Honor Magic7 Lite
Specifications

Secondary Camera: 16 MPix f/2.5
Price comparison
Average of 21 scores (from 35 reviews)
Reviews for the Honor Magic7 Lite
Source: Tech Advisor

The Honor Magic 7 Lite excels in areas like battery life, durability, and main camera performance, making it a reliable choice for users who value longevity and practicality. However, its dated design, average performance, and limited software support leave it trailing behind competitors in the fiercely competitive mid-range market. If battery life is your top priority, the Magic 7 Lite is a clear winner. But for those seeking a more well-rounded device, there are better options available.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/29/2025
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Expert Reviews

Despite being a generally competent mid-range phone, the Honor Magic 7 Lite is ultimately tricky to recommend. Battery life is excellent and improvements like OIS for the main camera, faster charging speed and upgraded device durability just about account for the extra £50 premium. Even with these improvements, however, the Magic 7 Lite struggles to compete with the now-discounted Google Pixel 8a. It may not have as much storage or last as long, but the Pixel’s general performance, camera quality, display accuracy and software support are all far superior. The Magic 7 Lite puts up a valiant fight but it would have been better off avoiding the price hike and giving the Pixel a wider berth.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/14/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: DxOMark

The Honor Magic7 Lite’s battery achieved a top score ex aequo in our database thanks to a powerful performance in autonomy. Equipped with a serious 6600 mAh battery, the Honor Magic7 Lite, which is marketed as Honor X9c in some regions of the world, exhibited an impressive battery life of just over three and a half days under moderate usage. The device gained 12 hours of autonomy over the previous model, the Honor Magic6 Lite (5800 mAh), lasting 89 hours without needing to recharge. Across most test cases, particularly in video streaming and gaming, the Honor Magic7 Lite demonstrated exceptional autonomy, also achieving the No. 1 spot in our autonomy sub-score.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/07/2025
Source: Irish Mirror

Overall, you get a well-made everyday device built to withstand knocks, drops and falls and yet it looks more premium than you might expect at its price point. If you are on a budget, this Honor handset will give you enough bang for your buck.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/02/2025
Source: Stuff TV

In a few ways, the Honor Magic 7 Lite doesn’t make any meaningful progress over its predecessor. The entry-grade chipset is unchanged, the firm’s software upgrade commitments still lag behind rival brands, and now the styling feels that much more out of step with the rest of the phone world. It’s not all bad though. Some might argue the rear cameras have gone backwards by dropping the third snapper, but the Magic 6 Lite’s macro lens was a token inclusion at best, and adding optical image stabilisation has upped the Magic 7 Lite’s night-time performance among affordable rivals. This is also a much tougher handset, which will be great news for accident-prone shoppers. Ultimately you’ll buy the Magic 7 Lite for its colossal battery; there’s simply no other affordable option out there with such a high capacity. If you’re after a long-lasting handset that doesn’t look like an actual brick, you’ll be able to forgive the limited generational upgrades everywhere else.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/02/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Phandroid

At a price that rests between 200-300 USD (when converted), the Honor Magic 7 Lite’s impressive design and build quality, good-looking display, capable battery and generally smooth performance make for a solid everyday smartphone. Folks looking to save a bit of cash will find a lot to love about the Magic 7 Lite, as long as they keep their expectations in check. On the other hand the low-end chipset, pre-installed apps and overall camera performance might leave you wanting a little more, and people who prioritize these areas will have to spend a bit more to get the device they want. At the end of the day though it’s a solid phone that plays it safe without attempting to punch higher than its weight class.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/02/2025
Foreign Reviews
Source: PC Welt

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/18/2025
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Smartzone

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/13/2025
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 75% display: 90% mobility: 85% workmanship: 85%
Source: Xataka

Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/15/2025
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 65% display: 80% mobility: 93% workmanship: 83%
Source: Hipertextual

Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/15/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: 4G News

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/08/2025
Rating: Total score: 90%
Source: HDblog.it

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/23/2025
Rating: Total score: 75% features: 79%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi

Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 01/20/2025
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 75% display: 85% mobility: 95% workmanship: 73%
Source: Evo smart

Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/09/2025
Rating: Total score: 71% price: 60% performance: 60% display: 70% mobility: 90%
Source: Tutto Android

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/07/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: DDay IT

Positive: Premium design; waaterproof and dust avoiding; tough device; long battery life; nice cameras. Negative: Average hardware; relatively high price.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/17/2025
Source: Igizmo

Positive: Tough device; waterproof IP64M; very long battery life; powerful hardware; high performance. Negative: Heavy and bulky; relatively high price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/17/2025
Source: Mister Gadget

Positive: Slim size; light weight; tough device; high autonomy; affordable price. Negative: No wireless charging; average performance.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/15/2025
Source: Techprincess IT

Positive: Decent hardware; smooth performance; large battery capacity; affordable price. Negative: Average cameras.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/07/2025
Source: Presse Citron

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/28/2025
Rating: Total score: 84% performance: 75% display: 95% mobility: 95% workmanship: 95%
Source: Les Mobiles

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/17/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Journal du Geek

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/13/2025
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Les Numeriques

Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/08/2025
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 60% display: 80% mobility: 100% workmanship: 80% ergonomy: 80%
Source: 01Net

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/08/2025
Rating: Total score: 70% price: 80% mobility: 70%
Source: Frandroid

Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/08/2025
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 70% display: 70% mobility: 90% workmanship: 80%
Source: L' Eclaireur FNAC

Positive: Elegant design; great built quality; waterproof IP68/IP69; nice cameras; fast charging. Negative: High price.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/28/2025
Source: Co Nowego

Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 02/09/2025
Source: Telepolis

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/05/2025
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: GSM Maniak

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/02/2025
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 70% display: 79% mobility: 95%
Source: Techno Senior

Positive: Tough device; impressive battery life; decent hardware; smooth performance; stereo speakers; NFC module; support eSIM. Negative: Poor video recording; without headphone jack; lack of MicroSD card slot.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/08/2025
Source: Komputerswiat

Positive: Very impressive autonomy; support eSIM; waterproof IP64; optical image stabilization (OIS) on main camera; stereo speakers. Negative: Expensive.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/28/2025
Source: GSM Online PL

Positive: Premium design; great built quality; nice AMOLED display; large battery capacity; quick 65W charging; good speakers. Negative: Average gaming performance; poor cameras.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/02/2025
Source: MobilArena HU

Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/02/2025
Rating: price: 60% display: 90% mobility: 100% workmanship: 80%
Source: Smartmania.cz

Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/11/2025
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 85% features: 75% mobility: 98% workmanship: 81%
Source: Computerblog.ro

Positive: Slim size; light weight; nice design; support waterproof; large battery capacity; attractive price. Negative: Without wireless charging; poor selfie camera.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 01/19/2025
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 710: Graphics chip for smartphones and tablets, integrated in the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 2 SoC. According to Qualcomm, 2x faster than the old Adreno 644 in the Snapdragon 7 Gen 1.
Non demanding games should be playable with these graphics cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
SD 6 Gen 1: Mid-range SoC with 8 Kryo cores (4x ARM Cortex A78 2.2 GHz performance cluster, 4x ARM Cortex A55 with 1.8 efficiency cluster) and an X62 5G modem (up to 2900 Mbps download). The chip is manufactured using the modern 4nm process.» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
6.78":
It is a small display format for smartphones. You shouldn't be severely defective in vision, and you won't see much detail on the screen and only have a small resolution available. For that, the device should be small and handy, easy to transport.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.Honor:
In 2014 Huawei created the sub brand Honor and offers certain smartphone series under this name. Occasionally the products are also called Huawei Honor.
The market share of Honor products is manageable, but there are several reviews on Honor smartphones with average ratings (as of 2016).
76.86%: This rating is not earth-shattering. This rating must actually be seen as average, since there are about as many devices with worse ratings as better ones. A purchase recommendation can only be seen with a lot of goodwill, unless it is about websites that generally rate strictly.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.