Crosscall Stellar-X5
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix
Price comparison
Reviews for the Crosscall Stellar-X5
Source: DxOMark
The Crosscall Stellar-X5 showed an average overall battery performance with good autonomy, and decent efficiency, but a poor charging experience. When used moderately, the Stellar-X5 managed to last more than two and a half days, which is above average in our database. The Stellar-X5 performed well during our typical usage scenario, but it struggled during our tests when settings such as screen brightness were calibrated. The Stellar-X5’s charging experience was quite slow, with the 20W charger never delivering above 18W. Using a wired charger, the device took more than 3 hours to reach a full charge. A quick 5-minute battery top-up recovered on average a bit more than 2 hours and 30 minutes of autonomy.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 09/17/2024
Source: DxOMark
The Crosscall Stellar-X5 is the French brand’s entry into the Ultra-premium realm, with a sleeker look and feel as well as better camera specifications than prior models in an aim to bridge the gap between the rugged work phone and the personal phone. The higher-resolution sensor and a better chipset than the previously tested Action-X5 indeed resulted in significant improvements in all aspects of our image quality evaluation. The Stellar-X5’s camera score also improved considerably thanks to images that were consistently well exposed and that showed an extended dynamic range. In addition, the camera has an efficient zero shutter lag capability in most tested conditions, meaning the user is likely to capture the intended moment, particularly fast-action scenarios like sports.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/11/2024
Source: DxOMark
The Crosscall Stellar-X5’s screen provided a very uneven performance in our Display protocol, with a screen experience that was affected by a pinkish cast in all conditions. Although the Stellar-X5’s display luminance and contrast levels were able to match most ultra-premium phones in indoor conditions, the device’s display was still difficult to read, especially in bright outdoor environments. In complete darkness, the screen’s luminance remained much too bright to offer a comfortable viewing experience. Watching HDR10 video was also a mixed experience. Although there were no frame drops, it was sometimes hard to make out the dark tones in the video content due to the lack of brightness.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/04/2024
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 710: Graphics chip for smartphones and tablets, integrated in the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 2 SoC. According to Qualcomm, 2x faster than the old Adreno 644 in the Snapdragon 7 Gen 1.
Non demanding games should be playable with these graphics cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
SD 6 Gen 1: Mid-range SoC with 8 Kryo cores (4x ARM Cortex A78 2.2 GHz performance cluster, 4x ARM Cortex A55 with 1.8 efficiency cluster) and an X62 5G modem (up to 2900 Mbps download). The chip is manufactured using the modern 4nm process.» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
6.58":
It is a small display format for smartphones. You shouldn't be severely defective in vision, and you won't see much detail on the screen and only have a small resolution available. For that, the device should be small and handy, easy to transport.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.
