Notebookcheck Logo

Honor X7a smartphone review - Flexible cameras in a low-priced cell phone

Phone with vision. A wide-angle camera in a phone that is sold for under 200 Euros (~$218) is not a matter of course. The Honor X7a has one, but it might also have some drawbacks due to its slow processor. We take a closer look in the test.
Honor X7a
Honor X7a (X Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G37 8 x 1.8 - 2.3 GHz, Cortex-A53
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
6.74 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 260 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB 
, 110 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 1 TB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B38/​B40/​B41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.3 x 167.5 x 76.9 ( = 0.33 x 6.59 x 3.03 in)
Battery
5330 mAh Lithium-Polymer, 22.5 Watt charging
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix f/​1.8, Phasenvergleich-AF, LED-Blitz, Videos @1080p/​30fps (Kamera 1); 5.0MP, f/​2.2, Weitwinkelobjektiv (Kamera 2); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, Makroobjektiv (Kamera 3); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, Tiefenschärfe (Kamera 4)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker, charger, USB cable, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.80W/​kg Head, 1.07W/​kg Body, fanless
Weight
196 g ( = 6.91 oz / 0.43 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
230 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
74.6 %
07/2023
Honor X7a
Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320
196 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.74"1600x720
78.5 %
06/2023
Honor X8a
Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2
179 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.70"2388x1080
80.1 %
05/2023
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
SD 685, Adreno 610
188 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080
78.7 %
05/2023
Nokia G22
T606, Mali-G57 MP1
195 g64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.52"1600x720
79.4 %
05/2023
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2
202 g64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.60"2408x1080

Case and features - Wrapped in plastic

The Honor X7a is made of plastic, but it still looks quite stable and pressure on the front or back hardly reaches the screen's liquid crystal. However, the phone creaks quietly when twisted. The back is available in glossy black or a matte version in Ocean Blue.

Both color variants cost from 170 Euros (~$185) on the Internet at the time of testing, for example at amazon.de. That is already a considerable discount compared to the RRP of 230 Euros (~$251). The Titanium Silver color option is almost exclusively available in Central Europe via Honor's online store.

The phone with a 6.74-inch screen offers reasonably narrow bezels, is easy to use for both left- and right-handers, and fits comfortably in the hand thanks to well-rounded edges.

128 GB of mass storage is ample for the price range, but the Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G offers much faster UFS flash than our test device. NFC is on board, as well as a 3.5 mm port for audio devices.

The microSD reader works on class level in the test with our reference SD card Angelbird V60 in terms of read and write speeds.

Honor X7a
Honor X7a
Honor X7a
Honor X7a

Size comparison

167.7 mm / 6.6 inch 78 mm / 3.07 inch 9.1 mm / 0.3583 inch 202 g0.4453 lbs167.5 mm / 6.59 inch 76.9 mm / 3.03 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs165.9 mm / 6.53 inch 76.2 mm / 3 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs165 mm / 6.5 inch 76.2 mm / 3 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs162.9 mm / 6.41 inch 74.5 mm / 2.93 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 179 g0.3946 lbs148 mm / 5.83 inch 105 mm / 4.13 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 1.5 g0.00331 lbs
SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
  (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
50.48 MB/s +93%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.9 - 77, n=99, last 2 years)
28.3 MB/s +8%
Honor X7a
  (Angelbird V60)
26.1 MB/s
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
  (Angelbird V60)
23.6 MB/s -10%
Nokia G22
  (Angelbird V60)
19.6 MB/s -25%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Honor X7a PowerVR GE8320, Helio G37, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø33.7 (24.7-48.3)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø39.3 (27.4-50)
Nokia G22 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø37.6 (30.1-45.4)
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø37.2 (22.3-48.4)
Honor X7a PowerVR GE8320, Helio G37, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø71.2 (27.4-77.4)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.5 (28-82.5)
Nokia G22 Mali-G57 MP1, T606, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø73.1 (39-81.8)
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø75.7 (20.1-83.4)

Communication, software and operation - Good signal strength, but only 4G

In terms of Wi-Fi, WiFi 5 is the fastest standard on board. Thus, the phone reaches the usual speeds between 300 and 380 MBit/s. We used our reference router, Asus ROG Rapture AXE11000, for the test. The transmission rates are fortunately very even.

If you insert a SIM card, a quite good signal strength is always established in running samples during our test. Nevertheless, it is not on the level of high-end phones, especially in difficult situations. Only 4G frequencies are available, the Honor X7a is not a 5G phone, although that can be found in this price range by now. Moreover, the 4G frequency variety is not sufficient for long range trips.

Due to the fairly large memory, it might not be that much of an issue, but it is still annoying that Honor preloads many advertising apps. Also, some of the apps are just duplicates of functions that are covered by the Google apps anyway. The security updates are from May 2023 and thus quite up-to-date. However, the phone still ships with Android 12, respectively the MagicUI 6.1 based on it.

The screen's frame rate can either be fixed at 60 or 90 Hz or dynamically selected by the system. The higher frame rate makes the touchscreen feel much more responsive. The screen can be operated very precisely up into the corners.

The fingerprint sensor is integrated in the standby button. It unlocks the phone reliably, but with a considerable waiting time. Face recognition can also be used, but it is much more susceptible to manipulation due to the pure software recognition.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Honor X7a
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
370 (341min - 386max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
369 (337min - 380max) MBit/s 0%
Honor X8a
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
367 (351min - 384max) MBit/s -1%
Nokia G22
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
362 (319min - 378max) MBit/s -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
325 (290min - 347max) MBit/s -12%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
369 (361min - 371max) MBit/s +20%
Honor X8a
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
333 (276min - 345max) MBit/s +8%
Nokia G22
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
315 (226min - 328max) MBit/s +2%
Honor X7a
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
308 (302min - 314max) MBit/s
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
286 (267min - 310max) MBit/s -7%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380Tooltip
Honor X7a; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø308 (302-314)
Honor X7a; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø370 (341-386)

Cameras - With wide-angle and good algorithm

Recording front camera
Recording front camera

There are 4 camera lenses on the back, the most interesting ones being the main camera with 50 megapixels and the wide-angle with 5 megapixels. The macro lens only has a very low resolution of 2 megapixels and the support lens for bokeh effects hardly adds any value.

In view of the much weaker sensor, the main camera does respectably compared to the high-end phones, which might be due to Honor's good algorithm. Sure, it clearly lacks contrast and details are often not visible. But those who do not enlarge their pictures too much will get decent pictures with the phone. Details are lost in very low light and high brightness differences, especially in dark areas, but the image sharpness in bright areas is decent.

In the lab, our test device partly shows double contours and a clear loss of sharpness at the edges in full studio lighting. In contrast, the image remains quite sharp in the center. Details are still visible at only 1 lux illumination.

You can only switch directly to the wide-angle camera, so you cannot use a hybrid zoom. The pictures are suitable as snapshots, but offer few details; the sky, for example, blurs to a mush.

The front-facing camera takes good selfies in which details are still visible. However, dark areas lack a bit of definition.

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.

Main camera FlowerMain camera EnvironmentMain camera LowLightMain camera Wide-angle
click to load images
ColorChecker
15.2 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
15.1 ∆E
17 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
17 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
13.7 ∆E
14.6 ∆E
6 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
14.6 ∆E
4 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor X7a: 11.14 ∆E min: 4.03 - max: 17.05 ∆E
ColorChecker
28.7 ∆E
53.5 ∆E
39.9 ∆E
34.6 ∆E
45.2 ∆E
61.1 ∆E
51.7 ∆E
35.5 ∆E
40.6 ∆E
28.8 ∆E
62.5 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
32 ∆E
46.6 ∆E
35 ∆E
71 ∆E
41.7 ∆E
41.5 ∆E
73.3 ∆E
67 ∆E
50 ∆E
35.9 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Honor X7a: 44.82 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 73.33 ∆E

Display - Honor-cell phone without PWM

Subpixel recording
Subpixel recording

The screen of the Honor X7a has a rather low resolution of 1600 x 720 pixels even for this price range. At least the IPS screen is fairly bright with 562 cd/m² on average and also has a good black value, so the contrast is quite high and colors look a bit more vivid.

However, color deviations are clearly visible, for example in the form of a blue cast in the grayscale, although we have already selected the "Warm" color scheme. Especially bright grayscales and light blue and green tones deviate too much from the optimum.

We did not notice PWM flickering even at minimum brightness.

542
cd/m²
578
cd/m²
536
cd/m²
555
cd/m²
586
cd/m²
539
cd/m²
571
cd/m²
587
cd/m²
562
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 587 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 561.8 cd/m² Minimum: 2.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 586 cd/m²
Contrast: 2254:1 (Black: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.24 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 5.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
93.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.226
Honor X7a
IPS, 1600x720, 6.74
Honor X8a
IPS, 2388x1080, 6.70
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Nokia G22
IPS, 1600x720, 6.52
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
PLS LCD, 2408x1080, 6.60
Response Times
13%
91%
-76%
-32%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
33.8 ?(22.4, 11.4)
29 ?(16, 13)
14%
2.8 ?(1.4, 1.4)
92%
60.2 ?(33, 27.2)
-78%
46.48 ?(20.16, 26.32)
-38%
Response Time Black / White *
16 ?(11.2, 4.8)
14 ?(9, 5)
12%
1.7 ?(0.8, 0.9)
89%
27.7 ?(17.9, 9.8)
-73%
20.21 ?(5.638, 14.57)
-26%
PWM Frequency
484
Screen
10%
39%
-7%
-47%
Brightness middle
586
492
-16%
650
11%
674
15%
579
-1%
Brightness
562
481
-14%
658
17%
641
14%
543
-3%
Brightness Distribution
91
94
3%
97
7%
90
-1%
87
-4%
Black Level *
0.26
0.38
-46%
0.43
-65%
0.57
-119%
Contrast
2254
1295
-43%
1567
-30%
1016
-55%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.24
1.32
69%
1.55
63%
4.45
-5%
7.6
-79%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
8.44
3.37
60%
2.59
69%
7.41
12%
12.7
-50%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.3
1.9
64%
1.8
66%
5.1
4%
8.7
-64%
Gamma
2.226 99%
2.194 100%
2.194 100%
2.072 106%
2.23 99%
CCT
6955 93%
6288 103%
6316 103%
7799 83%
9344 70%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
12% / 10%
65% / 52%
-42% / -21%
-40% / -44%

* ... 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
16 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.2 ms rise
↘ 4.8 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 32 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
33.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22.4 ms rise
↘ 11.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 40 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (33.7 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life - clear weaknesses

GFXBench T-Rex Stress Test
GFXBench T-Rex Stress Test

With the Helio G37 Honor has opted for a very weak SoC, even for this price range. Thus, the review sample only achieves 1/5 of the points in the benchmarks that the similarly priced Samsung Galaxy A14 5G with MediaTek Dimensity 700 achieves. In everyday use, you have to live with stutters and waiting times from time to time, for example when changing settings or opening apps.

In terms of storage, the Honor X7a is well equipped, but also slow since the phone only has eMMC flash. It only achieves about 1/3 of the transfer rates of UFS flash. On the Internet, too, you sometimes have to wait quite a long time until pages are loaded and photos appear.

Despite the comparatively low performance, the system heats up to 44.3 °C (~112 °F). That is clearly noticeable, but not yet critical, especially since the room temperature was a bit higher. However, this does not reduce the performance any further, as the stress test shows us: Even after numerous runs of a benchmark, the frame rates are constant. Unfortunately, the Honor X7a could not use 3DMark Wild Life, so we used the GFXBench T-Rex for the stress tests.

The mono speaker of the Honor phone is located at the bottom edge and does a poor job: Songs sound quite dull, even at maximum volume and at high frequencies there is usually only a little mush of sound. Audio devices connected via 3.5 mm jack or Bluetooth sound better.

The battery is ample with 5,330 mAh and manages a good runtime of 16:54 hours in our WLAN test. This should allow the user to work for two days without having to recharge the phone. If it is necessary, it can be recharged in less than 2 hours even when the phone is empty thanks to the 22.5-watt charger included.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 2138, n=220, last 2 years)
911 Points +462%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
525 Points +224%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
442 Points +173%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
310 Points +91%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
284 Points +75%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
162 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (146 - 172, n=4)
160 Points -1%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6681, n=220, last 2 years)
2988 Points +295%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points +136%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1700 Points +125%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
1318 Points +74%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1132 Points +50%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
756 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (553 - 947, n=4)
728 Points -4%
Geekbench 6.2
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (193 - 2930, n=105, last 2 years)
1390 Points +620%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
438 Points +127%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
193 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  ()
193 Points 0%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (845 - 7408, n=105, last 2 years)
3840 Points +354%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1217 Points +44%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
845 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  ()
845 Points 0%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average of class Smartphone
  (4761 - 21385, n=215, last 2 years)
11771 Points +105%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9421 Points +64%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
8038 Points +40%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
6789 Points +18%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
6637 Points +16%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
5742 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (4922 - 5815, n=4)
5435 Points -5%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Average of class Smartphone
  (286 - 7890, n=106, last 2 years)
2738 Points +529%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2438 Points +460%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1577 Points +263%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1362 Points +213%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (435 - 468, n=3)
452 Points +4%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
435 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (240 - 9814, n=106, last 2 years)
2733 Points +639%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2282 Points +517%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1387 Points +275%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1213 Points +228%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (370 - 397, n=3)
383 Points +4%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
370 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3208 Points +184%
Average of class Smartphone
  (858 - 4679, n=106, last 2 years)
3156 Points +180%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2977 Points +164%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
2389 Points +112%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (1129 - 1265, n=3)
1218 Points +8%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1129 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Average of class Smartphone
  (317 - 20131, n=183, last 2 years)
6705 Points +1160%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2546 Points +379%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1558 Points +193%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1386 Points +161%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (532 - 537, n=3)
535 Points +1%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
532 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (267 - 33376, n=182, last 2 years)
9675 Points +2008%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2347 Points +411%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1436 Points +213%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1231 Points +168%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (459 - 460, n=3)
460 Points 0%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
459 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Average of class Smartphone
  (938 - 8480, n=182, last 2 years)
4216 Points +248%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3618 Points +199%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2676 Points +121%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
2478 Points +105%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (1211 - 1298, n=3)
1264 Points +4%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1211 Points
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.6 - 123, n=227, last 2 years)
43.9 fps +470%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
12 fps +56%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
10 fps +30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9.2 fps +19%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
7.7 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (7 - 7.9, n=4)
7.6 fps -1%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
7.5 fps -3%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.3 - 229, n=227, last 2 years)
64 fps +1424%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
14 fps +233%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
10.1 fps +140%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
8.2 fps +95%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
5.5 fps +31%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
4.2 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (4 - 4.2, n=4)
4.15 fps -1%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.8 - 119, n=227, last 2 years)
32.7 fps +567%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
7.9 fps +61%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
6.4 fps +31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
5.4 fps +10%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (4.9 - 5, n=4)
4.95 fps +1%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
4.9 fps
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
4.8 fps -2%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 94, n=227, last 2 years)
25.5 fps +1600%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
5.3 fps +253%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3.6 fps +140%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
3.2 fps +113%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
2 fps +33%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1.5 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (1.5 - 1.5, n=4)
1.5 fps 0%
3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.38 - 42, n=214, last 2 years)
12.5 fps +1983%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2.3 fps +283%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1.5 fps +150%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1.5 fps +150%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
0.85 fps +42%
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (0.6 - 0.64, n=2)
0.62 fps +3%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
0.6 fps
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone
  (2228 - 89112, n=214, last 2 years)
33357 Points +425%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
15695 Points +147%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
15352 Points +142%
Nokia G22
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 4096
10858 Points +71%
Honor X8a
Mediatek Helio G88, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
9404 Points +48%
Honor X7a
Mediatek Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
6352 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G37
  (5648 - 6352, n=2)
6000 Points -6%
Honor X7aHonor X8aXiaomi Redmi Note 12 4GNokia G22Samsung Galaxy A14 5GAverage 128 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
8%
569%
368%
458%
74%
727%
Sequential Read 256KB
280
278.1
-1%
954.87
241%
881
215%
849.3
203%
Sequential Write 256KB
223
224.2
1%
709.51
218%
367
65%
469.83
111%
Random Read 4KB
59.1
61.6
4%
261.09
342%
131
122%
193.63
228%
Random Write 4KB
14.7
18.7
27%
231.57
1475%
172
1070%
204
1288%

Temperature

Max. Load
 44.3 °C
112 F
36.6 °C
98 F
33.8 °C
93 F
 
 44.4 °C
112 F
36.7 °C
98 F
34.1 °C
93 F
 
 43.2 °C
110 F
36.5 °C
98 F
33.9 °C
93 F
 
Maximum: 44.4 °C = 112 F
Average: 38.2 °C = 101 F
33.8 °C
93 F
36.4 °C
98 F
39.2 °C
103 F
34 °C
93 F
36.5 °C
98 F
42.3 °C
108 F
34.4 °C
94 F
36.6 °C
98 F
42.4 °C
108 F
Maximum: 42.4 °C = 108 F
Average: 37.3 °C = 99 F
Power Supply (max.)  40.8 °C = 105 F | Room Temperature 25.6 °C = 78 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.2 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.4 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 42.4 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.


Heatmap back side
Heatmap back side
Heatmap Front
Heatmap Front

Speaker

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204343.12535.436.73132.531.1403533.2503836.86328.524.28021.121.61002122.412520.922.116019.722.120014.730.325013.636.831511.942.840012.655.150014.460.163014.560.880015.660.4100012.569.5125012.872.6160011.171.5200011.971.3250011.968.6315013.166.9400014.463.7500015.961.2630015.956.5800016.357.9100001757125001759.51600017.649.1SPL26.579.6N0.839.4median 14.5median 59.5Delta2.212.929.635.63031.224.530.625.833.237.536.825.232.820.236.620.436.317.537.514.439.914.341.915.247.411.951.113.55712.165.512.466.511.770.111.874.511.477.212.376.112.276.712.178.112.28012.979.313.478.513.281.612.98213.682.513.479.313.26524.890.40.681.3median 12.9median 76.10.911.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHonor X7aSamsung Galaxy A14 5G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Honor X7a audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 68% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy A14 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 33.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.1% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery life

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing
Nokia G22
5050 mAh
1052 min +4%
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
5000 mAh
1029 min +1%
Honor X7a
5330 mAh
1014 min
Honor X8a
4500 mAh
927 min -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (424 - 2844, n=229, last 2 years)
914 min -10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
5000 mAh
719 min -29%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
16h 54min

Pros

+ current security patches
+ good runtimes
+ flexible cameras
+ reliable fingerprint sensor

Cons

- sluggish processor
- lame memory
- poor sound
- a lot of adware

Verdict - If only it had more power...

Under test: Honor X7a.
Under test: Honor X7a.

The Honor X7a could have been an interesting, affordable mid-range phone if the manufacturer had used a more powerful processor. Thus, you have to accept significant restrictions in performance and the additional wide-angle camera and the good camera algorithm can hardly compensate for that.

The phone lasts for a long time and charges quite quickly, but the lame storage and the poor speaker are further weak points. Honor could have also set itself apart from the competition with a 5G modem, but instead you get a scarce selection of 4G frequencies, so you can hardly use your phone on further trips.

The Honor X7a looks good, has up-to-date security patches and a PWM-free screen, but is at best suitable for photo fans with a tight budget and little demand for performance.

5G is available at a comparable price, for example, in the Samsung Galaxy A14 5G. The Redmi Note 12 4G even comes with an AMOLED screen. Both offer significantly more performance than our test device.

Price and availability

Directly from the manufacturer you can buy the Honor X7a for 179 Euros (~$195) at the time of testing. If you want the phone in silver-gray, this is currently the cheapest option, especially since it is hardly available elsewhere.

Those interested can save another 10 Euros (~$11) on the black and blue color variants at Internet retailers, for example at amazon.de.

Honor X7a - 07/01/2023 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
77%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
46 / 70 → 66%
Weight
88%
Battery
91%
Display
84%
Games Performance
5 / 64 → 8%
Application Performance
37 / 86 → 43%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
60 / 90 → 67%
Camera
58%
Average
68%
75%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Transparency

The present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review.

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Honor X7a smartphone review - Flexible cameras in a low-priced cell phone
Florian Schmitt, 2023-07- 6 (Update: 2023-07- 6)