Notebookcheck

Honor 8A Smartphone Review

Stefan Schomberg, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Finn D. Boerne), 05/29/2019

No mama's boy. Big display with a waterdrop notch, sleek design, efficient processor, and a light-sensitive camera are the Honor 8A's pros according to the manufacturer. Considering the device's low price this sounds almost too good to be true, or does it?

Honor 8A
Honor 8A

The Honor 8A is the successor to last year’s Honor 7A, which offered a great price-performance ratio, a modern design with narrow bezels, and decent performance and battery life. Its main drawbacks were a comparatively dim display and a cheap look and feel, which came mostly from the cheap-looking plastic used during the molding and manufacturing process. Considering its low price we were not particularly surprised to be honest.

Then came the Y6 (2019) by Honor’s parent company Huawei, which proved, at least in regard to the brown model, that cheap and sleek do not have to be mutually exclusive. Then again design is not everything. For the sake of this review, we have pitched the Honor 8A against its own predecessor, the Honor 7A, as well as the Xiaomi Redmi 7, the Huawei Y6 2019, and the Wiko View 2 Go.

Honor 8A (8 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
6.09 inch 19.5:9, 1520 x 720 pixel 276 PPI, capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 17 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm audio, Card Reader: microSD (up to 512 GB, FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity sensor
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM (850, 900, 1,800, 1,900), UMTS (850, 900, 1,900, 2,100), LTE, 3 (1,800 MHz), 20 (800 MHz), 1 (2,100 MHz), 5 (850 MHz), 8 (900 MHz), 38 (2,600 MHz), 40 (2,300 MHz), 41 (2,600 MHz), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 156.28 x 73.5 ( = 0.31 x 6.15 x 2.89 in)
Battery
3020 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/1.8
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: 1, Keyboard: virtual, Keyboard Light: yes, SIM tool, USB cable, power supply, 24 Months Warranty, head SAR: 0.43 W/kg, body SAR: 1.01 W/kg, fanless
Weight
150 g ( = 5.29 oz / 0.33 pounds), Power Supply: 25 g ( = 0.88 oz / 0.06 pounds)
Price
159 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The first thing you will notice immediately upon picking up the Honor 8A for the first time is that it looks and feels better than expected given its low price point, but at the same time it is no match for its more expensive competitors. The stylish double-textured case may be somewhat impressive for a short period of time but that’s about it. Unfortunately, the reflective coating at the back looks and feels slightly dull and cannot compete against the glass rear covers of pricier competitors. It is very efficient at attracting fingerprints and smudges, though. The design is brightened up slightly by the narrow matte band on the left-hand side of the case.

The plastic frame’s color matches the rest of the case, and it contains the volume rocker, the power button, a 3.5-mm headphone jack at the top, and a speaker as well as the microUSB port at the bottom. The SIM card tray for two SIM cards plus microSD card is located at the left-hand side. At the front, we find a large display with very narrow bezels for an entry-level device and a waterdrop notch. The bottom bezel containing the Honor logo is bigger than the other three.

Despite its low price, build quality was superb. The buttons sit tight inside their respective cavities and offer perfect travel and feedback. Gaps were consistent, and the case produced only minor creaking when we attempted to warp it. If we had to present you with one gripe it would be the hollow sound the device makes when you tap on its back. Thanks to its rounded edges the Honor 8A felt very comfortable in the hand, and at just 156.3 x 73.5 x 8 mm (6.15 x 2.89 x 0.31 inches) and 150 g (5.29 oz / 0.33 lbs) it was pleasantly compact and lightweight.

Honor 8A
Honor 8A

Size Comparison

158.7 mm / 6.25 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs157.2 mm / 6.19 inch 76 mm / 2.99 inch 7.98 mm / 0.3142 inch 167 g0.3682 lbs156.28 mm / 6.15 inch 73.5 mm / 2.89 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs156.28 mm / 6.15 inch 73.5 mm / 2.89 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs153.6 mm / 6.05 inch 73.1 mm / 2.88 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 160 g0.3527 lbs152.4 mm / 6 inch 73 mm / 2.87 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs

Connectivity

Compared to its predecessor the internal storage has been doubled in capacity to 32 GB. Like before it can be expanded via microSD cards, and the 8A supports cards with up to 512 GB in size. The fingerprint reader remained at the back, and unfortunately the device still features a microUSB port at the bottom instead of the more modern USB-C connector. NFC is not supported.

Left side: SIM tray
Left side: SIM tray
Bottom: speaker, microUSB
Bottom: speaker, microUSB
Right side: volume rocker, power button
Right side: volume rocker, power button
Top: microphone, 3.5-mm headphone jack
Top: microphone, 3.5-mm headphone jack

Software

With Android 9.0 Pie and EMUI 9.0, the Honor 8A runs an up-to-date version of Google’s operating system. It lacks support for Magic UI, which is only offered on more-expensive models such as the Honor 20. At the time of writing, security patches were as of March 1, 2019 and thus sufficiently up-to-date. In addition to Honor’s/Huawei’s own apps, such as the Huawei App Gallery, we also found various third-party applications such as Amazon or Booking.com preloaded on the device. The availability of future updates is uncertain due to the current trade conflict between China and the United States.

Communication and GPS

Like its predecessor the Honor 8A supports LTE Cat 4 (up to 150 Mb/s downstream), which is acceptable for an entry-level device. The list of supported LTE frequencies is not particularly long but at least sufficient for European markets. We did not have any issues during our review period.

Wi-Fi is only supported in the 2.4 GHz band, and the device does not support ac Wi-Fi at all. When connected to our Linksys EA8500 reference router and downloading data the Honor 8A turned out to be ever so slightly slower than the Huawei Y6 2019. That said it was still more than fast enough. Uploads were a different story, though, and the 8A was even slower than its own predecessor and consequently ended up in last place.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=397)
220 MBit/s ∼100% +233%
Huawei Y6 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
69 (min: 61, max: 66) MBit/s ∼31% +5%
Honor 8A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 32 GB eMMC Flash
66 (min: 58, max: 65) MBit/s ∼30%
Wiko View 2 Go
Adreno 505, 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
54.7 (min: 53, max: 57) MBit/s ∼25% -17%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
51.4 (min: 49, max: 54) MBit/s ∼23% -22%
Honor 7A
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
45 MBit/s ∼20% -32%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=397)
210 MBit/s ∼100% +469%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.4 (min: 52, max: 61) MBit/s ∼26% +50%
Wiko View 2 Go
Adreno 505, 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
53 (min: 36, max: 58) MBit/s ∼25% +44%
Honor 7A
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
46.7 MBit/s ∼22% +27%
Huawei Y6 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 32 GB eMMC Flash
37.8 (min: 29, max: 46) MBit/s ∼18% +2%
Honor 8A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P35 MT6765, 32 GB eMMC Flash
36.9 (min: 22, max: 52) MBit/s ∼18%
010203040506070Tooltip
Honor 8A Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø61.8 (58-65)
Xiaomi Redmi 7 Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Qualcomm Adreno 506; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø51.1 (49-54)
Huawei Y6 2019 Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø64 (61-66)
Wiko View 2 Go Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Qualcomm Adreno 505; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø54.6 (53-57)
Honor 8A Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø37.1 (22-52)
Xiaomi Redmi 7 Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Qualcomm Adreno 506; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø55.5 (52-61)
Huawei Y6 2019 Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø38 (29-46)
Wiko View 2 Go Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Qualcomm Adreno 505; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø53.2 (36-58)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test at the window
GPS Test at the window
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

Supported location services include A-GPS, GLONASS, and BDS, and they worked very well in general. Even indoor GPS accuracy was fairly high. Outdoors, GPS lock was obtained very quickly and accurately. It was, however, not as accurate as the Garmin Edge 500 professional satnav, and it cut corners quite regularly and extensively when recording the track. That said it was in good company since even more-expensive smartphones are not necessarily any better in this regard.

GPS Garmin Edge 500 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – city
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – city
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – city
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – city
Honor 8A - overview
Honor 8A - overview
Honor 8A - city
Honor 8A - city
Honor 8A - city
Honor 8A - city

Telephony and Call Quality

The stock telephone app is practically identical to Google’s default vanilla Android telephony app, and users should thus find their way around it almost immediately and without any issues. Call quality was decent, especially considering the device’s low price, and there were no issues understanding each other while on a phone call. Ambient noises were sometimes reduced to a soft and muddy fizzle, which was somewhat distracting to be honest. The speaker turned out to be very loud and worked surprisingly well for making phone calls; however, we suggest keeping the ambient noise level down if possible. Carrier support presupposed, the Honor 8A also supports VoLTE.

Cameras

Honor 8A selfie
Honor 8A selfie

The main camera features a 13 MP sensor with a light-sensitive aperture of f/1.8 for improved low-light photo quality. The front-facing secondary camera is equipped with an 8 MP sensor. The light-sensitive nature of the main rear-facing shooter turned out to be superior to the 8A’s direct competitor, the Y6 (2019). Naturally, more-expensive smartphones such as the Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus produced much better results, but considering the Honor 8A’s price point the photos were more than decent.

The same can be said for photos taken in good light. Close-range focus was acceptable, long-range focus less so. Dynamic range was also in need of improvement, and bright clouds were practically indistinguishable from a bright sky despite support for HDR. Videos turned out similar to photos overall. We should add though that the frame rate is too low for pan shots, the resolution is limited to 1080p, and there is no image stabilization at all.

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

The front-facing camera lacks support for HDR and features an aperture of f/2.0. Accordingly, it is not as light-sensitive as the rear-facing main camera and produces photos with an even more unbalanced dynamic range and a much higher noise ratio. Focus is decent, at least at close range. These issues with focus and noise were further corroborated under normalized conditions.

Honor 8A
Honor 8A
Test chart
Test chart
ColorChecker colors. Reference color in the bottom half of each square
Test chart zoomed-in

Accessories and Warranty

The included accessories are identical to the predecessor's. In the box, we found a charger, a USB cable, a SIM tool, a quick-start guide, and a warranty booklet.

Warranty depends on the country the device was purchased in. For example, devices sold in Europe come with a 24-month warranty by default.

Input Devices and Handling

The Honor 8A comes with a screen protector ex factory, which felt somewhat sharp around the edges and was thus uncomfortable to use. It had no effect on the device’s usability, though, and the touchscreen remained very smooth. Typing on the accurate SwiftKey keyboard worked flawlessly and without any issues, and the display was capable of accurately detecting touch input up to its very edges.

The rear-mounted fingerprint reader was incapable of keeping up with its more expensive flagship brethren. Nevertheless, it was sufficiently fast and accurate. Subjectively, performance was acceptable most of the time with only minor lag every now and then. Browsing the web was fast and smooth, as was scrolling through websites. Changes in orientation, from portrait to landscape or vice versa, were pretty slow.

Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in portrait mode
Keyboard in portrait mode

Display

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The 6.1-inch display runs at a native resolution of 1560x720 with a resulting pixel density of less than 330 PPI. This may sound comparatively poor; however, we had almost no issues in everyday use. While its predecessor, the Honor 7A, still suffered from a dim display the Honor 8A offers an acceptable 540 nits on average. Unfortunately, black level and contrast are worse than they were last year but are still more than acceptable when compared to other smartphones in the device’s price range. The same can be said for color and grayscale accuracy. The overall very similar Huawei Y6 (2019) cannot keep up with the Honor 8A in terms of display brightness.

546
cd/m²
533
cd/m²
551
cd/m²
550
cd/m²
522
cd/m²
554
cd/m²
558
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
535
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 558 cd/m² Average: 542.1 cd/m² Minimum: 3.19 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 522 cd/m²
Contrast: 1111:1 (Black: 0.47 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 6.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
98.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.28
Honor 8A
IPS, 1520x720, 6.09
Honor 7A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.7
Xiaomi Redmi 7
IPS, 1520x720, 6.26
Huawei Y6 2019
IPS LCD, 1560x720, 6.09
Wiko View 2 Go
IPS, 1512x720, 5.93
Screen
7%
2%
7%
7%
Brightness middle
522
417
-20%
444
-15%
487
-7%
465
-11%
Brightness
542
395
-27%
441
-19%
485
-11%
462
-15%
Brightness Distribution
94
88
-6%
90
-4%
89
-5%
84
-11%
Black Level *
0.47
0.18
62%
0.45
4%
0.35
26%
0.32
32%
Contrast
1111
2317
109%
987
-11%
1391
25%
1453
31%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4
6.46
-62%
3.94
1%
4.3
-8%
4.76
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.5
10.72
-13%
6.72
29%
10.1
-6%
7.71
19%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.6
5.8
12%
4.8
27%
4.1
38%
4.6
30%
Gamma
2.28 96%
2.423 91%
2.294 96%
2.09 105%
2.674 82%
CCT
7258 90%
7839 83%
7445 87%
7312 89%
6806 96%

* ... 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 9524 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.


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
24.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms rise
↘ 15.6 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. » 39 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.4 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. » 77 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (40.4 ms).

A big plus of last year’s model was the total lack of PWM, and this was also true for this year’s refresh. Using a spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software we were able to detect a blue tint that is quite common for LCDs. Overall, colors were more accurate than grays, and color-space coverage was acceptable. All things considered the Honor 8A did pretty well in this regard.

CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color space
CalMAN color space
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation

Outdoor usability has been improved noticeably over last year’s model thanks to the display’s higher maximum brightness. As anticipated, viewing angles were superb and as wide as expected, and we only noticed minor shadowing at extreme angles.

Honor 8A viewing angles
Honor 8A viewing angles


Outdoors, auto brightness
Outdoors, auto brightness
Outdoors, maximum brightness
Outdoors, maximum brightness
Outdoors, maximum brightness
Outdoors, maximum brightness

Performance

The MediaTek MT6765 Helio P35 SoC with four Cortex-A53 cores running at up to 2.3 GHz and four Cortex-A53 cores running at up to 1.8 GHz should offer a decent level of performance. Combined with the PowerVR GE8320 GPU and 2 GB of RAM, the Honor 8A outperformed its direct competitor, the Y6 2019 most of the time. However, in some benchmarks, such as PCMark, it turned out to be slower than its own Honor 7A predecessor. Thanks to its Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, the Xiaomi Redmi 7 was the only competitor significantly faster than the Honor 8A. 

Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2893 Points ∼64%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2127 Points ∼47% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3850 Points ∼85% +33%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1607 Points ∼36% -44%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2461 Points ∼55% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
2893 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=299)
4513 Points ∼100% +56%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3834 Points ∼86%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2820 Points ∼63% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4301 Points ∼96% +12%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2354 Points ∼53% -39%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2542 Points ∼57% -34%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
3834 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1174 - 11598, n=353)
4479 Points ∼100% +17%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
855 Points ∼65%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
675 Points ∼51% -21%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1227 Points ∼93% +44%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
832 Points ∼63% -3%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
674 Points ∼51% -21%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
855 Points ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (758 - 4824, n=355)
1325 Points ∼100% +55%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4886 Points ∼83%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
3892 Points ∼66% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
5912 Points ∼100% +21%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
5511 Points ∼93% +13%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
3596 Points ∼61% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
4886 Points ∼83% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3227 - 11440, n=349)
4937 Points ∼84% +1%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4045 Points ∼57%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
5109 Points ∼72% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7117 Points ∼100% +76%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4229 Points ∼59% +5%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4323 Points ∼61% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
4045 Points ∼57% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4096 - 14439, n=517)
5401 Points ∼76% +34%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2079 Points ∼13%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼100% +657%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1740 Points ∼11% -16%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
2079 Points ∼13% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1849 - 15735, n=37)
2434 Points ∼15% +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
355 Points ∼2%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼100% +3995%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
203 Points ∼1% -43%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
355 Points ∼2% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (209 - 14536, n=37)
2303 Points ∼16% +549%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
435 Points ∼3%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼100% +3299%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
253 Points ∼2% -42%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
435 Points ∼3% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (260 - 14786, n=40)
1997 Points ∼14% +359%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1021 Points ∼48%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1301 Points ∼61% +27%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2133 Points ∼100% +109%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
876 Points ∼41% -14%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1167 Points ∼55% +14%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
1021 Points ∼48% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4535, n=363)
1813 Points ∼85% +78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
432 Points ∼28%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
304 Points ∼20% -30%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
469 Points ∼30% +9%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
197 Points ∼13% -54%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
305 Points ∼20% -29%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
432 Points ∼28% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (76 - 8206, n=363)
1548 Points ∼100% +258%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
496 Points ∼34%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
366 Points ∼25% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
567 Points ∼39% +14%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
238 Points ∼16% -52%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
365 Points ∼25% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
496 Points ∼34% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (94 - 6312, n=366)
1445 Points ∼100% +191%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
961 Points ∼45%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1285 Points ∼60% +34%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2147 Points ∼100% +123%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
889 Points ∼41% -7%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1184 Points ∼55% +23%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
961 Points ∼45% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=377)
1782 Points ∼83% +85%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
695 Points ∼33%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
530 Points ∼25% -24%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
813 Points ∼38% +17%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
450 Points ∼21% -35%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
529 Points ∼25% -24%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
695 Points ∼33% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=377)
2118 Points ∼100% +205%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
741 Points ∼41%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
610 Points ∼34% -18%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
943 Points ∼52% +27%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
505 Points ∼28% -32%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
603 Points ∼33% -19%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
741 Points ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7980, n=378)
1805 Points ∼100% +144%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
998 Points ∼47%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1232 Points ∼58% +23%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2119 Points ∼100% +112%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
898 Points ∼42% -10%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1103 Points ∼52% +11%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
998 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4262, n=439)
1740 Points ∼82% +74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
223 Points ∼17%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
254 Points ∼20% +14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
424 Points ∼33% +90%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
250 Points ∼20% +12%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
257 Points ∼20% +15%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
223 Points ∼17% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (65 - 6362, n=441)
1280 Points ∼100% +474%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
270 Points ∼22%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
308 Points ∼25% +14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
516 Points ∼42% +91%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
298 Points ∼24% +10%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
310 Points ∼25% +15%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
270 Points ∼22% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80 - 5734, n=449)
1225 Points ∼100% +354%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
997 Points ∼47%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1259 Points ∼59% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2132 Points ∼100% +114%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
869 Points ∼41% -13%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1136 Points ∼53% +14%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
997 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4240, n=471)
1645 Points ∼77% +65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
429 Points ∼25%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
535 Points ∼31% +25%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
807 Points ∼47% +88%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
357 Points ∼21% -17%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
523 Points ∼30% +22%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
429 Points ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 10008, n=471)
1735 Points ∼100% +304%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
491 Points ∼33%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
613 Points ∼41% +25%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
936 Points ∼63% +91%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
411 Points ∼28% -16%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
594 Points ∼40% +21%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
491 Points ∼33% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7673, n=479)
1491 Points ∼100% +204%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
10689 Points ∼68%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9249 Points ∼59% -13%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼100% +47%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
14037 Points ∼89% +31%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
8971 Points ∼57% -16%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
10689 Points ∼68% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4811 - 45072, n=631)
13525 Points ∼86% +27%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7061 Points ∼36%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9684 Points ∼50% +37%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼74% +106%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7567 Points ∼39% +7%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9686 Points ∼50% +37%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
7061 Points ∼36% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3585 - 162695, n=631)
19546 Points ∼100% +177%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7637 Points ∼47%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9584 Points ∼59% +25%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼91% +94%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
8431 Points ∼52% +10%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9517 Points ∼58% +25%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
7637 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4164 - 83518, n=632)
16333 Points ∼100% +114%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
19 fps ∼56%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
16 fps ∼47% -16%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
25 fps ∼73% +32%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
14 fps ∼41% -26%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
16 fps ∼47% -16%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
19 fps ∼56% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6 - 251, n=659)
34.1 fps ∼100% +79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
26 fps ∼70%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
27 fps ∼73% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
37 fps ∼100% +42%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
20 fps ∼54% -23%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
25 fps ∼68% -4%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
26 fps ∼70% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.8 - 120, n=662)
26.5 fps ∼72% +2%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
9.8 fps ∼52%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
7.1 fps ∼38% -28%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
11 fps ∼59% +12%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
6.5 fps ∼35% -34%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
7.1 fps ∼38% -28%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
9.8 fps ∼52% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.7 - 132, n=578)
18.7 fps ∼100% +91%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
16 fps ∼84%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
14 fps ∼74% -12%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
19 fps ∼100% +19%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
11 fps ∼58% -31%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
13 fps ∼68% -19%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
16 fps ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.4 - 115, n=583)
17.4 fps ∼92% +9%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
5.8 fps ∼37%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4.6 fps ∼30% -21%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼45% +21%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.2 fps ∼27% -28%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.5 fps ∼16% -57%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
5.8 fps ∼37% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 88, n=440)
15.5 fps ∼100% +167%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
9.6 fps ∼65%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
10 fps ∼68% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14 fps ∼95% +46%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7.6 fps ∼51% -21%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9.7 fps ∼66% +1%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
9.6 fps ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.4 - 110, n=443)
14.8 fps ∼100% +54%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
0 fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4.2 fps ∼48%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.7 fps ∼31%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.8 fps ∼32%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.86 - 59, n=143)
8.76 fps ∼100%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
0 fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1.3 fps ∼22%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
0.8 fps ∼13%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
0.88 fps ∼15%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.26 - 31, n=143)
5.99 fps ∼100%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6.8 fps ∼52%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼54% +3%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.3 fps ∼18% -66%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4.7 fps ∼36% -31%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
6.8 fps ∼52% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 59, n=145)
13 fps ∼100% +91%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.8 fps ∼26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼27% +3%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.2 fps ∼29% +11%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼18% -32%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
3.8 fps ∼26% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.94 - 63, n=144)
14.4 fps ∼100% +279%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2.6 fps ∼25%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼25% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼38% +50%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2 fps ∼19% -23%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼25% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
2.6 fps ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.89 - 54, n=369)
10.4 fps ∼100% +300%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.8 fps ∼40%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
5.4 fps ∼57% +42%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7.8 fps ∼83% +105%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
3.1 fps ∼33% -18%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
5 fps ∼53% +32%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
3.8 fps ∼40% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 58, n=373)
9.41 fps ∼100% +148%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
fps ∼0%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.09 - 651, n=60)
25.9 fps ∼100%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
fps ∼0%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6.62 - 606, n=55)
23 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
fps ∼0%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 fps ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 739, n=55)
27.6 fps ∼100%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
Points ∼0%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
59990 Points ∼47%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
102781 Points ∼81%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
64157 Points ∼50%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
56793 Points ∼45%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (52607 - 380913, n=260)
127050 Points ∼100%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
816 Points ∼76%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
705 Points ∼66% -14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1071 Points ∼100% +31%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
785 Points ∼73% -4%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
673 Points ∼63% -18%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
816 Points ∼76% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=590)
734 Points ∼69% -10%
Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
792 Points ∼42%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
739 Points ∼39% -7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1072 Points ∼57% +35%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
470 Points ∼25% -41%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
741 Points ∼39% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
792 Points ∼42% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=590)
1889 Points ∼100% +139%
Memory (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1366 Points ∼78%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1209 Points ∼69% -11%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1758 Points ∼100% +29%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1458 Points ∼83% +7%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
884 Points ∼50% -35%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
1366 Points ∼78% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6661, n=590)
1413 Points ∼80% +3%
System (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2533 Points ∼62%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1962 Points ∼48% -23%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4090 Points ∼100% +61%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1755 Points ∼43% -31%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1808 Points ∼44% -29%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
2533 Points ∼62% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=590)
2799 Points ∼68% +11%
Overall (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1223 Points ∼72%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1055 Points ∼62% -14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1695 Points ∼100% +39%
Huawei Y6 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
986 Points ∼58% -19%
Wiko View 2 Go
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
945 Points ∼56% -23%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
1223 Points ∼72% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=594)
1389 Points ∼82% +14%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Honor 8A
Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
133 Points ∼19%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
133 Points ∼19% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (35 - 2754, n=98)
701 Points ∼100% +427%

In our web-browsing benchmark, the Honor 8A was the slowest device in our test group, albeit the difference was negligible (except for aforementioned Redmi 7). Subjectively, we were unable to tell the difference between the various models.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (14.7 - 108, n=70)
29 Points ∼100% +113%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
26.9 Points ∼93% +98%
Huawei Y6 2019
15.326 Points ∼53% +13%
Honor 8A
13.6 Points ∼47%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
13.6 Points ∼47% 0%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 123, n=64)
33 runs/min ∼100% +123%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chome 73)
27.44 runs/min ∼83% +85%
Huawei Y6 2019 (Chrome)
15.69 runs/min ∼48% +6%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
14.8 runs/min ∼45%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
14.8 runs/min ∼45% 0%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 161, n=124)
62.7 Points ∼100% +116%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
58 Points ∼93% +100%
Huawei Y6 2019
35 Points ∼56% +21%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
29 Points ∼46%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
29 Points ∼46% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
8258 Points ∼100% +90%
Average of class Smartphone (1994 - 43280, n=651)
6118 Points ∼74% +41%
Huawei Y6 2019 (Chrome)
4437 Points ∼54% +2%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
4347 Points ∼53%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
4347 Points ∼53% 0%
Honor 7A (Chrome 67)
3389 Points ∼41% -22%
Wiko View 2 Go (Chrome 71)
3089 Points ∼37% -29%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Honor 7A (Chrome 67)
14709 ms * ∼100% -30%
Wiko View 2 Go (Chrome 71)
13373 ms * ∼91% -18%
Honor 8A (Chrome)
11323 ms * ∼77%
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
11323 ms * ∼77% -0%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=671)
10898 ms * ∼74% +4%
Huawei Y6 2019
10198 ms * ∼69% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
4856.4 ms * ∼33% +57%

* ... smaller is better

Storage performance was inconspicuous overall, and the Honor 8A was neither particularly fast nor particularly slow when we ran our benchmarks on the internal storage memory or our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card.

Honor 8AHonor 7A Xiaomi Redmi 7Huawei Y6 2019Average 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-16%
3%
5%
-12%
-10%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
61.83
65.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
6%
63.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
64.45 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
49.3 (3.4 - 87.1, n=131)
-20%
48.3 (9.5 - 87.1, n=393)
-22%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
81.92
84.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
85.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
5%
83.16 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
68.1 (8.2 - 96.5, n=131)
-17%
66.4 (8.1 - 96.5, n=393)
-19%
Random Write 4KB
15
9.4
-37%
14.4
-4%
15
0%
18.5 (0.75 - 77.3, n=175)
23%
19.3 (0.14 - 250, n=701)
29%
Random Read 4KB
61
39.2
-36%
73.6
21%
69
13%
38 (3.59 - 117, n=175)
-38%
43.9 (1.59 - 175, n=701)
-28%
Sequential Write 256KB
104
72.5
-30%
84.7
-19%
107.78
4%
94.6 (14.8 - 189, n=175)
-9%
90.4 (2.99 - 392, n=701)
-13%
Sequential Read 256KB
265
254.8
-4%
298
12%
279.26
5%
233 (25.8 - 452, n=175)
-12%
255 (12.1 - 1468, n=701)
-4%

Gaming

Simple 2D games such as Angry Birds or less-demanding 3D games like Shadow Fight 3 ran smoothly on the Honor 8A, albeit some games may require reduced details to remain playable. More-demanding 3D games, such as Asphalt 9, ran at less than 24 to 30 FPS, which would be generally considered a smooth experience. Sometimes the game would even crash completely leaving the impression that the Honor 8A’s hardware was overwhelmed with the task at hand. We used Gamebench, which can be downloaded here, to run our benchmarks. Long story short: Despite the fact that input via gyroscope and touchscreen worked flawlessly the Honor 8A is not suitable for gamers. 

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
GameBench PUBG (low graphics settings)
010203040Tooltip
; 0.12.0: Ø20.6 (1-33)
GameBench Asphalt 9 (low graphics settings)
01020Tooltip
; 1.5.4a: Ø10 (5-17)
Gamebench Shadow Fight 3 (low graphics settings)
010203040506070Tooltip
; 1.18.3: Ø43 (1-61)

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench Manhattan battery test
GFXBench Manhattan battery test

With surface temperatures of just 35 °C and internal temperatures of no more than 40 °C under load the Honor 8A remained very cool overall. The predecessor got significantly warmer and reached almost 42 °C at the surface and much higher internal temperatures. Frame drops due to high temperatures can still happen but are rather unlikely.

Max. Load
 32.4 °C
90 F
32 °C
90 F
34.6 °C
94 F
 
 31.8 °C
89 F
31.7 °C
89 F
32.7 °C
91 F
 
 30.8 °C
87 F
30.6 °C
87 F
33 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 34.6 °C = 94 F
Average: 32.2 °C = 90 F
28.8 °C
84 F
29.4 °C
85 F
30.2 °C
86 F
29 °C
84 F
29.5 °C
85 F
31.7 °C
89 F
29.6 °C
85 F
29.5 °C
85 F
31 °C
88 F
Maximum: 31.7 °C = 89 F
Average: 29.9 °C = 86 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.4 °C = 89 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.2 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.6 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 31.7 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.6 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map front
Heat map front
Heat map rear
Heat map rear

Speakers

Pink Noise
Pink Noise

The single speaker is hidden behind two gratings, and it performed much better than on the predecessor. We found no signs of distortion. However, the Honor 8A lacked bass, as expected. All things considered the speaker performed very well.

As usual we suggest using external speakers or headphones for an improved audio experience. Unlike on the Huawei Y6 a headset is not included with the Honor 8A, and users need to equip their own unit that can be connected either via 3.5-mm headphone jack or Bluetooth. Both worked flawlessly and can be further fine-tuned with an equalizer.

Like before, the Honor 8A can be interconnected with up to eight other Honor devices in order to create a surround sound system. 

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.536.42531.932.33122.325.44021.723.65029.237.56326.723.98020.323.910020.525.7125233816015.653.820017.852.925016.357.831515.462.640015.964.150015.864.363013.368.580014.168.6100014.172.812501477160013.577.2200013.480.3250013.979.6315014.279.8400013.979.3500014.679.1630014.276.2800014.776.5100001572.31250014.961.21600015.347.3SPL26.489.4N0.877.4median 14.7median 68.6Delta0.91142.646.338.438.734.231.337.326.53031.826.62823.222.421.221.12121.616.326.416.636.715.841.213.546.312.251.61252.611.75510.558.79.661.69.563.6965.38.567.48.569.28.371.38.269.38.167.68.165.18.162.38.264.48.353.38.235.265.451.721.959.978.619.17.10.31239median 9.5median 58.72.812.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHonor 8AHonor 7A
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Honor 8A audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 75% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 44% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Honor 7A audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 55% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

Power Consumption

Even though the 3,020 mAh battery is identical to the Y6 (2019), battery life differed between the two contenders. On average, the Honor smartphone drew more energy in standby and under load. In return, minimum and maximum power consumption were lower than on the Huawei Y6 (2019).

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.14 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.73 / 2.07 / 2.14 Watt
Load midlight 4.3 / 5.96 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Honor 8A
3020 mAh
Honor 7A
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2019
3020 mAh
Wiko View 2 Go
4000 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio P35 MT6765
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-17%
2%
21%
2%
0%
2%
Idle Minimum *
0.73
1.3
-78%
1
-37%
0.59
19%
0.8
-10%
0.73
-0%
0.881 (0.2 - 3.4, n=727)
-21%
Idle Average *
2.07
1.6
23%
1.7
18%
1.94
6%
2
3%
2.07
-0%
1.736 (0.6 - 6.2, n=726)
16%
Idle Maximum *
2.14
2.9
-36%
2.1
2%
1.96
8%
2.3
-7%
2.14
-0%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=727)
6%
Load Average *
4.3
3.7
14%
3.3
23%
2.82
34%
3.6
16%
4.3
-0%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=721)
5%
Load Maximum *
5.96
6.4
-7%
5.6
6%
3.57
40%
5.4
9%
5.96
-0%
5.87 (1.2 - 14.2, n=721)
2%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

It seems that our battery benchmarks benefited from this lower minimum and maximum consumption levels, and the Honor A8 clearly outperformed the Huawei Y6 (2019) and even more so its own Honor 7A predecessor with display brightness normalized to 150 nits. The battery should thus easily last for two full days.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 48.8min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15h 17min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 01min
Honor 8A
3020 mAh
Honor 7A
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Huawei Y6 2019
3020 mAh
Wiko View 2 Go
4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-21%
-4%
-14%
-11%
Reader / Idle
1489
H.264
917
902
-2%
805
-12%
WiFi v1.3
828.8
657
-21%
848
2%
732.1
-12%
734
-11%
Load
301
268
-11%
249
-17%

Pros

+ compact
+ decent system performance
+ great battery
+ up-to-date software
+ fingerprint reader

Cons

- microUSB
- not suitable for gamers

Verdict

In review: Honor 8A.
In review: Honor 8A.

The Honor 7A was already pretty good, and the Honor 8A is even better. The divided design is definitely a matter of taste, and we would have preferred a more premium touch and feel. However, considering the Honor 8A’s price point we have no issues with it. The screen was decent and much brighter than last year's model, internal storage memory has doubled in capacity, and overall performance has improved as well.

The Honor 8A is an entry-level smartphone with no real flaws. Considering the almost identical price, it offers more than its most prominent in-house competitor, the Huawei Y6 (2019).

The camera is most likely going to be sufficient for most users - if you want more you have to pay more, it’s that simple. Overall, the Honor 8A is a great entry-level smartphone for less than $200. Huawei’s brown Y6 may offer a sleeker design but lacks a fingerprint reader in return.

Honor 8A - 05/23/2019 v6
Stefan Schomberg

Chassis
76%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
78%
Connectivity
40 / 60 → 67%
Weight
92%
Battery
96%
Display
83%
Games Performance
21 / 63 → 33%
Application Performance
49 / 70 → 70%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
61 / 91 → 67%
Camera
47%
Average
69%
79%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Honor 8A Smartphone Review
Stefan Schomberg, 2019-05-29 (Update: 2019-05-31)