 8 MP aperture ƒ/2.0, 1.12 μm/pixel 4 lenses front flash video resolution [email protected]
Additional features
Speakers: stereosound Qualcomm Aqstic Smart PA Qualcomm aptX technology for Bluetooth, Keyboard: onscreen, USB 2.0 Type-C on USB cable, Qualcomm QuickCharge 3.0 adapter, paperwork, Android One, 24 Months Warranty, SAR values head: 1.495 W/Kg (10 g) body:1.451 W/Kg (10 g), fanless
Weight
163 g ( = 5.75 oz / 0.36 pounds), Power Supply: 59 g ( = 2.08 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
319 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The case of the Aquaris X2 has a glass surface over the display, a metal frame and a plastic back, which can come in the colors "Sand Gold" or "Carbon Black". The back is slightly curved and cannot be removed. Our Sand Gold version is matte and gives way slightly under pressure, which is not a good sign for quality. At least the case has an IP52 certification, which means it is protected against dust and water drops (maximum amount of water: 3-5 mm³/min for a maximum of 10 minutes). The battery cannot be removed by the user. The metal frame gives the smartphone decent stability but contributes to its weight of 163 grams. The phone is nice to handle as it is only 8 mm thick and 151 x 72 mm large. The volume control and power buttons are positioned on the right side of the case and are easy to reach. They also have a comfortable pressure point and sit nice and tight. The sides and areas at the top and bottom of the Aquaris X2's Infinity display have turned out rather large. The display-to-surface ratio is therefore only 76%. Compared to the 70% of its predecessor, the Aquaris X, this is still an improvement. 

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

The BQ Aquaris X2 features a fingerprint reader, Wi-Fi calling, a compass and a configurable status LED. The wireless transfer of display content to an external display is also supported with Miracast.

Our test unit's internal eMMC storage device has a capacity of 32 GB, although users only have about 21 GB available ex-works. It is possible to expand the dual-SIM smartphone's storage to up to 256 GB by placing a microSD card into one of the two SIM slots. However, the card cannot be recognized as internal storage.

The 3100-mAh battery can be recharged via the USB Type-C 3.1 port positioned on the bottom of the device. You can also connect peripheral devices such as external keyboards or USB sticks with the USB port via an OTG adapter. Headphones can be plugged into the 3.5-mm audio jack.

Software - fast updates thanks to Android One

BQ has decided to use Google's Android One for its Aquaris X2, which also means that the device has pure Android. The Android One program does not allow the manufacturer to make changes to the software or add their own user interface. This speeds up the distribution of updates and security patches for the various phones. The Aquaris X2 on Android will therefore receive the newest software updates for two years and security patches for three years. The BQ smartphone is shipped with Android 8.1.0 Oreo. The only additional app that is preinstalled on the phone is the BQ Plus app. It also has an Ambient Display and double-tap-to-wake functionality to turn on the screen.

Communication and GPS

Wireless communication is enabled by Bluetooth 5.0 and a near-field-communication chip (NFC). The integrated Wi-Fi module supports IEEE 802.11 ac/b/g/n (dual-band) and both the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands. The range and attenuation at close proximity to the router (Telekom Speedport, W921V) are good at -38 dBM.

The Qualcomm X12 LTE modem in the Aquaris X2 supports download rates of up to 300 Mb/s and 50 Mb/s upload in LTE networks. Our test unit is a dual-SIM phone, which means that you can use up to two nano-SIM cards simultaneously. The hybrid slot does not have any limitations in terms of LTE frequencies. The smartphone's reception is good in the German D2 Vodafone network.

The Wi-Fi transfer rates between the smartphone and our reference router Linksys EA 8500 are impressive. The data transfer rates remain at around 300 Mb/s throughout the test; this is a good result for this price range. 

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HTC U12 Plus
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
579 MBit/s ∼100% +111%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
310 MBit/s ∼54% +13%
Nokia 6 2018
Adreno 508, 630, 32 GB eMMC Flash
289 MBit/s ∼50% +5%
BQ Aquaris X2
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
275 MBit/s ∼47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
268 MBit/s ∼46% -3%
Nokia 7 Plus
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
247 MBit/s ∼43% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
246 MBit/s ∼42% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=311)
212 MBit/s ∼37% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 32 GB eMMC Flash
120 MBit/s ∼21% -56%
Huawei Honor 7X
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
46.4 MBit/s ∼8% -83%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HTC U12 Plus
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
573 MBit/s ∼100% +78%
Nokia 6 2018
Adreno 508, 630, 32 GB eMMC Flash
345 MBit/s ∼60% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
333 MBit/s ∼58% +3%
BQ Aquaris X2
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
322 (min: 275) MBit/s ∼56%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
311 MBit/s ∼54% -3%
Nokia 7 Plus
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
307 MBit/s ∼54% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
Adreno 509, 636, 32 GB eMMC Flash
273 MBit/s ∼48% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=311)
206 MBit/s ∼36% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 32 GB eMMC Flash
123 MBit/s ∼21% -62%
Huawei Honor 7X
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
47 MBit/s ∼8% -85%
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors
GPS test indoors
GPS test indoors

Mobile localization is taken care of by the satellite systems GPS, GALILEO and GLONASS. Positioning works best outdoors, where the phone found our location quickly and within four meters. It is also possible to get a signal indoors, but this is not strong enough to locate us. In addition, we tested the phone's localization capabilities by taking it on a 9-km bike ride together with the professional navigation system Garmin Edge 500. There was a difference of only 10 meters between the two systems at the end of the ride. This is a good result and the device should be usable for navigating in the car or on a bike.

GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS BQ Aquaris X2
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500

Telephone & Call Quality

The telephone app in our test unit is the standard Android application. It offers fast access to your contacts and favorites. The call quality of the BQ smartphone is very good and both sides can understand the other very well during our test call. The speakers and microphones also make video calls very comfortable when there is not too much background noise. The Aquaris X2 supports modern standards such as VoLTE (this is supposed to be added in a later update according to BQ) and Wi-Fi calling.

Cameras - a dual camera setup for the BQ phone

Photo taken with front camera
Photo taken with front camera

The dual camera system in the Aquaris X2 consists of a Samsung S5K2L8 sensor with 12 MP and a Samsung S5K5E8 sensor with 5 MP. The 12-MP CMOS sensor on the main camera (on the back of the device) has a pixel size of 1.29 μm, so photos should be very bright. Videos are recorded with the video stabilizer "Vidhance" at up to 4K and 30fps.

The camera quality is good for a mid-range smartphone and the shutter speed for autofocus with phase detection is quite fast. The photos show a lot of details and are sufficiently sharp. Colors appear natural but tend to be a little pale and sometimes have a slight red cast.

We noticed a big improvement compared to the predecessor when taking low-light pictures. The aperture of f/1.8 enables the Aquaris X2 to take brighter pictures that are of decent quality if there is sufficient ambient light. But still, taking photos in dark surroundings remains the largest weakness of the BQ Aquaris X2. The camera often has difficulties focusing properly in the dark and takes photos with ragged edges and image noise. 

The front camera has 8 MP, an aperture of f/2.0 and a flash. The Samsung S5K4H7 sensor records videos at 1080p and 30 fps and takes very good photos, although image sharpness does suffer a little from the fixed focus.

The BQ camera app was adapted for Google Lens and functions such as Play Photos, time lapse, filters and 10x zoom. Screenshots are no longer displayed within the camera app.

Photo taken in auto mode
Photo taken in auto mode
Photo taken in HDR mode
Photo taken in HDR mode
Photo taken in portrait mode
Photo taken in portrait mode

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 3
click to load images

Accessories and Warranty

Apart from the smartphone itself, the box of our test unit contained a user's manual, a USB cable plus a modular 18-W power supply (9V, 2A).

The phone has a warranty of 24 months. You can additionally insure the device against theft or other issues for another 50 Euros (~$60).

Input Devices & Handling

The smartphone is operated via three on-screen buttons in the bottom third of the display. The 5.65-inch display responds precisely to inputs even in the corners. As expected, the device uses the standard Google keyboard Gboard.

The fingerprint reader on the back unlocks the BQ smartphone quite quickly. It also does not take very long for the display to turn on from being in standby.

Display - bright 2:1 IPS panel

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

Like its predecessor, the Aquaris X2 is equipped with an IPS LTPS LC display with Full HD resolution. Now, however, it has a 2:1 format and a diagonal of 5.65-inches. This means that the pixel density is around 427 ppi. Content looks very crisp.

The display is very bright at over 600 cd/m² and has an even brightness distribution of 96%. When the ambient light sensor is turned on, the Aquaris X2 cannot reach its full luminosity (576 cd/m²). During our realistic APL50 measurement, which simulates an even distribution of bright and dark areas on the IPS screen, the display reached a brightness of 635 cd/m².

The screen has PWM flickering at a frequency of 2315 Hz at lower brightness levels up to 38%. This would not have been necessary considering the display technology used. 

630
cd/m²
616
cd/m²
608
cd/m²
626
cd/m²
631
cd/m²
622
cd/m²
625
cd/m²
616
cd/m²
625
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 631 cd/m² Average: 622.1 cd/m² Minimum: 12.81 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 631 cd/m²
Contrast: 1034:1 (Black: 0.61 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.5 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 5.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
99.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.38
BQ Aquaris X2
IPS LCD, 2160x1080, 5.65
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.9
Nokia 6 2018
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Nokia 7 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 6
Xiaomi Mi 6X
LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Huawei Honor 7X
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.93
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
Super AMOLED, 1480x720, 5.6
HTC U12 Plus
Super LCD 6, 2880x1440, 6
Screen
24%
-22%
21%
-13%
13%
19%
10%
22%
Brightness middle
631
761
21%
417
-34%
458
-27%
459
-27%
518
-18%
533.2
-15%
453
-28%
395
-37%
Brightness
622
723
16%
421
-32%
463
-26%
441
-29%
532
-14%
511
-18%
459
-26%
402
-35%
Brightness Distribution
96
90
-6%
88
-8%
92
-4%
91
-5%
94
-2%
88
-8%
93
-3%
90
-6%
Black Level *
0.61
0.69
-13%
0.61
-0%
0.22
64%
0.47
23%
0.23
62%
0.35
43%
0.37
39%
Contrast
1034
1103
7%
684
-34%
2082
101%
977
-6%
2252
118%
1523
47%
1068
3%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.5
2.4
56%
6.1
-11%
4
27%
5.8
-5%
5.66
-3%
2.83
49%
2.6
53%
1.6
71%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.5
5.2
39%
11.2
-32%
7.4
13%
10.7
-26%
10.32
-21%
6.72
21%
9.2
-8%
3.4
60%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.6
1.8
68%
7.1
-27%
4.7
16%
7.3
-30%
6.8
-21%
3.7
34%
1.6
71%
1.1
80%
Gamma
2.38 92%
2.21 100%
2.16 102%
2.19 100%
2.28 96%
2.269 97%
1.9 116%
2.07 106%
2.14 103%
CCT
7531 86%
6312 103%
8362 78%
7425 88%
7984 81%
8564 76%
6918 94%
6356 102%
6536 99%

* ... 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 detected 2315 Hz ≤ 38 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2315 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 38 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2315 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8929 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The combination of great brightness with a black value of 0.61 cd/m² means that our display has a good contrast ratio of about 1000:1. Our APL 50 measurements showed a similar contrast ratio (1043:1) as the black value remains constant at evenly distributed light and dark areas.

The display analysis with the help of our spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software shows a relatively high color deviation for this price range at 5.5 for colors and 5.6 for grayscales. The color temperature of the display is rather cool at 7500 Kelvin. This results in a slight blue cast.

CalMAN color accuracy (sRGB)
CalMAN color accuracy (sRGB)
CalMAN grayscales (sRGB)
CalMAN grayscales (sRGB)
CalMAN color space (sRGB)
CalMAN color space (sRGB)
CalMAN color saturation (sRGB)
CalMAN color saturation (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
18.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4.8 ms rise
↘ 14 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. » 17 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
44.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.4 ms rise
↘ 24.4 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. » 68 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

The viewing-angle stability of the liquid crystal display is very good. Colors do not invert at any angle and we did not notice any ghosting either. The Aquaris X2 can be used quite well outdoors thanks to its great brightness. Reflections on the display are not too strong either, but they are noticeable when it is sunny.

Sunny with reflections
Sunny with reflections
Shade
Shade

Performance - the Snapdragon 636 enables smooth operation

BQ has equipped the Aquaris X2 with a new Qualcomm SoC - the Snapdragon 636. This American mid-range processor made by the San Diego-based semiconductor manufacturer integrates eight 64-bit cores of its own 14 nm Kryo 260 architecture. The graphics card is an Adreno 509 that supports modern interfaces such as Vulkan and OpenGL ES 3.1.

Thanks to the slim UI the Aquaris X2 is very fast. Operation is mostly smooth thanks to the Snapdragon 636 combined with 3 GB of RAM. We did notice occasional stutters, particularly when the processor had to handle multi-tasking.  

The BQ smartphone also did a good job at our benchmarks and was placed slightly above its Snapdragon 630 competition. However, there is still a big difference between the results of a Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 combined with an Adreno 512, like in the Nokia 7 Plus or Xiaomi Mi 6X, and those of the Aquaris X2.

AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
116748 Points ∼46%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
90347 Points ∼35% -23%
Nokia 6 2018
90435 Points ∼35% -23%
Nokia 7 Plus
141701 Points ∼55% +21%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
140714 Points ∼55% +21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
115654 Points ∼45% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
81992 Points ∼32% -30%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
61794 Points ∼24% -47%
HTC U12 Plus
255739 Points ∼100% +119%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (115565 - 138661, n=9)
119151 Points ∼47% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=171)
117893 Points ∼46% +1%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
5706 Points ∼66%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
4875 Points ∼57% -15%
Nokia 6 2018
4719 Points ∼55% -17%
Nokia 7 Plus
6077 Points ∼71% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5995 Points ∼70% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
5642 Points ∼66% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
4859 Points ∼56% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3809 Points ∼44% -33%
HTC U12 Plus
8601 Points ∼100% +51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5611 - 6068, n=9)
5101 Points ∼59% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=256)
4551 Points ∼53% -20%
Work performance score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
6437 Points ∼63%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
5712 Points ∼56% -11%
Nokia 6 2018
5484 Points ∼53% -15%
Nokia 7 Plus
6825 Points ∼66% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
6723 Points ∼66% +4%
Huawei Honor 7X
6213 Points ∼61% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
4878 Points ∼48% -24%
HTC U12 Plus
10264 Points ∼100% +59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (6040 - 6999, n=8)
6422 Points ∼63% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (4058 - 13531, n=424)
4956 Points ∼48% -23%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1059 Points ∼74%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
925 Points ∼64% -13%
Nokia 6 2018
895 Points ∼62% -15%
Nokia 7 Plus
1101 Points ∼77% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1108 Points ∼77% +5%
Huawei Honor 7X
724 Points ∼50% -32%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
732 Points ∼51% -31%
HTC U12 Plus
1437 Points ∼100% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1018 - 1088, n=8)
1055 Points ∼73% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=500)
697 Points ∼49% -34%
Graphics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1597 Points ∼20%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1523 Points ∼19% -5%
Nokia 6 2018
1520 Points ∼19% -5%
Nokia 7 Plus
2298 Points ∼29% +44%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2295 Points ∼29% +44%
Huawei Honor 7X
845 Points ∼11% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
533 Points ∼7% -67%
HTC U12 Plus
7945 Points ∼100% +397%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1590 - 1625, n=8)
1604 Points ∼20% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=500)
1735 Points ∼22% +9%
Memory (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
2016 Points ∼55%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1213 Points ∼33% -40%
Nokia 6 2018
1161 Points ∼32% -42%
Nokia 7 Plus
2503 Points ∼69% +24%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2470 Points ∼68% +23%
Huawei Honor 7X
1788 Points ∼49% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
1096 Points ∼30% -46%
HTC U12 Plus
3641 Points ∼100% +81%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1461 - 2492, n=8)
2040 Points ∼56% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=500)
1243 Points ∼34% -38%
System (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
4434 Points ∼56%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
3249 Points ∼41% -27%
Nokia 6 2018
3237 Points ∼41% -27%
Nokia 7 Plus
4976 Points ∼63% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
4797 Points ∼61% +8%
Huawei Honor 7X
2899 Points ∼37% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
2201 Points ∼28% -50%
HTC U12 Plus
7862 Points ∼100% +77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4320 - 5348, n=8)
4594 Points ∼58% +4%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=500)
2509 Points ∼32% -43%
Overall (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1972 Points ∼46%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1535 Points ∼36% -22%
Nokia 6 2018
1504 Points ∼35% -24%
Nokia 7 Plus
2369 Points ∼56% +20%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2343 Points ∼55% +19%
Huawei Honor 7X
1334 Points ∼31% -32%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
985 Points ∼23% -50%
HTC U12 Plus
4252 Points ∼100% +116%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1847 - 2156, n=8)
1991 Points ∼47% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=504)
1253 Points ∼29% -36%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
4309 Points ∼34%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
3763 Points ∼30% -13%
Nokia 6 2018
3690 Points ∼30% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5486 Points ∼44% +27%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4578 Points ∼37% +6%
Huawei Honor 7X
2772 Points ∼22% -36%
HTC U12 Plus
12493 Points ∼100% +190%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4309 - 5041, n=9)
4555 Points ∼36% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=198)
4508 Points ∼36% +5%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
4974 Points ∼56%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
4011 Points ∼46% -19%
Nokia 6 2018
883 Points ∼10% -82%
Nokia 7 Plus
5867 Points ∼67% +18%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
5843 Points ∼66% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4943 Points ∼56% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
3342 Points ∼38% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3741 Points ∼42% -25%
HTC U12 Plus
8812 Points ∼100% +77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4781 - 5426, n=9)
4974 Points ∼56% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=248)
4298 Points ∼49% -14%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1323 Points ∼31%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
822 Points ∼20% -38%
Nokia 6 2018
4210 Points ∼100% +218%
Nokia 7 Plus
1646 Points ∼39% +24%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1620 Points ∼38% +22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1339 Points ∼32% +1%
Huawei Honor 7X
869 Points ∼21% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
732 Points ∼17% -45%
HTC U12 Plus
2429 Points ∼58% +84%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1323 - 1506, n=9)
1354 Points ∼32% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=249)
1267 Points ∼30% -4%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
2353 Points ∼74%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1822 Points ∼57% -23%
Nokia 6 2018
1738 Points ∼54% -26%
Nokia 7 Plus
2749 Points ∼86% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2757 Points ∼86% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2346 Points ∼73% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
1553 Points ∼49% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
1709 Points ∼53% -27%
HTC U12 Plus
3197 Points ∼100% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (2251 - 2634, n=9)
2361 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼51% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
816 Points ∼23%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
721 Points ∼21% -12%
Nokia 6 2018
707 Points ∼20% -13%
Nokia 7 Plus
1161 Points ∼33% +42%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1164 Points ∼33% +43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
797 Points ∼23% -2%
Huawei Honor 7X
338 Points ∼10% -59%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
211 Points ∼6% -74%
HTC U12 Plus
3488 Points ∼100% +327%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (797 - 818, n=9)
813 Points ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼34% +45%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
955 Points ∼28%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
833 Points ∼24% -13%
Nokia 6 2018
814 Points ∼24% -15%
Nokia 7 Plus
1332 Points ∼39% +39%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1335 Points ∼39% +40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
934 Points ∼27% -2%
Huawei Honor 7X
409 Points ∼12% -57%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
262 Points ∼8% -73%
HTC U12 Plus
3419 Points ∼100% +258%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (934 - 962, n=9)
951 Points ∼28% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼33% +19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
2338 Points ∼84%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1802 Points ∼65% -23%
Nokia 6 2018
1733 Points ∼62% -26%
Nokia 7 Plus
2734 Points ∼99% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2680 Points ∼97% +15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
2379 Points ∼86% +2%
Huawei Honor 7X
1656 Points ∼60% -29%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
1705 Points ∼61% -27%
HTC U12 Plus
2774 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1349 - 2626, n=9)
2266 Points ∼82% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=385)
1538 Points ∼55% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1337 Points ∼24%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1258 Points ∼22% -6%
Nokia 6 2018
1249 Points ∼22% -7%
Nokia 7 Plus
1895 Points ∼34% +42%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
1891 Points ∼34% +41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1313 Points ∼23% -2%
Huawei Honor 7X
528 Points ∼9% -61%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
264 Points ∼5% -80%
HTC U12 Plus
5637 Points ∼100% +322%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1313 - 1353, n=9)
1333 Points ∼24% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=385)
1627 Points ∼29% +22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1478 Points ∼32%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
1348 Points ∼29% -9%
Nokia 6 2018
1332 Points ∼29% -10%
Nokia 7 Plus
2035 Points ∼44% +38%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2023 Points ∼44% +37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1458 Points ∼32% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
622 Points ∼14% -58%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
325 Points ∼7% -78%
HTC U12 Plus
4585 Points ∼100% +210%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1458 - 1493, n=9)
1477 Points ∼32% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=393)
1384 Points ∼30% -6%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
16747 Points ∼50%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
12845 Points ∼38% -23%
Nokia 6 2018
13196 Points ∼39% -21%
Nokia 7 Plus
20085 Points ∼59% +20%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
21016 Points ∼62% +25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
17471 Points ∼52% +4%
Huawei Honor 7X
13372 Points ∼40% -20%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
6184 Points ∼18% -63%
HTC U12 Plus
33810 Points ∼100% +102%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (16719 - 19365, n=9)
17286 Points ∼51% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=540)
12875 Points ∼38% -23%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
20806 Points ∼25%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
18449 Points ∼23% -11%
Nokia 6 2018
18572 Points ∼23% -11%
Nokia 7 Plus
29333 Points ∼36% +41%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
28984 Points ∼35% +39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
20909 Points ∼26% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
10332 Points ∼13% -50%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
5376 Points ∼7% -74%
HTC U12 Plus
81726 Points ∼100% +293%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (20610 - 20909, n=9)
20801 Points ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=540)
17971 Points ∼22% -14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
19743 Points ∼32%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
16818 Points ∼27% -15%
Nokia 6 2018
17030 Points ∼27% -14%
Nokia 7 Plus
26610 Points ∼43% +35%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
26731 Points ∼43% +35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
20033 Points ∼32% +1%
Huawei Honor 7X
10882 Points ∼18% -45%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
5537 Points ∼9% -72%
HTC U12 Plus
62152 Points ∼100% +215%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (19714 - 20404, n=9)
19905 Points ∼32% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=541)
15098 Points ∼24% -24%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
36 fps ∼37%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
30 fps ∼31% -17%
Nokia 6 2018
30 fps ∼31% -17%
Nokia 7 Plus
50 fps ∼51% +39%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
50 fps ∼51% +39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
35 fps ∼36% -3%
Huawei Honor 7X
19 fps ∼19% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
12 fps ∼12% -67%
HTC U12 Plus
98 fps ∼100% +172%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (35 - 36, n=9)
35.7 fps ∼36% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=565)
31.3 fps ∼32% -13%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
34 fps ∼58%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
28 fps ∼47% -18%
Nokia 6 2018
31 fps ∼53% -9%
Nokia 7 Plus
48 fps ∼81% +41%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
48 fps ∼81% +41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
35 fps ∼59% +3%
Huawei Honor 7X
18 fps ∼31% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
19 fps ∼32% -44%
HTC U12 Plus
59 fps ∼100% +74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (33 - 40, n=9)
34.9 fps ∼59% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=568)
24.9 fps ∼42% -27%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
16 fps ∼22%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
14 fps ∼19% -12%
Nokia 6 2018
14 fps ∼19% -12%
Nokia 7 Plus
23 fps ∼32% +44%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
23 fps ∼32% +44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
16 fps ∼22% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
8 fps ∼11% -50%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
5.4 fps ∼8% -66%
HTC U12 Plus
72 fps ∼100% +350%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (16 - 16, n=9)
16 fps ∼22% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=487)
16.8 fps ∼23% +5%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
15 fps ∼43%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
13 fps ∼37% -13%
Nokia 6 2018
15 fps ∼43% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
22 fps ∼63% +47%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
21 fps ∼60% +40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
15 fps ∼43% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
7.9 fps ∼23% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
10 fps ∼29% -33%
HTC U12 Plus
35 fps ∼100% +133%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (14 - 18, n=9)
15.2 fps ∼43% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=490)
16 fps ∼46% +7%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
10 fps ∼26%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
9.8 fps ∼25% -2%
Nokia 6 2018
9.8 fps ∼25% -2%
Nokia 7 Plus
14 fps ∼36% +40%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
15 fps ∼38% +50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
9.8 fps ∼25% -2%
Huawei Honor 7X
4.7 fps ∼12% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3.2 fps ∼8% -68%
HTC U12 Plus
39 fps ∼100% +290%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (9.8 - 10, n=9)
9.98 fps ∼26% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼37% +43%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
9.8 fps ∼32%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
9.4 fps ∼30% -4%
Nokia 6 2018
10 fps ∼32% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus
15 fps ∼48% +53%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
14 fps ∼45% +43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
10 fps ∼32% +2%
Huawei Honor 7X
4.5 fps ∼15% -54%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
6.9 fps ∼22% -30%
HTC U12 Plus
31 fps ∼100% +216%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (9.1 - 12, n=9)
9.97 fps ∼32% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼45% +42%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
6.3 fps ∼18%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
5.6 fps ∼16% -11%
Nokia 6 2018
5.6 fps ∼16% -11%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.3 fps ∼24% +32%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
9 fps ∼26% +43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
6.3 fps ∼18% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
2.9 fps ∼8% -54%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
2 fps ∼6% -68%
HTC U12 Plus
35 fps ∼100% +456%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (6.3 - 6.3, n=9)
6.3 fps ∼18% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼28% +57%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
6 fps ∼30%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
5.3 fps ∼27% -12%
Nokia 6 2018
5.9 fps ∼30% -2%
Nokia 7 Plus
9.1 fps ∼46% +52%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
8.6 fps ∼43% +43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
6 fps ∼30% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
2.9 fps ∼15% -52%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
4 fps ∼20% -33%
HTC U12 Plus
20 fps ∼100% +233%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5.7 - 7.4, n=9)
6.11 fps ∼31% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼44% +48%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
260 Points ∼38%
Nokia 7 Plus
349 Points ∼50% +34%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
353 Points ∼51% +36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
255 Points ∼37% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (255 - 260, n=2)
258 Points ∼37% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (36.3 - 2754, n=76)
693 Points ∼100% +167%
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1
3D Graphics Tests (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
1898 Points ∼83%
Nokia 7 Plus
2286 Points ∼100% +20%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
2290 Points ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
1582 Points ∼69% -17%
Huawei Honor 7X
1076 Points ∼47% -43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (1582 - 1898, n=2)
1740 Points ∼76% -8%
Average of class Smartphone (178 - 5597, n=217)
1180 Points ∼52% -38%
2D Graphics Tests (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
5587 Points ∼81%
Nokia 7 Plus
6900 Points ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
6741 Points ∼98% +21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
5536 Points ∼80% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
3594 Points ∼52% -36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (5536 - 5587, n=2)
5562 Points ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 17549, n=218)
3538 Points ∼51% -37%
Memory Tests (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
28859 Points ∼4%
Nokia 7 Plus
33919 Points ∼5% +18%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
48089 Points ∼7% +67%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
34899 Points ∼5% +21%
Huawei Honor 7X
62513 Points ∼9% +117%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (28859 - 34899, n=2)
31879 Points ∼5% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (678 - 31742300, n=218)
660863 Points ∼100% +2190%
Disk Tests (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
10762 Points ∼49%
Nokia 7 Plus
12634 Points ∼58% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
12592 Points ∼58% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
10661 Points ∼49% -1%
Huawei Honor 7X
5891 Points ∼27% -45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (10661 - 10762, n=2)
10712 Points ∼49% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1033 - 153275, n=217)
21754 Points ∼100% +102%
CPU Tests (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
157795 Points ∼84%
Nokia 7 Plus
186416 Points ∼99% +18%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
188411 Points ∼100% +19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
158167 Points ∼84% 0%
Huawei Honor 7X
122441 Points ∼65% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (157795 - 158167, n=2)
157981 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1140 - 486197, n=218)
62847 Points ∼33% -60%
System (sort by value)
BQ Aquaris X2
7839 Points ∼82%
Nokia 7 Plus
9453 Points ∼99% +21%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
9533 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
7001 Points ∼73% -11%
Huawei Honor 7X
4710 Points ∼49% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (7001 - 7839, n=2)
7420 Points ∼78% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (2016 - 21253, n=218)
4244 Points ∼45% -46%

Legend

 
BQ Aquaris X2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Motorola Moto G6 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Qualcomm Adreno 508, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 6 2018 Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Qualcomm Adreno 508, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Nokia 7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi 6X Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Honor 7X HiSilicon Kirin 659, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
HTC U12 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

The browser speed in Chrome version 67 is satisfactory. It takes relatively long to load more complex pages and scrolling can be a little irregular in this case.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
87.036 Points ∼100% +97%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
53.89 Points ∼62% +22%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
52.139 Points ∼60% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (44.2 - 51.5, n=9)
45.4 Points ∼52% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
44.322 Points ∼51% 0%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
44.245 Points ∼51%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=423)
36.7 Points ∼42% -17%
Huawei Honor 7X (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
31.299 Points ∼36% -29%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
28.167 Points ∼32% -36%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus (Chrome 66)
27.971 Points ∼32% -37%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
20.877 Points ∼24% -53%
Octane V2 - Total Score
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
16285 Points ∼100% +81%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
10945 Points ∼67% +22%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
9995 Points ∼61% +11%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
9004 Points ∼55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (8273 - 9746, n=9)
8744 Points ∼54% -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
8422 Points ∼52% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=559)
5558 Points ∼34% -38%
Huawei Honor 7X (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
5302 Points ∼33% -41%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus (Chrome 66)
5011 Points ∼31% -44%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
4993 Points ∼31% -45%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
3739 Points ∼23% -58%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
11807.6 ms * ∼100% -149%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=579)
11477 ms * ∼97% -142%
Nokia 6 2018 (Browser: Chrome 65)
9922.7 ms * ∼84% -110%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus (Chrome 66)
9796.9 ms * ∼83% -107%
Huawei Honor 7X (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
8684.3 ms * ∼74% -83%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
4768.9 ms * ∼40% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
4740 ms * ∼40% -0%
BQ Aquaris X2
4733 ms * ∼40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4105 - 4820, n=9)
4630 ms * ∼39% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
3937.3 ms * ∼33% +17%
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
2409.6 ms * ∼20% +49%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
257 Points ∼100% +57%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
173 Points ∼67% +5%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
168 Points ∼65% +2%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
164 Points ∼64%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 67)
158 Points ∼61% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (147 - 184, n=7)
158 Points ∼61% -4%
Nokia 6 2018
117 Points ∼46% -29%
Huawei Honor 7X (Chrome 63.0.3239.111)
111 Points ∼43% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼43% -32%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus (Chrome 66)
108 Points ∼42% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
89 Points ∼35% -46%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66)
101 Points ∼100% +87%
Average of class Smartphone (25 - 161, n=63)
63.6 Points ∼63% +18%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
63 Points ∼62% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
61 Points ∼60% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (Chrome 66)
56 Points ∼55% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (54 - 61, n=6)
56 Points ∼55% +4%
BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67)
54 Points ∼53%
Motorola Moto G6 Plus (Chrome 66)
39 Points ∼39% -28%
Nokia 6 2018 (Chrome 66)
35 Points ∼35% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137)
31 Points ∼31% -43%

* ... smaller is better

The storage capacity of 32 GB is rather low for a mid-range smartphone that costs over $350 - particularly as our eMMC storage device is not the fastest around, which you can see from the results of the AndroBench benchmark. After setup, the user only has 21 GB left available.

The storage capacity can be expanded via a microSD card. We measured the slot's speed with our reference card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 (max. read: 270 MB/s, write 150 MB/s) and the results are on the same level as those of our comparison devices.

BQ Aquaris X2Motorola Moto G6 PlusNokia 6 2018Nokia 7 PlusXiaomi Mi 6XXiaomi Redmi Note 5Huawei Honor 7XSamsung Galaxy A6 2018HTC U12 PlusAverage 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
65%
-7%
13%
6%
-1%
1%
-23%
161%
-16%
-21%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
61.29 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
62.31
0%
62.4
0%
30.55
-51%
65.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
5%
63.64 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
47.3 (3.4 - 87.1, n=113)
-24%
45.8 (3.4 - 87.1, n=323)
-26%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
82.91 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
83.42 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
82.21
-1%
83.4
1%
52.65
-36%
81.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
84.32 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
66.4 (8.2 - 96.5, n=113)
-20%
64 (8.2 - 96.5, n=323)
-23%
Random Write 4KB
14.4
62.76
336%
15.3
6%
19.62
36%
6.89
-52%
16.3
13%
20.24
41%
10.68
-26%
104.24
624%
18.9 (0.75 - 77.3, n=151)
31%
16.1 (0.14 - 164, n=608)
12%
Random Read 4KB
43.9
58.39
33%
38.78
-12%
54.65
24%
72.98
66%
48.9
11%
81.4
85%
24.54
-44%
118.14
169%
36.3 (3.59 - 117, n=151)
-17%
38.3 (1.59 - 173, n=608)
-13%
Sequential Write 256KB
188.7
216.09
15%
118.32
-37%
211.6
12%
203.7
8%
121.6
-36%
127.87
-32%
100.64
-47%
195.82
4%
95 (14.8 - 189, n=151)
-50%
79.8 (2.99 - 246, n=608)
-58%
Sequential Read 256KB
270.5
286.64
6%
272.59
1%
283.12
5%
271.98
1%
287.6
6%
265.31
-2%
208.44
-23%
709.11
162%
230 (25.8 - 440, n=151)
-15%
230 (12.1 - 895, n=608)
-15%

Games

The Adreno 509 integrated in our Qualcomm SoC offers sufficient processing power to display demanding games from the Android Play Store such as the Asphalt racing games Xtreme or Airborne and the ego-shooter Dead Trigger 2. Our measurements of the refresh rate while gaming, measured with the Gamebench app, showed a relatively constant 30 fps even at high graphics details.

We encountered no issues when using the touchscreen and gyroscope while gaming on the Aquaris X2.

Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettingsValue
 high30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Dead Trigger 2
 SettingsValue
 high30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 SettingsValue
 high HD31 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!

Emissions

Temperature - a cool BQ phone

The surface temperature of the Aquaris X2 raises no issues. It reaches only 37 °C under continuous load, which is absolutely fine.

We tested the Qualcomm SoC's performance under continuous load with the GFXBench battery test. The Aquaris X2 hardly lost any performance during the demanding Manhattan test (Open GL ES 3.1) - not even 1% after 30 rounds.

Max. Load
 38.3 °C
101 F
37.4 °C
99 F
39 °C
102 F
 
 37.7 °C
100 F
38.1 °C
101 F
37.7 °C
100 F
 
 37.6 °C
100 F
35.9 °C
97 F
35.9 °C
97 F
 
Maximum: 39 °C = 102 F
Average: 37.5 °C = 100 F
34.3 °C
94 F
36.6 °C
98 F
36.6 °C
98 F
34.1 °C
93 F
36 °C
97 F
36.1 °C
97 F
31.9 °C
89 F
35.6 °C
96 F
35.5 °C
96 F
Maximum: 36.6 °C = 98 F
Average: 35.2 °C = 95 F
Power Supply (max.)  29.1 °C = 84 F | Room Temperature 20.1 °C = 68 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.5 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 35.7 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.6 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34.2 °C / 94 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.1 °C / 90 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.

Speakers - good but quiet

Speaker test: Pink Noise
Speaker test: Pink Noise

With one speaker placed at the top and another along the bottom of the device, the Aquaris X2 manages to produce stereo sound when playing music or videos. Together, the two speakers offer decent sound quality for a device of this price range. However, the maximum volume of about 80 dB(A) is rather low. While the speaker at the top of the display is a little quieter and mainly produces high frequencies, the speaker at the bottom is louder and more powerful.

If you want to use your own headphones, you do not need to purchase a separate adapter for the Aquaris X2 - there is an audio jack which works very well.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.930.22528.434.33136.134.14030.9335030.636.26322.232.48024.925.610024.423.412523.522.816020.328.920019.842.825018.251.531517.458.940016.662.750017.162.463015.959.180015.956.8100015.962.3125016.770.116001674200015.969.6250016.267315016.469.340001769.8500016.568.4630016.468.9800016.665.7100001768.21250016.559.81600016.945.3SPL28.680.7N1.147.1median 16.6median 62.4Delta1.610.435.240.932.939.937.234.931.740.339.639.128.334.127.332.326.928.726.731.5243920.946.220.948.319.555.718.562.917.565.817.569.615.769.215.87016.675.215.873.715.474.215.573.51671.615.873.11671.616.367.116.367.716.271.816.475.516.459.928.684.11.158.5median 16.4median 69.22.18.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseBQ Aquaris X2Xiaomi Mi 6X
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
BQ Aquaris X2 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 33% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Mi 6X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Runtime

Power Consumption

Thanks to the modern 14 nm FinFET manufacturing process, the Qualcomm SoC is supposed to be relatively undemanding in terms of power consumption. The Aquaris consumes slightly less power on average than the Xiaomi Redmi Note 5. However, it cannot keep up with its Snapdragon 630 competition.  

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.13 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.65 / 2.24 / 2.26 Watt
Load midlight 3.87 / 6.8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
BQ Aquaris X2
3100 mAh
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
3200 mAh
Nokia 6 2018
3000 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4000 mAh
Huawei Honor 7X
3340 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3000 mAh
HTC U12 Plus
3500 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
21%
20%
-2%
4%
-30%
-14%
23%
-25%
-20%
2%
Idle Minimum *
0.65
0.5
23%
0.67
-3%
0.65
-0%
0.65
-0%
1
-54%
1.02
-57%
0.81
-25%
0.77
-18%
0.981 (0.6 - 1.75, n=9)
-51%
0.879 (0.2 - 3.4, n=642)
-35%
Idle Average *
2.24
1.78
21%
1.76
21%
1.76
21%
1.94
13%
2.6
-16%
2.46
-10%
1.26
44%
2.18
3%
2.28 (1.4 - 4.48, n=9)
-2%
1.721 (0.6 - 6.2, n=641)
23%
Idle Maximum *
2.26
1.81
20%
1.78
21%
1.78
21%
1.97
13%
2.9
-28%
2.51
-11%
1.3
42%
2.21
2%
2.66 (2 - 4.5, n=9)
-18%
1.998 (0.74 - 6.6, n=642)
12%
Load Average *
3.87
3.3
15%
2.82
27%
4.47
-16%
4.65
-20%
5
-29%
4.16
-7%
2.87
26%
6.25
-61%
4.58 (3.65 - 7.92, n=9)
-18%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=636)
-4%
Load Maximum *
6.8
5.14
24%
4.56
33%
9.13
-34%
5.93
13%
8.2
-21%
5.87
14%
4.82
29%
10.16
-49%
7.47 (5.1 - 13.6, n=9)
-10%
5.76 (1.2 - 14.2, n=636)
15%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

The best judge of battery runtimes is our Wi-Fi test that we run with the display brightness set to 150 cd/m². The BQ phone did a relatively good job in this test but still only ranks in the lower mid-range of our comparison field.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
10h 17min
BQ Aquaris X2
3100 mAh
Motorola Moto G6 Plus
3200 mAh
Nokia 6 2018
3000 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5
4000 mAh
Huawei Honor 7X
3340 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A6 2018
3000 mAh
HTC U12 Plus
3500 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
617
702
14%
942
53%
672
9%
495
-20%
872
41%
664
8%
608
-1%
507
-18%

Pros

+ bright IPS panel
+ good camera
+ good speakers
+ precise GPS
+ very good microphones
+ stock Android

Cons

- 32 GB eMMC storage
- color reproduction of display
- quality of back cover
- display-to-surface ratio
- black value

Verdict - high-performing mid-range device

Review: BQ Aquaris X2. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
Review: BQ Aquaris X2. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

The technology of the BQ Aquaris X2 is good, but considering its price of around 320 Euros (~$372) we were surprised to see that it is only equipped with a current lower mid-range processor. The storage options could have been more generous as well (32 GB of internal storage and 3 GB of RAM). The price is about 20 Euros (~$23) higher compared to last year's model, which corresponds to the general trend on the smartphone market.

You will have to accept the mediocre feel of the back cover. It is made out of plastic and does not seem to be of high quality - particularly as it gives way to pressure quite easily. 

Fans of stock Android should definitely take a look at the BQ Aquaris X2. If you do not mind a slightly larger display, you might also be interested in more powerful Android One competitors such as the Nokia 7 Plus or the Xiaomi Mi 6X (Mi A2)

Nonetheless, BQ has managed to craft a decent update for its X series. The mid-range smartphone offers great system performance, a nice camera and good speakers. We would also like to highlight the great call quality, particularly during video calls via the speakers. Thanks to Android One, updates and security patches are guaranteed for quite some time.

BQ Aquaris X2 - 07/24/2018 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
83%
Keyboard
66 / 75 → 88%
Pointing Device
92%
Connectivity
58 / 60 → 97%
Weight
91%
Battery
93%
Display
85%
Games Performance
45 / 63 → 71%
Application Performance
58 / 70 → 83%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
75 / 91 → 82%
Camera
73%
Average
78%
86%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 2 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 > BQ Aquaris X2 Smartphone Review
Marcus Herbrich, 2018-07-26 (Update: 2018-07-26)