Notebookcheck

Honor 9X Smartphone Review: A new Huawei smartphone with Google Play Services

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Andrea Grüblinger (translated by Alex Alderson), 11/11/2019

Déjà vu. Notebookcheck.com reviews the Honor 9X, a midrange handset with a pop-up front-facing camera, a notch and punch-hole free 6.59-inch display and a HiSilicon Kirin 710F SoC among other features. Read on to find out in what area this latest Honor smartphone excels, and if it can maintain the company's reputation of selling competitively priced midrange handsets.

Honor 9X

The Honor 9X is a tale of two handsets. On the one hand, the company has released a HiSilicon Kirin 810-powered model that comes without Google Services. On the other, there is the Kirin 710F-powered edition that launches with Google Services. Honor is pricing both versions identically too.

Essentially, the Honor 9X launching in Europe is a re-branded Huawei P Smart Z, which we reviewed earlier this year, but with slighter faster storage and an improved primary camera sensor. More on what the F in the Kirin 710F means later. We have included an overview below of the Honor 9X and the devices against which we will be comparing it.

Honor 9X (9 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.59 inch 19.5, 2340 x 1080 pixel 391 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, LCD IPS
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, , 112.6 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: up to 512 GB microSD cards, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, digital compass, gyroscope, proximity sensor,, OTG, Miracast, Wi-Fi Calling
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS: 850, 900, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. LTE: 800, 850, 900, 1,800, 2,100, 2,300, 2,500, 2,600 MHz., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.8 x 163.5 x 77.3 ( = 0.35 x 6.44 x 3.04 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/1.8
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix f/2.2
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Onscreen, Headphones, charger, USB cable, SIM tool, quick start guide, warranty card, EMUI 9.1 , 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.84 W/kg - head. LTE Cat.12 (600 Mbps/100 Mbps), DRM Widevine: L1, fanless
Weight
197 g ( = 6.95 oz / 0.43 pounds), Power Supply: 53 g ( = 1.87 oz / 0.12 pounds)
Price
300 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Device comparison table

RatingDateModelWeightDriveSizeResolutionBest Price
76%11/2019Honor 9X
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
197 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.59"2340x1080
84%06/2019Huawei P Smart Z 2019
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
197 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.59"2340x1080
81%11/2019Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4
200 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.53"2340x1080
84%04/2019Sony Xperia 10
630, Adreno 508
162 g64 GB eMMC Flash6"2520x1080
81%07/2019Xiaomi Mi 9T
730, Adreno 618
191 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.39"2340x1080
80%04/2019Samsung Galaxy A50
Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3
166 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2340x1080

Case - A pop-up camera and a plastic back

The 6.59-inch display with which Honor has equipped the Honor 9X does away with a punch-hole or notch, which is a welcome change from the other midrange handsets that we have covered recently. Honor has achieved this interrupted display by hiding the front-facing camera within the chassis of the device. The camera appears from the top edge of the frame when you want to use it courtesy of a motorised housing, and it then returns within the chassis when you are done taking selfies.

Honor claims that the device has a 91% screen-to-body ratio, which would be unrivalled for a midrange smartphone. Our measurements return an 84% ratio though, a far cry from Honor's claim. Regardless, an 84% screen-to-body ratio is much higher than many other modern midrange handsets.

The modern design extends to the rear, which has a subtly curved back. Honor currently offers the device with Phantom black and Phantom blue back panels, which both look like glass in marketing photos. However, our review unit definitely has a plastic back, and it is one that feels rather cheap with the hollow feedback that it produces. The device has a plastic frame too, something that is also not necessarily obvious from the photos that Honor has provided.

Our review unit is well-built other than its hollow back panel though. Hence, our complaints are rather minor here.

Honor 9X
Honor 9X
Honor 9X
Honor 9X

Size Comparison

163.5 mm / 6.44 inch 77.3 mm / 3.04 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 197 g0.4343 lbs163.5 mm / 6.44 inch 77.3 mm / 3.04 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 197 g0.4343 lbs161.35 mm / 6.35 inch 76.4 mm / 3.01 inch 8.79 mm / 0.3461 inch 200 g0.4409 lbs158.5 mm / 6.24 inch 74.7 mm / 2.94 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 166 g0.366 lbs156.7 mm / 6.17 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 191 g0.4211 lbs156 mm / 6.14 inch 68 mm / 2.68 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 162 g0.3571 lbs

Connectivity - 128 GB of storage, a headphone jack and fingerprint sensor, but no always-on display

Honor has included a 3.5 mm jack, a fingerprint sensor, and 128 GB of UFS 2.1 flash storage. The device supports Miracast and USB OTG too. There is no status LED or always-on display, though. The device supports up to 512-GB microSD cards too if 128 GB is not enough, and it also supports the exFAT file system.

Software - EMUI 9.1 and outdated security patches

The Honor 9X ships with EMUI 9.1, an in-house version of Android 9.0 Pie. Honor had pushed the August 2019 set of security patches to our review unit at the time of testing in November, making them a touch outdated.

The device comes with Google Services preinstalled, which means that the standard suite of Google apps also make an appearance. Honor includes several in-house apps too.

Quick search
Quick search
Quick settings
Quick settings
Settings
Settings
Default home screen
Default home screen

Communication & GPS - Slow Wi-Fi but accurate GPS

The Honor 9X supports up to IEEE 802.11ac and can connect to 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi networks. Theoretically, the device should have achieved decent transfer speeds during our tests, but the opposite proved the case as our comparison tables below demonstrate. We tested the Honor 9X with the same Linksys EA8500 as we used with all our comparison devices, but it could only average a measly 156 Mb/s across both iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests we ran. In short, the Honor 9X has comparatively slow Wi-Fi performance for a 300-Euro (~$331) smartphone released in 2019.

The device also supports relatively few LTE bands. The eight bands that it utilises are enough for LTE coverage within Europe, especially as it supports the increasingly more frequently used Band 28. You may struggle to find a network outside of that region, though.

The Honor 9X has two nanoSIM card slots and supports LTE on both. Its second SIM-card slot is a hybrid one though, meaning that you must compromise between dual-SIM functionality and microSD card expansion; you cannot have two SIM cards and a microSD card inserted simultaneously.

There is an NFC chip onboard too, along with Bluetooth 4.2. We should point out that the latter is a bit outdated now, with other midrange devices having graduated to the newer Bluetooth 5.0 standard.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
353 (min: 330, max: 362) MBit/s ∼100% +108%
Sony Xperia 10
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
334 (min: 326, max: 341) MBit/s ∼95% +96%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Adreno 618, 730, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
333 (min: 297, max: 343) MBit/s ∼94% +96%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9610, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
294 (min: 278, max: 302) MBit/s ∼83% +73%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=462)
230 MBit/s ∼65% +35%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
191 (min: 143, max: 217) MBit/s ∼54% +12%
Honor 9X
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
170 (min: 156, max: 179) MBit/s ∼48%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
319 (min: 302, max: 325) MBit/s ∼100% +125%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Adreno 618, 730, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
293 (min: 161, max: 346) MBit/s ∼92% +106%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9610, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
272 (min: 250, max: 285) MBit/s ∼85% +92%
Sony Xperia 10
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
253 (min: 128, max: 283) MBit/s ∼79% +78%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=462)
219 MBit/s ∼69% +54%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
212 (min: 194, max: 237) MBit/s ∼66% +49%
Honor 9X
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
142 (min: 118, max: 160) MBit/s ∼45%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø170 (156-179)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø142 (118-160)
GPS Test: Indoors
GPS Test: Indoors
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Outdoors

Our review unit achieved a satellite fix with up to five metres accuracy regardless of where we tested it. While not at the levels of flagship smartphones, the Honor 9X performs comparatively well for a midrange device.

We also took the Honor 9X on a bike ride to test its location accuracy against a Garmin Edge 520, one of our reference bike computers. Again, our review unit surprised us with its accuracy, with it only recording a 10-metre longer route than the Garmin did over our 3.9 km test route. We would have expected a significantly higher deviation from a 300-Euro (~$331) smartphone, so the Honor 9X has done exceptionally well in this regard. In short, you should encounter no issues with using the Honor 9X for all navigation tasks.

GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Honor 9X - Overview
GPS test: Honor 9X - Overview
GPS test: Honor 9X - Bridge
GPS test: Honor 9X - Bridge
GPS test: Honor 9X - Loop
GPS test: Honor 9X - Loop

Telephone Features & Call Quality - Wi-Fi calling

EMUI 9.1 dialer
EMUI 9.1 dialer

While the Honor 9X supports Wi-Fi calling, we could not find a corresponding option for enabling voice over LTE (VoLTE). Your carrier must have provisioned the Honor 9X on its network before Wi-Fi calling will work, though.

We experienced no issues with our review unit during our call tests. Both the microphone and earpiece worked well, so you need not resort to using headphones if you are making a call on the Honor 9X.

Cameras - A pop-up selfie camera and a 48 MP primary rear-facing sensor

Taking a selfie with the Honor 9X
Taking a selfie with the Honor 9X

The Honor 9X has four cameras, the primary one of which is a Sony IMX582. Honor complements the 48 MP and f/1.8 aperture sensor with a 2 MP depth-of-field and 8 MP ultra-wide-angle sensors. The latter has an f/2.4 aperture and 120° field of view for reference. The 16 MP front-facing sensor completes the camera array.

The IMX582 has a Quad Bayer colour filter that allows it to combine four adjacent pixels into one, theoretically creating more detail per pixel in a 12 MP image. The Honor 9X shoots in 12 MP by default.

The primary camera sensor performs well in daylight, with our review unit producing shots that are detailed and sharp. While not on par with modern flagships, the IMX582 delivers good enough image quality in our opinion for devices at this price. However, the sensor struggles in low-light scenarios, just as it did during our Xiaomi Mi 9T review.

Undoubtedly, one of the highlights of the Honor 9X is its motorised front-facing camera, perhaps thanks to the novelty of it alone. The 16 MP sensor is not a selfie specialist, though. On the contrary, our review unit tends to overexpose photos as it does in the P Smart Z. We noticed image artefacts during our tests too.

An ultra-wide-angle shot
An ultra-wide-angle shot
A standard shot with the IMX582
A standard shot with the IMX582
Additional camera options
Additional camera options
Camera UI
Camera UI
Camera settings
Camera settings
Pro mode
Pro mode

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
ColorChecker Photo
29.6 ∆E
54.9 ∆E
39.8 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
45.2 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.7 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
43.6 ∆E
29.7 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
46.6 ∆E
37.4 ∆E
76.6 ∆E
44.6 ∆E
42 ∆E
94.3 ∆E
71.4 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor 9X: 47.07 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 94.33 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
10.6 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
1.1 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor 9X: 5.52 ∆E min: 1.07 - max: 10.65 ∆E
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
A shot of our ColorChecker Passport graph at 1 lux
A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart at 1 lux

Accessories and Warranty - A few accessories and 24-month warranty

Our review unit arrived with a 10 W modular charger, a matching USB cable, and some headphones in the box. There is also a SIM tool and a quick-start guide and even a silicone case as well.

The Honor 9X comes with a limited 24-month manufacturer's warranty. Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation - A fingerprint sensor and 2D face unlock

Honor has placed the fingerprint sensor on the back of the device, which worked reliably during our tests. The scanner does not unlock our review unit particularly quickly though, with there being about a two-second delay before the screen wakes. It will take about two seconds for the Honor phone to unlock.

While the device does not offer any other forms of biometric authentication, you can use its front-facing camera for unlocking the device with your face. However, this is not as secure as using a fingerprint, password, pattern or PIN. Moreover, face unlock is much slower than these other methods, as you must wait for the front-facing camera to appear.

The Honor 9X also has a capacitive touchscreen that recognises up to 10 points simultaneously. The one in our device recognised inputs quickly and precisely, so we have no complaints here.

Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode

Display - A dark and low-contrast IPS panel

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Honor 9X has a 6.59-inch IPS panel that resolves natively at 2340x1080. The 19.5:9 aspect ratio display looks sharp enough for everyday use in our opinion, although its maximum brightness could be higher. X-Rite i1Pro 2 recorded its average peak brightness at 483 cd/m² with an evenness of 94%, putting it slightly ahead of the P Smart Z. However, it is noticeably darker than our other comparison devices, especially the Redmi Note 8 Pro and Samsung Galaxy A50. Incidentally, the display gets roughly as bright when set to manual brightness as when we left the ambient light sensor enabled.

469
cd/m²
476
cd/m²
486
cd/m²
477
cd/m²
494
cd/m²
479
cd/m²
480
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
499
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 499 cd/m² Average: 482.6 cd/m² Minimum: 2.09 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Contrast: 969:1 (Black: 0.51 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.74 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 7.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
99% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.086
Honor 9X
LCD IPS, 2340x1080, 6.59
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
LCD IPS, 2340x1080, 6.59
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.53
Sony Xperia 10
IPS-LCD, 2520x1080, 6
Xiaomi Mi 9T
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Samsung Galaxy A50
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4
Screen
-2%
23%
19%
38%
31%
Brightness middle
494
439
-11%
669
35%
547
11%
589
19%
644
30%
Brightness
483
431
-11%
630
30%
525
9%
589
22%
628
30%
Brightness Distribution
94
92
-2%
87
-7%
93
-1%
96
2%
91
-3%
Black Level *
0.51
0.36
29%
0.42
18%
0.36
29%
Contrast
969
1219
26%
1593
64%
1519
57%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.74
6.4
-11%
4.8
16%
4.6
20%
2.5
56%
2.64
54%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.26
12.1
-18%
9
12%
12.1
-18%
4.9
52%
9.23
10%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7.3
8.6
-18%
6.2
15%
3.9
47%
1.6
78%
2.5
66%
Gamma
2.086 105%
2.18 101%
2.24 98%
2.17 101%
2.24 98%
2.024 109%
CCT
8572 76%
9021 72%
7846 83%
7158 91%
6544 99%
6649 98%

* ... 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 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

While the Honor 9X has a brighter and more evenly lit display than the one in the P Smart Z, it also has a considerably higher black value, which we measured at 0.51 cd/m². This not only gives blacks a grey haze but also results in a disappointing 961:1: contrast ratio. All our comparison devices managed at least 1,000:1 during our tests, while those with AMOLED panels have a theoretically infinite contrast ratio.

Moreover, our photo spectrometer and CalMAN software showed that the display suffers from high colour and greyscale deviations from the sRGB colour space, which we measured at 5.7 and 7.3, respectively. Ideally, these would be at 3 or below. The display also has an 8,572 K colour temperature, which is well above our ideal value of 6,500 K. Correspondingly, the display looks overly cool and has a slight bluish tint to it.

CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour space - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour space - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - sRGB target colour space

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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7 ms rise
↘ 13 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 (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 37 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

The Honor 9X has reasonably stable viewing angles, though. While blacks start to look hazy at acute viewing angles, as the photos below demonstrate, the display always remains readable. Likewise, we had no issues with readability outdoors, although the display can look washed-out in direct sunlight.

Using the Honor 9X outdoors
Using the Honor 9X outdoors
Using the Honor 9X outdoors
Using the Honor 9X outdoors
Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - A Kirin 710F and 4 GB of RAM do not always make for good company

The Kirin 710F that Honor integrates within the Honor 9X has four ARM Cortex-A73 cores and four ARM Cortex-A53 cores that can reach up to 2.2 GHz and 1.7 GHz, respectively. Arranged on a big.LITTLE architecture like the regular Kirin 710, Huawei has used Flip Chip Chip Scale Package (fcCSP) for the Kirin 710F as its F suffix implies. The SoC integrates an ARM Mali-G51 MP4 GPU like the regular Kirin 710 too.

The Kirin 710F and 4 GB of RAM performs well in synthetic benchmarks, but it falls short of expectations in daily use. In short, it is not on the same level as comparable Qualcomm chips. While EMUI 9.1 generally runs smoothly, we noticed some stuttering when multitasking. Load times are noticeably longer than on competing devices too. We also had the same experience with the Huawei P30 Lite and P Smart Z.

By contrast, the UFS 2.1 flash storage with which Honor has equipped the Honor 9X is fast. As the comparison table below demonstrates, the Honor 9X has faster storage than all our comparison devices.

Geekbench 5
Vulkan Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1218 Points ∼79%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 3222, n=30)
1539 Points ∼100%
OpenCL Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
984 Points ∼49%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1793 Points ∼89% +82%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
 
984 Points ∼49% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=36)
2015 Points ∼100% +105%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1412 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1612 Points ∼81% +14%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
 
1412 Points ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=47)
1995 Points ∼100% +41%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
335 Points ∼58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
391 Points ∼68% +17%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
 
335 Points ∼58% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (155 - 1344, n=47)
575 Points ∼100% +72%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7018 Points ∼70%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6929 Points ∼70% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
9967 Points ∼100% +42%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
5987 Points ∼60% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7533 Points ∼76% +7%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5827 Points ∼58% -17%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (5803 - 7141, n=9)
6448 Points ∼65% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=399)
5379 Points ∼54% -23%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
9509 Points ∼64%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
9424 Points ∼63% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14946 Points ∼100% +57%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
4948 Points ∼33% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9049 Points ∼61% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
7029 Points ∼47% -26%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (7004 - 9509, n=10)
8217 Points ∼55% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=566)
5844 Points ∼39% -39%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2345 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2543 Points ∼91% +8%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
2167 Points ∼78% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2786 Points ∼100% +19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2272 - 2345, n=3)
2318 Points ∼83% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=76)
2691 Points ∼97% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
801 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1978 Points ∼70% +147%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
693 Points ∼25% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1917 Points ∼68% +139%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (801 - 1220, n=3)
1047 Points ∼37% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=76)
2807 Points ∼100% +250%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
938 Points ∼37%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2087 Points ∼82% +122%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
861 Points ∼34% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2060 Points ∼81% +120%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (938 - 1365, n=3)
1189 Points ∼47% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=76)
2550 Points ∼100% +172%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2579 Points ∼78%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2789 Points ∼84% +8%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3326 Points ∼100% +29%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1664 Points ∼50% -35%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3241 Points ∼97% +26%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2266 Points ∼68% -12%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1851 - 2789, n=11)
2359 Points ∼71% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=406)
2002 Points ∼60% -22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
844 Points ∼36%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
840 Points ∼36% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2322 Points ∼100% +175%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
792 Points ∼34% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2176 Points ∼94% +158%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1188 Points ∼51% +41%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (470 - 1194, n=11)
825 Points ∼36% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=406)
1824 Points ∼79% +116%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
992 Points ∼41%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
993 Points ∼41% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼100% +143%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
896 Points ∼37% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2347 Points ∼97% +137%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1328 Points ∼55% +34%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (563 - 1351, n=11)
960 Points ∼40% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=407)
1693 Points ∼70% +71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2598 Points ∼77%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2723 Points ∼81% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3362 Points ∼100% +29%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1732 Points ∼52% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3296 Points ∼98% +27%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2241 Points ∼67% -14%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1656 - 2723, n=11)
2374 Points ∼71% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=435)
1910 Points ∼57% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1350 Points ∼41%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1378 Points ∼42% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2323 Points ∼70% +72%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1299 Points ∼39% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3316 Points ∼100% +146%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1553 Points ∼47% +15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (740 - 1378, n=11)
1229 Points ∼37% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=435)
2432 Points ∼73% +80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1525 Points ∼46%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1534 Points ∼46% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼73% +58%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1375 Points ∼42% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3312 Points ∼100% +117%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1667 Points ∼50% +9%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (844 - 1534, n=11)
1376 Points ∼42% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=435)
2040 Points ∼62% +34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2549 Points ∼78%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2668 Points ∼81% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3280 Points ∼100% +29%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1645 Points ∼50% -35%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3227 Points ∼98% +27%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2351 Points ∼72% -8%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1924 - 2716, n=11)
2454 Points ∼75% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=486)
1907 Points ∼58% -25%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
848 Points ∼38%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
856 Points ∼39% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2218 Points ∼100% +162%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
704 Points ∼32% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2008 Points ∼91% +137%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1149 Points ∼52% +35%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (457 - 856, n=11)
743 Points ∼33% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=486)
1510 Points ∼68% +78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
995 Points ∼42%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
990 Points ∼41% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼100% +140%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
809 Points ∼34% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2192 Points ∼92% +120%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1296 Points ∼54% +30%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (550 - 995, n=11)
877 Points ∼37% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=487)
1453 Points ∼61% +46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2536 Points ∼78%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2654 Points ∼81% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3267 Points ∼100% +29%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1687 Points ∼52% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3239 Points ∼99% +28%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2432 Points ∼74% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1907 - 2654, n=11)
2446 Points ∼75% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=527)
1770 Points ∼54% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1333 Points ∼42%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1327 Points ∼42% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2219 Points ∼70% +66%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1235 Points ∼39% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3184 Points ∼100% +139%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1279 Points ∼40% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (568 - 1333, n=11)
1050 Points ∼33% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=526)
1982 Points ∼62% +49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1490 Points ∼47%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1490 Points ∼47% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼75% +60%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1315 Points ∼41% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3196 Points ∼100% +114%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1430 Points ∼45% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (673 - 1490, n=11)
1196 Points ∼37% -20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=529)
1708 Points ∼53% +15%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
22492 Points ∼98%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
22668 Points ∼99% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
22928 Points ∼100% +2%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
12437 Points ∼54% -45%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
19433 Points ∼85% -14%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14353 Points ∼63% -36%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (11158 - 22668, n=9)
15870 Points ∼69% -29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=687)
14357 Points ∼63% -36%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21792 Points ∼47%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
22605 Points ∼49% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
39137 Points ∼84% +80%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
17878 Points ∼38% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
46605 Points ∼100% +114%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16593 Points ∼36% -24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (12426 - 22605, n=9)
20229 Points ∼43% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=685)
22559 Points ∼48% +4%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21943 Points ∼62%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
22168 Points ∼62% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
33832 Points ∼95% +54%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
16290 Points ∼46% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
35557 Points ∼100% +62%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16037 Points ∼45% -27%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (12120 - 22168, n=9)
18823 Points ∼53% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=685)
18200 Points ∼51% -17%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
39 fps ∼48%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
39 fps ∼48% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
82 fps ∼100% +110%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
29 fps ∼35% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
77 fps ∼94% +97%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
39 fps ∼48% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (33 - 39, n=10)
37.9 fps ∼46% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=705)
38.5 fps ∼47% -1%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
35 fps ∼60%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
35 fps ∼60% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +66%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
25 fps ∼43% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +66%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
36 fps ∼62% +3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (31 - 36, n=10)
34.9 fps ∼60% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=714)
28.3 fps ∼49% -19%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21 fps ∼43%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21 fps ∼43% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
49 fps ∼100% +133%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
13 fps ∼27% -38%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
38 fps ∼78% +81%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23 fps ∼47% +10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (17 - 21, n=10)
20.4 fps ∼42% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=610)
22.3 fps ∼46% +6%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19 fps ∼45%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19 fps ∼45% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +121%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
11 fps ∼26% -42%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
34 fps ∼81% +79%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
21 fps ∼50% +11%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (16 - 19, n=10)
18.5 fps ∼44% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=619)
19.6 fps ∼47% +3%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
14 fps ∼48%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
14 fps ∼48% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
29 fps ∼100% +107%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
9.5 fps ∼33% -32%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼93% +93%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼48% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (12 - 14, n=10)
13.7 fps ∼47% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=475)
18.2 fps ∼63% +30%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
12 fps ∼46%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
12 fps ∼46% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
26 fps ∼100% +117%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
7.8 fps ∼30% -35%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
24 fps ∼92% +100%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
13 fps ∼50% +8%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (11 - 13, n=10)
12.5 fps ∼48% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=477)
17 fps ∼65% +42%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.3 fps ∼23%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.2 fps ∼22% -4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6.8 fps ∼67% +196%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
2.7 fps ∼26% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9.3 fps ∼91% +304%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4.9 fps ∼48% +113%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2.2 - 7, n=10)
4.03 fps ∼40% +75%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=198)
10.2 fps ∼100% +343%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4 fps ∼36%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3.5 fps ∼32% -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
11 fps ∼100% +175%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1.7 fps ∼15% -57%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6.1 fps ∼55% +53%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.1 fps ∼28% -22%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2.6 - 4, n=10)
2.88 fps ∼26% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=197)
7.08 fps ∼64% +77%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.1 fps ∼36%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.7 fps ∼28% -23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
17 fps ∼100% +179%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
4.4 fps ∼26% -28%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼88% +146%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.2 fps ∼48% +34%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (4.6 - 6.9, n=10)
5.95 fps ∼35% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=202)
15 fps ∼88% +146%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼37%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5.7 fps ∼30% -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
19 fps ∼100% +171%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
4.9 fps ∼26% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼84% +129%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9 fps ∼47% +29%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (4.6 - 7, n=10)
6.38 fps ∼34% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=202)
16.8 fps ∼88% +140%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.7 fps ∼48%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.7 fps ∼48% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
16 fps ∼100% +108%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
5.3 fps ∼33% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼100% +108%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.9 fps ∼56% +16%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (6.9 - 7.7, n=10)
7.58 fps ∼47% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=400)
12.4 fps ∼78% +61%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.5 fps ∼46%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.1 fps ∼51% +9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14 fps ∼100% +115%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
4.3 fps ∼31% -34%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
13 fps ∼93% +100%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.1 fps ∼58% +25%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (6.4 - 7.1, n=10)
6.72 fps ∼48% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=404)
11.1 fps ∼79% +71%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
183420 Points ∼87%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
140131 Points ∼66% -24%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
88287 Points ∼42% -52%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
210836 Points ∼100% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
144194 Points ∼68% -21%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (124870 - 183420, n=10)
139210 Points ∼66% -24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=296)
143005 Points ∼68% -22%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1090 Points ∼91%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1194 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1145 Points ∼96% +5%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
815 Points ∼68% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1099 Points ∼92% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
927 Points ∼78% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (982 - 1212, n=10)
1100 Points ∼92% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=643)
765 Points ∼64% -30%
Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1478 Points ∼42%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1489 Points ∼42% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3419 Points ∼96% +131%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1409 Points ∼40% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3559 Points ∼100% +141%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1957 Points ∼55% +32%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (1450 - 1489, n=10)
1468 Points ∼41% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=643)
2116 Points ∼59% +43%
Memory (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2948 Points ∼63%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3013 Points ∼65% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3609 Points ∼78% +22%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
983 Points ∼21% -67%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
4646 Points ∼100% +58%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2492 Points ∼54% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2823 - 4360, n=10)
3235 Points ∼70% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=643)
1558 Points ∼34% -47%
System (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5297 Points ∼78%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5267 Points ∼78% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6155 Points ∼91% +16%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
3159 Points ∼47% -40%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6760 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5112 Points ∼76% -3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (4826 - 5568, n=10)
5253 Points ∼78% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=643)
3039 Points ∼45% -43%
Overall (sort by value)
Honor 9X
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2240 Points ∼67%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2301 Points ∼69% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3054 Points ∼92% +36%
Sony Xperia 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Adreno 508, 3072
1374 Points ∼41% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3329 Points ∼100% +49%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2193 Points ∼66% -2%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
  (2140 - 2445, n=10)
2270 Points ∼68% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=643)
1526 Points ∼46% -32%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
47.131 Points ∼100% +43%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=115)
36.4 Points ∼77% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
35.298 Points ∼75% +7%
Honor 9X (Chrome 78)
32.916 Points ∼70%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019 (Chrome 74)
32.095 Points ∼68% -2%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (30 - 32.9, n=5)
31.4 Points ∼67% -5%
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73)
16.254 Points ∼34% -51%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
46.46 runs/min ∼100% +37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
41.6 runs/min ∼90% +23%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=103)
40.2 runs/min ∼87% +19%
Honor 9X (Chrome 78)
33.9 runs/min ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chome 73)
33.07 runs/min ∼71% -2%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (31.2 - 33.9, n=4)
32.4 runs/min ∼70% -4%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
17501 Points ∼100% +78%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
15606 Points ∼89% +58%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73)
10322 Points ∼59% +5%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019 (Chrome 74)
10288 Points ∼59% +4%
Honor 9X (Chrome 78)
9851 Points ∼56%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (9041 - 10288, n=10)
9577 Points ∼55% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=701)
6908 Points ∼39% -30%
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73)
4865 Points ∼28% -51%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=726)
10451 ms * ∼100% -153%
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73)
10256.9 ms * ∼98% -149%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (3999 - 4853, n=10)
4235 ms * ∼41% -3%
Honor 9X (Chrome 78)
4123.4 ms * ∼39%
Huawei P Smart Z 2019 (Chrome 74)
4103 ms * ∼39% -0%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73)
3897 ms * ∼37% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
3001.5 ms * ∼29% +27%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
2563.9 ms * ∼25% +38%

* ... smaller is better

Honor 9XHuawei P Smart Z 2019Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 ProSony Xperia 10Xiaomi Mi 9TSamsung Galaxy A50Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-25%
-6%
-33%
-24%
-29%
-11%
-51%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
67.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.53 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
57.33 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-15%
63.81 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
60.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-10%
59.2 (25.5 - 72.4, n=21)
-12%
49.5 (1.7 - 87.1, n=438)
-26%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
76.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
76.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
71.61 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-6%
83.23 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
73.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
74 (28.2 - 88.2, n=21)
-3%
67.8 (8.1 - 96.5, n=438)
-11%
Random Write 4KB
159.3
77.98
-51%
180.4
13%
14.39
-91%
107.82
-32%
18.2
-89%
87.9 (18.2 - 250, n=43)
-45%
23.1 (0.14 - 259, n=762)
-85%
Random Read 4KB
142.32
94.07
-34%
156.22
10%
53.12
-63%
128.65
-10%
98.9
-31%
140 (98.9 - 161, n=43)
-2%
48.5 (1.59 - 226, n=762)
-66%
Sequential Write 256KB
196.1
191.75
-2%
193.54
-1%
232.87
19%
179.19
-9%
192.1
-2%
212 (182 - 503, n=43)
8%
99.5 (2.99 - 590, n=762)
-49%
Sequential Read 256KB
860.34
304.32
-65%
534.5
-38%
273.8
-68%
492.74
-43%
507.3
-41%
747 (427 - 912, n=43)
-13%
280 (12.1 - 1781, n=762)
-67%

Games - Smooth frame rates at high graphics settings

The midrange GPU is based on ARM's Bifrost architecture and uses four of a possible 12 cores. The Mali G51 supports modern graphics standards like DirectX 11, OpenGL ES 3.2, Vulkan 1.0, and Renderscript.

Our review unit is powerful enough to handle all modern games. While titles like Asphalt 9: Legends and PUBG Mobile do not play well at maximum graphics, we encountered no frame rate issues when we set both to high graphics.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends

Emissions - Hot under load and with an underwhelming speaker

Temperature

The Honor 9X runs hot. While our review unit remains cool when idling, some areas peak at over 40 °C under load. However, you should only notice these during prolonged gaming sessions.

Max. Load
 41.4 °C
107 F
37.3 °C
99 F
35.4 °C
96 F
 
 41.4 °C
107 F
37.4 °C
99 F
35.9 °C
97 F
 
 40.9 °C
106 F
37.2 °C
99 F
35.1 °C
95 F
 
Maximum: 41.4 °C = 107 F
Average: 38 °C = 100 F
33.7 °C
93 F
36.3 °C
97 F
40.5 °C
105 F
34.4 °C
94 F
36 °C
97 F
40.7 °C
105 F
34.6 °C
94 F
36 °C
97 F
39 °C
102 F
Maximum: 40.7 °C = 105 F
Average: 36.8 °C = 98 F
Power Supply (max.)  40.5 °C = 105 F | Room Temperature 21.7 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38 °C / 100 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 41.4 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.7 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.4 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Pink noise speaker test
Pink noise speaker test

Honor has equipped the Honor 9X with a mono speaker that is overly quiet. The speaker does not reproduce frequencies linearly either and even distorts at low volumes. As expected, medium and high-pitched frequencies dominate matters, while bass tones are almost inaudible.

There is a 3.5 mm jack though, so you can use any headphones that you have to hand. The headphones that we tested get pleasantly loud, while we noticed no electrical interference.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2041.247.12537.540.13130.528.44033345037.642.46328.626.28023.923.310022.824.312521.921.716020.329.52002041.625019.144.63151750.540016.553.450016.859.263016.263.680015.565.8100014.869.3125014.169.6160015.568.2200015.567250014.566.7315013.863.3400013.765.9500013.864.563001465.380001460.21000014.149.81250014.243.71600014.337.2SPL60.964.462.127.178N13.816.914.70.939.9median 15.5median 60.2Delta1.911.832.836.425.53027.525.222.333.728.531.118.92920.22521.621.418.723.420.237.917.144.514.647.515.952.915.456.916.56214.265.214.571.513.372.113.472.113.671.314.27014.672.213.676.714.479.214.571.814.268.814.670.514.868.314.95115.244.126.585.10.859.3median 14.6median 68.30.811.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHonor 9XHuawei P Smart Z 2019
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Honor 9X audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.6% 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 25%, worst was 44%
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 53%

Huawei P Smart Z 2019 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management - High power consumption but solid battery life

Power Consumption

In short, the Honor 9X has comparatively high power consumption. Oddly, the P Smart Z averages significantly lower consumption than its sibling, despite being equipped with almost identical hardware. All our other comparison devices fare better than the Honor 9X here too.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.2 / 1.9 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 2.3 / 3 / 4.2 Watt
Load midlight 5.3 / 9.4 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Honor 9X
4000 mAh
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
Sony Xperia 10
2870 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9T
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A50
4000 mAh
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
32%
32%
45%
62%
35%
30%
43%
Idle Minimum *
2.3
0.85
63%
0.79
66%
0.72
69%
0.54
77%
0.8
65%
1.083 (0.8 - 2.3, n=10)
53%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=792)
62%
Idle Average *
3
2.4
20%
2.32
23%
2.16
28%
0.95
68%
1.5
50%
2.2 (1.2 - 3, n=10)
27%
1.741 (0.6 - 6.2, n=791)
42%
Idle Maximum *
4.2
2.43
42%
2.38
43%
2.17
48%
1.08
74%
1.7
60%
2.61 (2.2 - 4.2, n=10)
38%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=792)
52%
Load Average *
5.3
4.62
13%
4.72
11%
3.32
37%
2.7
49%
5.9
-11%
4.73 (4.06 - 6, n=10)
11%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=786)
23%
Load Maximum *
9.4
7.44
21%
7.68
18%
5.34
43%
5.4
43%
8.3
12%
7.58 (6.13 - 9.4, n=10)
19%
5.94 (1.2 - 14.2, n=786)
37%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Honor 9X performed surprisingly well in our battery life tests. Its 4,000 mAh battery lasted a respectable 13:52 hours. Only the Redmi Note 8 Pro and Mi 9T lasted longer than our review unit.

The Honor 9X takes just over two hours to recharge fully with its 10 W charger.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 52min
Honor 9X
4000 mAh
Huawei P Smart Z 2019
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
Sony Xperia 10
2870 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9T
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A50
4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
832
746
-10%
864
4%
541
-35%
991
19%
701
-16%

Pros

+ stylish design
+ accurate GPS
+ fast internal storage
+ good battery life
+ dual-SIM
+ microSD card expansion
+ 3.5 mm jack

Cons

- low maximum brightness
- poor contrast ratio
- few LTE bands supported
- comparatively poor low-light photos
- cheap plastic back
- SoC stutters in daily use
- underwhelming speaker

Verdict - An inferior rehash

The Honor 9X smartphone review. Test device courtesy of Honor Germany.
The Honor 9X smartphone review. Test device courtesy of Honor Germany.

The device that has arrived in Europe feels like a Huawei P Smart Z, principally because it is. Honor has equipped its version with slighter faster internal storage and a better primary camera sensor, but the two devices are otherwise identical save for the Honor 9X also having an inferior speaker.

While the Honor 9X and P Smart Z both launched at around 300 Euros (~$331), the latter can now be had for almost 100 Euros (~$110) off its retail price. Had the two devices launched simultaneously, then it may have been harder to choose between them. However, a slightly better primary camera and faster storage hardly justify spending one-third more for essentially the same device.

The Honor 9X is a decent midrange smartphone that has arrived too late to the party. Go with the P Smart Z or Mi 9T instead.

In short, we would only recommend the Honor 9X over the P Smart Z when they become equally priced. Moreover, if you are willing to spend 300 Euros (~$331) on the Honor 9X, then we would suggest considering the Xiaomi Mi 9T as it represents better value for money and is an all-round better smartphone than the Honor 9X is.

Honor 9X - 11/08/2019 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
76%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
45 / 70 → 64%
Weight
88%
Battery
90%
Display
76%
Games Performance
12 / 64 → 19%
Application Performance
64 / 86 → 74%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
60 / 90 → 67%
Camera
61%
Average
70%
76%
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 9X Smartphone Review: A new Huawei smartphone with Google Play Services
Marcus Herbrich, 2019-11-11 (Update: 2019-11-13)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor - @aldersonaj
Prior to writing and translating for Notebookcheck, I worked for various companies including Apple and Neowin. I have a BA in International History and Politics from the University of Leeds, which I have since converted to a Law Degree. Happy to chat on Twitter or Notebookchat.