Notebookcheck

Honor 9X Lite Smartphone Review – Convincing thanks to new camera and Google?

Affordable classic. With older Android 9, but at least with Google Services, the Honor 9X Lite comes to your home. The high-resolution main camera and features like NFC make the smartphone worth a look.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy),
Honor 9X Lite
Honor 9X Lite (9 Series)
Processor
HiSilicon Kirin 710 8 x 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A73/-A53
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.5 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 396 PPI, kapazitiver Touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB 
, 116 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm-Audioport, Card Reader: microSD up to 256 GB, dedicated, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B7/​B8/​B20), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.8 x 160.4 x 76.6 ( = 0.31 x 6.31 x 3.02 in)
Battery
3750 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/1.8, phase comparison AF, LED flash, videos @1080p/30fps (camera 1); 2.0MP, f/2.4, depth of field (camera 2)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono loudspeaker at the lower edge, Keyboard: Virtual, Silicone bumper, charger, USB cable, headset, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0.81 W/kg (head), 1.02 W/kg (body); LTE Cat 6 (300Mbps/50Mbps); , fanless
Weight
188 g ( = 6.63 oz / 0.41 pounds), Power Supply: 58 g ( = 2.05 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
199 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison devices

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
77 %7
08/2020
Honor 9X Lite
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
188 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.5"2340x1080
77 %7
05/2020
Huawei P Smart 2020
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
163 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.21"2340x1080
75 %7
06/2020
Sony Xperia L4
Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320
178 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.2"1680x720
80 %7
07/2020
Samsung Galaxy M31
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
191 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.4"2340x1080
85 %6
11/2018
Honor 8X
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
175 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.5"2340x1080

Case, equipment and operation - Slow WLAN

Huawei and thus also the subsidiary Honor may no longer be supplied with technology by American companies. Now the manufacturer is taking a divided path: Some smartphones are simply minimally modified predecessors that still have Google certification, others come completely without Google apps and, above all, the Google services that many apps use. The Honor 9X Lite belongs to the first category, still offers Android 9 and looks quite similar to the older Honor 8X.

The Honor 9X Lite is a rather cheap mid-range smartphone for 199 Euro and is available on the net already for a much lower price or with free accessories. The case is acceptable for this price: stable and plain with a black, reflective back. A green color variant is also available.

With 128 GB, the smartphone offers a generous amount of mass storage for the price range, and there is also NFC, which allows wireless payment options. The USB port is still a micro USB port and there is only older Bluetooth 4.2, but with aptX for higher sound quality. The memory card reader is independent of the two SIM ports, so you can use one card for all three at the same time.

In our test with the Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router, the WLAN module is indeed capable of WiFi 5, but the speeds fluctuate greatly and are generally not particularly high. You shouldn't expect too many LTE frequencies either, so when traveling abroad to other continents the smartphone may not be able to dial into the local LTE networks.

As far as software is concerned, there is only older Android 9, you should not expect an update to a newer version. The security patches are also quite old at the time of testing.

On the back of the phone there is a fingeprint sensor, which unlocks the Honor 9 Lite quickly and reliably.

Size comparison

160.4 mm / 6.31 inch 76.6 mm / 3.02 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs160.4 mm / 6.31 inch 76.6 mm / 3.02 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs159.2 mm / 6.27 inch 75.1 mm / 2.96 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 191 g0.4211 lbs159 mm / 6.26 inch 71 mm / 2.8 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 178 g0.3924 lbs155.3 mm / 6.11 inch 73.5 mm / 2.89 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy M31
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
336 (282min - 350max) MBit/s ∼100% +120%
Honor 8X
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
207 (162min - 243max) MBit/s ∼62% +35%
Huawei P Smart 2020
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
200 (126min - 252max) MBit/s ∼60% +31%
Honor 9X Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
153 (106min - 195max) MBit/s ∼46%
Sony Xperia L4
802.11 b/g/n
120 (106min - 124max) MBit/s ∼36% -22%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy M31
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
297 (258min - 312max) MBit/s ∼100% +52%
Huawei P Smart 2020
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
211 (175min - 242max) MBit/s ∼71% +8%
Honor 9X Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
196 (47min - 258max) MBit/s ∼66%
Honor 8X
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
182 (136min - 231max) MBit/s ∼61% -7%
Sony Xperia L4
802.11 b/g/n
109 (103min - 114max) MBit/s ∼37% -44%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø153 (106-195)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø196 (47-258)

Cameras - Now with pixel binning

Recording front camera
Recording front camera
Recording front camera LowLight
Recording front camera LowLight

The biggest innovation compared to the Honor 8X is probably the main camera, which now works with pixel binning, i.e. always combines 4 pixels to one large, very light-sensitive pixel. The 48 megapixel resolution of the sensor results in 12 megapixel images, which is sufficient for most applications.

However, the images seem a bit too exposed and offer too little contrast, so that details are quickly lost in light and dark areas. This also results in a pale image impression, and image details often appear pixelated. Even in the test lab under defined lighting conditions, the images look pale, but the overall sharpness is on a decent level. In low light, images quickly appear pixelated and offer only a few details, but at least the brightening is acceptable.

The front camera with 8 megapixels makes passable selfies in normal light, which look quite pixelated in detail. In low light, the motif is not visible without additional brightening.

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.

Hauptobjektiv BlumeHauptobjektiv UmgebungHauptobjektiv Low Light
click to load images
ColorChecker
13 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
18.5 ∆E
10.8 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
5 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
6 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
17.4 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
18.4 ∆E
19.1 ∆E
15.3 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor 9X Lite: 11.9 ∆E min: 3.06 - max: 19.06 ∆E
ColorChecker
9.4 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
8 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
11 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
12 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
6 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor 9X Lite: 7.74 ∆E min: 1.73 - max: 13.18 ∆E

Display - Right color

Sub-pixel Array
Sub-pixel Array

FullHD resolution is no longer completely uncommon in this price range, but still a positive aspect. The display of the Honor 9X Lite is not very bright, though, and the black level is so high that the contrast values are pressed, so that the overall picture impression is somewhat pale.

But the image display on the screen is actually quite lifelike and there is at best a slight blue cast.

In addition, we don't notice any PWM flickering and the reaction times aren't too slow.

408
cd/m²
428
cd/m²
435
cd/m²
408
cd/m²
435
cd/m²
438
cd/m²
409
cd/m²
409
cd/m²
428
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 438 cd/m² Average: 422 cd/m² Minimum: 2.4 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 435 cd/m²
Contrast: 565:1 (Black: 0.77 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.31 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 3.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6
98.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.3
Honor 9X Lite
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5
Huawei P Smart 2020
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.21
Sony Xperia L4
IPS, 1680x720, 6.2
Samsung Galaxy M31
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4
Honor 8X
LCD IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5
Response Times
-31%
-75%
66%
-9%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
36 (17, 19)
42 (25, 17)
-17%
58 (33, 25)
-61%
9 (6, 3)
75%
40 (18, 22)
-11%
Response Time Black / White *
18 (7, 11)
26 (15, 11)
-44%
34 (19, 15)
-89%
8 (3, 5)
56%
19.2 (6.8, 12.4)
-7%
PWM Frequency
344 (10)
100 (15)
208
Screen
-13%
1%
25%
-26%
Brightness middle
435
446
3%
429
-1%
622
43%
484
11%
Brightness
422
448
6%
404
-4%
615
46%
469
11%
Brightness Distribution
93
87
-6%
92
-1%
97
4%
93
0%
Black Level *
0.77
0.51
34%
0.26
66%
0.55
29%
Contrast
565
875
55%
1650
192%
880
56%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.31
5.22
-58%
6.14
-85%
2.25
32%
7.3
-121%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.8
8.66
-27%
10.51
-55%
6.22
9%
11.1
-63%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.2
6.8
-113%
6.6
-106%
2.7
16%
7.4
-131%
Gamma
2.3 96%
2.43 91%
2.23 99%
2.019 109%
2.16 102%
CCT
6894 94%
7956 82%
8346 78%
6810 95%
8534 76%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-22% / -17%
-37% / -14%
46% / 35%
-18% / -23%

* ... smaller is better

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 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7 ms rise
↘ 11 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. » 22 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17 ms rise
↘ 19 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 31 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (38.8 ms).

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 17714 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.


CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life - Good runtime

The SoC is the in-house Kirin 710, which is already known from many similarly priced smartphones from Huawei and Honor. The 2-year-old processor is a little difficult to handle during performance peaks, but it is still sufficient for smooth everyday operation with only very rare jerking.

Simpler games without much demands on the graphics card can be played on the smartphone, for more complex mobile games you may have to reduce the graphics settings.

The memory is quite slow eMMC Flash, the Samsung Galaxy M31 has here by UFS 2.0 again the nose in front. However, the card reader does a solid job with good speeds in cooperation with our reference microSD card, the Toshiba Exceria Pro M501.

The Honor 9X Lite gets slightly warm under load, but this is never a problem. The mono speaker is moderately loud, but offers a decent sound, which also reproduces voices and singing in an easily understandable way and is not too high-frequency-heavy. Whoever listens to music more often, will probably still prefer to use the 3.5mm audio port or Bluetooth, over which you get a clean sound signal on your devices.

The battery achieves a decent result with 13:13 hours in our WLAN test, which is about one hour below the Honor 8X. The Samsung Galaxy M31 with its huge battery lasts much longer. The battery life of the Honor 9X Lite is completely sufficient for everyday use; you don't have to charge it every day during normal use. The charger supports 10 watts of charging power and needs well over 2 hours until the battery is full again.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1320 Points ∼67%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
883 Points ∼45% -33%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1325 Points ∼67% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1320 - 1356, n=2)
1338 Points ∼68% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=106)
1963 Points ∼100% +49%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
331 Points ∼59%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
150 Points ∼27% -55%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
348 Points ∼62% +5%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (330 - 331, n=2)
331 Points ∼59% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=106)
557 Points ∼100% +68%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6887 Points ∼96%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
5251 Points ∼74% -24%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
5587 Points ∼78% -19%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7141 Points ∼100% +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (5803 - 7141, n=12)
6497 Points ∼91% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=509)
5915 Points ∼83% -14%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
9322 Points ∼100%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6909 Points ∼74% -26%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
6202 Points ∼67% -33%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
8939 Points ∼96% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (7004 - 9854, n=13)
8380 Points ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=667)
6485 Points ∼70% -30%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2479 Points ∼92%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2257 Points ∼84% -9%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1102 Points ∼41% -56%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2332 Points ∼86% -6%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2702 Points ∼100% +9%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1851 - 2789, n=15)
2350 Points ∼87% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=512)
2200 Points ∼81% -11%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
847 Points ∼40%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
831 Points ∼39% -2%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
467 Points ∼22% -45%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1533 Points ∼73% +81%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
801 Points ∼38% -5%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (470 - 1194, n=15)
831 Points ∼39% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=512)
2112 Points ∼100% +149%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
992 Points ∼50%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
967 Points ∼49% -3%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
536 Points ∼27% -46%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1659 Points ∼84% +67%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
950 Points ∼48% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (563 - 1351, n=15)
965 Points ∼49% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8269, n=513)
1971 Points ∼100% +99%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2456 Points ∼91%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2221 Points ∼82% -10%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1106 Points ∼41% -55%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2308 Points ∼86% -6%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2697 Points ∼100% +10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1656 - 2723, n=15)
2358 Points ∼87% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=543)
2112 Points ∼78% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1369 Points ∼48%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1251 Points ∼44% -9%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
782 Points ∼28% -43%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1993 Points ∼70% +46%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1316 Points ∼47% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (740 - 1378, n=15)
1250 Points ∼44% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=543)
2830 Points ∼100% +107%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1518 Points ∼64%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1385 Points ∼58% -9%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
836 Points ∼35% -45%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2055 Points ∼86% +35%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1485 Points ∼63% -2%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (844 - 1534, n=15)
1395 Points ∼59% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=543)
2376 Points ∼100% +57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2459 Points ∼92%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2325 Points ∼87% -5%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1078 Points ∼40% -56%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2258 Points ∼85% -8%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2663 Points ∼100% +8%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1924 - 2716, n=15)
2429 Points ∼91% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=593)
2083 Points ∼78% -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
857 Points ∼48%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
728 Points ∼41% -15%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
405 Points ∼23% -53%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1478 Points ∼83% +72%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
798 Points ∼45% -7%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (457 - 857, n=15)
755 Points ∼42% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=593)
1779 Points ∼100% +108%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1002 Points ∼59%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
859 Points ∼51% -14%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
470 Points ∼28% -53%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1601 Points ∼94% +60%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
945 Points ∼56% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (550 - 1002, n=15)
891 Points ∼53% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7400, n=594)
1695 Points ∼100% +69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2429 Points ∼92%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2328 Points ∼88% -4%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1084 Points ∼41% -55%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2195 Points ∼83% -10%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2645 Points ∼100% +9%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1907 - 2654, n=15)
2422 Points ∼92% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=635)
1948 Points ∼74% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1355 Points ∼58%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
979 Points ∼42% -28%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
680 Points ∼29% -50%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2020 Points ∼86% +49%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1280 Points ∼55% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (568 - 1355, n=15)
1072 Points ∼46% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12611, n=634)
2340 Points ∼100% +73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1503 Points ∼73%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1124 Points ∼55% -25%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
741 Points ∼36% -51%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2056 Points ∼100% +37%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1445 Points ∼70% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (673 - 1503, n=15)
1218 Points ∼59% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9549, n=637)
2011 Points ∼98% +34%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21625 Points ∼100%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
12009 Points ∼56% -44%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
14930 Points ∼69% -31%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
20128 Points ∼93% -7%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
17450 Points ∼81% -19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (11158 - 22668, n=12)
16572 Points ∼77% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=781)
15413 Points ∼71% -29%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21470 Points ∼81%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19251 Points ∼73% -10%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
11549 Points ∼44% -46%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
25160 Points ∼95% +17%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21533 Points ∼81% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2177 - 22605, n=12)
18746 Points ∼71% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=779)
26525 Points ∼100% +24%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21504 Points ∼90%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
16976 Points ∼71% -21%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
12161 Points ∼51% -43%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
23836 Points ∼100% +11%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
20468 Points ∼86% -5%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (12120 - 22168, n=12)
19147 Points ∼80% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=779)
20738 Points ∼87% -4%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.2 fps ∼37%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
fps ∼0% -100%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4.1 fps ∼36% -2%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
5.7 fps ∼50% +36%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.1 fps ∼36% -2%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2.2 - 7, n=13)
3.92 fps ∼35% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=305)
11.3 fps ∼100% +169%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼32%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
fps ∼0% -100%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1.4 fps ∼17% -46%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
3.6 fps ∼44% +38%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼32% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2.6 - 4, n=13)
2.92 fps ∼36% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=303)
8.09 fps ∼100% +211%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.4 fps ∼38%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
fps ∼0% -100%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6.4 fps ∼38% 0%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
9.4 fps ∼56% +47%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5.2 fps ∼31% -19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (4.6 - 6.9, n=13)
6.03 fps ∼36% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=309)
16.9 fps ∼100% +164%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼36%
Huawei P Smart 2020
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
fps ∼0% -100%
Sony Xperia L4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3.8 fps ∼20% -46%
Samsung Galaxy M31
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
10 fps ∼52% +43%
Honor 8X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.6 fps ∼24% -34%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (4.6 - 7, n=13)
6.52 fps ∼34% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=308)
19.4 fps ∼100% +177%
Honor 9X LiteHuawei P Smart 2020Sony Xperia L4Samsung Galaxy M31Honor 8XAverage 128 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-8%
-8%
61%
-4%
-0%
-12%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
69.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
62.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-10%
60.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-12%
68.12 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
62.5 (26.1 - 73.5, n=22)
-10%
51 (1.7 - 87.1, n=527)
-26%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
76 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
76.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
83.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
74.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
75.24 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
75.2 (29.2 - 85.9, n=22)
-1%
69 (8.1 - 96.5, n=527)
-9%
Random Write 4KB
72.4
61.1
-16%
22.5
-69%
152.4
110%
59.87
-17%
46.5 (8.48 - 151, n=24)
-36%
35.3 (0.14 - 319, n=878)
-51%
Random Read 4KB
44.8
41.2
-8%
61.2
37%
128.9
188%
49.54
11%
68.4 (20.7 - 108, n=24)
53%
58.7 (1.59 - 324, n=878)
31%
Sequential Write 256KB
200.9
168.3
-16%
165
-18%
221.7
10%
169.98
-15%
186 (90 - 258, n=24)
-7%
126 (2.99 - 911, n=878)
-37%
Sequential Read 256KB
286.8
282.1
-2%
293.4
2%
489.5
71%
283.87
-1%
288 (144 - 499, n=24)
0%
338 (12.1 - 1802, n=878)
18%

Temperature

Max. Load
 44.6 °C
112 F
40.3 °C
105 F
39.6 °C
103 F
 
 43.4 °C
110 F
39.9 °C
104 F
39.7 °C
103 F
 
 42.5 °C
109 F
39.6 °C
103 F
39.1 °C
102 F
 
Maximum: 44.6 °C = 112 F
Average: 41 °C = 106 F
35.3 °C
96 F
38.7 °C
102 F
43.2 °C
110 F
35.7 °C
96 F
38.4 °C
101 F
42.6 °C
109 F
35.3 °C
96 F
38.7 °C
102 F
41.2 °C
106 F
Maximum: 43.2 °C = 110 F
Average: 38.8 °C = 102 F
Power Supply (max.)  45.6 °C = 114 F | Room Temperature 21.7 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.6 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.2 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.7 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.


Heatmap Top
Heatmap Top
Heatmap Back
Heatmap Back

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.739.22537.334.93129.229.64032.432.1503240.26323.623.78021.721.610021.930.612522.524.416018.531.320014.84025012.339.531512.549.140011.953.450013.156.163014.563.880018.766.9100019.370.7125018.269.4160016.466.7200014.366.3250014.963.8315014.661.6400015.469.6500016.161.4630016.762.5800017.769.61000018.668.11250019.449.61600020.350.7SPL56.366.463.728.778.6N10.719.118.1142.6median 16.4median 61.6Delta2.310.735.433.439.733.62829.927.430.729.830.725.828.622.223.623.424.221.221.319.224.218.9361938.417.246.21649.816.755.718.86014.765.615.666.81463.813.962.514.460.414.756.614.355.8156415.765.615.862.815.763.416.264.915.749.915.95167.471.86327.674.821.626.315133.9median 15.8median 56.61.910.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHonor 9X LiteHuawei P Smart 2020
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Honor 9X Lite audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.8% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Huawei P Smart 2020 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 66% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 79% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery life

Honor 9X Lite
3750 mAh
Huawei P Smart 2020
3400 mAh
Sony Xperia L4
3580 mAh
Samsung Galaxy M31
6000 mAh
Honor 8X
3750 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
793
523
-34%
783
-1%
1324
67%
852
7%
694 (223 - 2636, n=743)
-12%
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 13min

Pros

+ decent battery life
+ true color screen
+ much memory
+ Google Services

Cons

- fluctuating WLAN-speed
- outdated software

Verdict – Decent equipment, but old software

In review: Honor 9X Lite. Test device provided by:
In review: Honor 9X Lite. Test device provided by:
notebooksbilliger.de

Should one be angry with Honor for only launching a slightly modified version of the Honor 8X with the Honor 9X Lite or praise that there is a camera that focuses on contemporary pixel binning and that the manufacturer offers a lot of memory for the price?

In any case, with the upcoming Android 11, the operating system is outdated and the security patches are hopelessly outdated. In view of the current dispute with the USA and the low device price, one should also not expect any updates soon.

The power of the Honor 9X Lite is still good for the price range, but there are already much more powerful devices available. The battery life is decent, the camera takes acceptable pictures and the screen is even reasonably color fidelity and offers quite a high resolution. The fingerprint sensor unlocks the device quickly and reliably, and in everyday life you can quickly and easily access frequently used apps thanks to Google support.

The Honor 9X Lite is a remake of the Honor 8X with new camera and old software. Without serious weaknesses and with quite a lot of memory it can still convince despite older components.

The Honor 9X Lite is still a decent offer for moderate demands, especially since it is currently available for a reasonable price on the net or is offered directly from the manufacturer with many accessory gifts. However, one should not place any value on current software if one decides on the inexpensive mid-range device.

Honor 9X Lite - 08/27/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
78%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
44 / 70 → 63%
Weight
89%
Battery
90%
Display
86%
Games Performance
13 / 64 → 20%
Application Performance
64 / 86 → 74%
Temperature
85%
Noise
100%
Audio
66 / 90 → 73%
Camera
55%
Average
71%
77%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 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 > Honor 9X Lite Smartphone Review – Convincing thanks to new camera and Google?
Florian Schmitt, 2020-08-27 (Update: 2020-08-27)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.