Notebookcheck

LG K20 Smartphone Review – Mobile phone under 100 Euro

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), 12/01/2019

Low expectation. The LG K20 costs less than 100 Euro and should be sufficient for everyday activities. Whether it is a good choice for savers, or offers less than you can expect even for so little money, you learn in the test.

LG K20
LG K20 (K Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
1024 MB 
Display
5.45 inch 18:9, 960 x 480 pixel 197 PPI, Capacitive, IPS
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, , 11.3 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3,5mm-Audioport, Card Reader: microSD up to 32 GB, dedicated, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Acceleration sensor, Proximity sensor
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4), Bluetooth 4.2, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B38), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.3 x 148.6 x 71.9 ( = 0.33 x 5.85 x 2.83 in)
Battery
3000 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 8 MPix Contrast-AF, LED Flash, Videos @720p/30fps
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speakers on the rear panel, Keyboard: Virtual, Charger, charging cable, cleaning cloth, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat 4 (150Mbps/50MBps); SAR value: 0.717W/kg (head), 1.343W/kg (body); notification LED, fanless
Weight
153 g ( = 5.4 oz / 0.34 pounds), Power Supply: 49 g ( = 1.73 oz / 0.11 pounds)
Price
99 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

Comparison Units

BewertungRating VersionDatumModellGewichtLaufwerkGroesseAufloesungPreis ab
68%712/2019LG K20
MT6739, PowerVR GE8100
153 g16 GB eMMC Flash5.45"960x480
83%608/2019Xiaomi Redmi 7A
439, Adreno 505
165 g16 GB eMMC Flash5.45"1440x720
73%602/2019Motorola Moto E5 Play
425, Adreno 308
150 g16 GB eMMC Flash5.2"960x480
75%612/2018Nokia 2.1
425, Adreno 308
174 g8 GB eMMC Flash5.5"1280x720

Case, Equipment and Operation

With the LG K20, the manufacturer sells a very cheap smartphone for just under 100 euros. Of course, there's only a plastic chassis for it, but LG uses a blue or black, matt shimmering raw material that's easy to handle. The device looks compact and stable, although it creaks slightly under pressure when you press the back, this doesn't show up on the screen. The device is also very torsion-resistant and quite light with 153 grams.

1 GB RAM isn't much, but not unusual in this price range, only the Xiaomi Redmi 7A offers more at this price. The 16 GB mass memory also corresponds to the class average, whereby the Nokia 2.1 comes to the customer with only 8 GB. A dedicated microSD slot can be used in addition to the two SIM slots, thus the memory can be expanded by up to 32 GB, whereby our reference card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 with 64 GB is also recognized without difficulty. The WLAN module is a bit slower than many competitors, but the differences are very small and the LG K20 offers a quite stable signal overall.

With such inexpensive smartphones, you'll almost always have to live with delays in operation, for example when you call up the list of all apps on the LG K20, otherwise operation in the menus is relatively fluid. The touchscreen has a slight delay, but you can work with it well in everyday life.

LG K20
LG K20
LG K20
LG K20
LG K20
LG K20

Size Comparison

153.6 mm / 6.05 inch 77.6 mm / 3.06 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 174 g0.3836 lbs148.6 mm / 5.85 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 153 g0.3373 lbs147 mm / 5.79 inch 71 mm / 2.8 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs146.3 mm / 5.76 inch 70.4 mm / 2.77 inch 9.6 mm / 0.378 inch 165 g0.3638 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
802.11 b/g/n
60 (min: 52, max: 64) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
802.11 b/g/n
55.5 (min: 49, max: 57) MBit/s ∼93% +2%
LG K20
802.11 b/g/n
54.3 (min: 48, max: 56) MBit/s ∼91%
Nokia 2.1
802.11 b/g/n
48.7 (min: 29, max: 54) MBit/s ∼81% -10%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Motorola Moto E5 Play
802.11 b/g/n
56.6 (min: 29, max: 61) MBit/s ∼100% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
802.11 b/g/n
53.8 (min: 25, max: 57) MBit/s ∼95% +7%
Nokia 2.1
802.11 b/g/n
52.7 (min: 27, max: 58) MBit/s ∼93% +5%
LG K20
802.11 b/g/n
50.1 (min: 47, max: 56) MBit/s ∼89%
0102030405060Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø53.8 (48-56)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø50 (47-56)

Cameras - Low resolution and blurred

Front camera recording
Front camera recording

8 megapixels on the back and 5 megapixels on the front? This is reminiscent of its bigger brother, the LG K30. In fact, both smartphones take pretty similar pictures: Often noisy in detail, quite cool colors and little brightened. The sharpness suffers in low light. You can use the camera for snapshots, but if you want to enlarge and print your pictures, you should look elsewhere. 

Videos can be recorded in 720p and 30 fps, whereby this is an artificial restriction of the LG software, with other camera apps Full HD videos can also be recorded. The autofocus here is a bit slow and brightness transitions are clearly visible. Overall, the video quality is OK for the price range.

The front camera has a hard time hitting the right sharpness.

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
29.8 ∆E
54.3 ∆E
38.8 ∆E
36.3 ∆E
44.4 ∆E
62.8 ∆E
53.8 ∆E
35.2 ∆E
42.1 ∆E
28 ∆E
65.3 ∆E
64.5 ∆E
30.3 ∆E
48.6 ∆E
36.3 ∆E
76.7 ∆E
42.6 ∆E
43.4 ∆E
92 ∆E
70.6 ∆E
52 ∆E
37 ∆E
24 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
ColorChecker LG K20: 46.77 ∆E min: 13.55 - max: 92.02 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
10.9 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
9 ∆E
13.7 ∆E
8 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
13.7 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
1.8 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
ColorChecker LG K20: 9.31 ∆E min: 1.83 - max: 13.95 ∆E
Test chart - perfect illumination
Test chart - perfect illumination
Test chart – 1 Lux
Test chart – 1 Lux

Display - Low resolution

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

With 960 x 480 pixels, the resolution of the display in the LG K20 is quite low, just 197 pixels per inch is a low value. In terms of brightness, the LG K20 is at class level, but the Xiaomi Redmi 7A shows that it's also much brighter. We're not very enthusiastic about the color reproduction that we determine in our tests with the CalMAN software: The deviations are quite high, there is a violent blue cast and colors look very dull on the screen.

The reaction times are also very long, so that there can be visible delays when the image changes quickly.

358
cd/m²
358
cd/m²
312
cd/m²
360
cd/m²
362
cd/m²
322
cd/m²
364
cd/m²
359
cd/m²
325
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 364 cd/m² Average: 346.7 cd/m² Minimum: 3.52 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 362 cd/m²
Contrast: 1034:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.4 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 9.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
90.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.605
LG K20
IPS, 960x480, 5.45
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Motorola Moto E5 Play
IPS, 960x480, 5.2
Nokia 2.1
IPS, 1280x720, 5.5
Response Times
19%
58%
69%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
59 (59)
32 (15, 17)
46%
50 (23, 27)
15%
42 (23, 19)
29%
Response Time Black / White *
93 (17, 76)
22 (11, 11)
76%
20 (7, 13)
78%
30 (17, 13)
68%
PWM Frequency
1087 (10)
384.6 (10)
-65%
1961 (15)
80%
2273
109%
Screen
11%
-11%
17%
Brightness middle
362
533
47%
369
2%
338
-7%
Brightness
347
506
46%
358
3%
327
-6%
Brightness Distribution
86
88
2%
81
-6%
82
-5%
Black Level *
0.35
0.6
-71%
0.4
-14%
0.27
23%
Contrast
1034
888
-14%
923
-11%
1252
21%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
8.4
5.6
33%
9.75
-16%
5.36
36%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
15
11.4
24%
18.28
-22%
9.77
35%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
9.7
7.4
24%
11.8
-22%
6.2
36%
Gamma
2.605 84%
2.212 99%
2.057 107%
2.345 94%
CCT
9313 70%
7974 82%
11971 54%
8460 77%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
78.6
Total Average (Program / Settings)
15% / 13%
24% / 8%
43% / 31%

* ... 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
93 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17 ms rise
↘ 76 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 100 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
59 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0 ms rise
↘ 59 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. » 94 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (39.4 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 detected 1087 Hz ≤ 10 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 1087 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 10 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 1087 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9338 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.


Performance, Emissions and Battery life

The Mediatek MT6739 is a bit older, and a bit slower overall than the Snapdragon 425, which is used in many price range devices. There are noticeable delays every now and then, but overall you can navigate through the menus more or less smoothly. microSD cards are read quite quickly, but the internal memory is very slow. This is shown by delayed app starts and long data transfer times. There is hardly any noticeable warming under a longer load.

The speaker is located at the back of the smartphone, it barely radiates deep mid-range frequencies, but still has quite balanced highs. Nevertheless, some of the frequencies are quite unpleasant in the ears, vocals and speech seem quite thin. Overall, the speaker is only suitable as an emergency solution. The device can be connected to audio devices via a 3.5mm socket and Bluetooth, which didn't cause any problems.

With 3000 mAh, the LG K20 lags somewhat behind its competitors when it comes to battery performance. The battery life of 11:14 hours is still usable in our WLAN test, but for example 20% shorter than with the Nokia 2.1. The smartphone is sufficient for one working day, but charging takes quite a long time with over two hours.

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
3586 Points ∼67%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
4594 Points ∼86% +28%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
3209 Points ∼60% -11%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
3146 Points ∼59% -12%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2467 - 5377, n=15)
3175 Points ∼59% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=398)
5367 Points ∼100% +50%
Work performance score (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
4816 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
5880 Points ∼100% +22%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
4152 Points ∼71% -14%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (3742 - 4816, n=10)
4242 Points ∼72% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=565)
5831 Points ∼99% +21%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
620 Points ∼31%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1595 Points ∼80% +157%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (573 - 677, n=13)
613 Points ∼31% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=405)
1996 Points ∼100% +222%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
99 Points ∼5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
419 Points ∼23% +323%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (75 - 189, n=13)
97.6 Points ∼5% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=405)
1811 Points ∼100% +1729%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
122 Points ∼7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
501 Points ∼30% +311%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (93 - 225, n=13)
120 Points ∼7% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=406)
1681 Points ∼100% +1278%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
620 Points ∼33%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1594 Points ∼84% +157%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
877 Points ∼46% +41%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
885 Points ∼46% +43%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (530 - 698, n=15)
613 Points ∼32% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=434)
1905 Points ∼100% +207%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
180 Points ∼7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
730 Points ∼30% +306%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
249 Points ∼10% +38%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
250 Points ∼10% +39%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (131 - 189, n=15)
160 Points ∼7% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=434)
2414 Points ∼100% +1241%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
214 Points ∼11%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
830 Points ∼41% +288%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
296 Points ∼15% +38%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
297 Points ∼15% +39%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (159 - 225, n=15)
191 Points ∼9% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=434)
2027 Points ∼100% +847%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
615 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1610 Points ∼85% +162%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (486 - 690, n=16)
565 Points ∼30% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=485)
1902 Points ∼100% +209%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
92 Points ∼6%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
370 Points ∼25% +302%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (65 - 185, n=16)
85.3 Points ∼6% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=485)
1501 Points ∼100% +1532%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
113 Points ∼8%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
446 Points ∼31% +295%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (80 - 221, n=16)
105 Points ∼7% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=486)
1444 Points ∼100% +1178%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
612 Points ∼35%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1579 Points ∼89% +158%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
819 Points ∼46% +34%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
892 Points ∼51% +46%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (445 - 690, n=16)
564 Points ∼32% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=526)
1765 Points ∼100% +188%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
168 Points ∼9%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
724 Points ∼37% +331%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
199 Points ∼10% +18%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
46 Points ∼2% -73%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (102 - 185, n=16)
131 Points ∼7% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=525)
1967 Points ∼100% +1071%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
200 Points ∼12%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
823 Points ∼48% +312%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
239 Points ∼14% +20%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
58 Points ∼3% -71%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (120 - 211, n=16)
156 Points ∼9% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=528)
1697 Points ∼100% +749%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
8725 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
12673 Points ∼88% +45%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
10784 Points ∼75% +24%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
10427 Points ∼73% +20%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (7103 - 10981, n=16)
9334 Points ∼65% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=686)
14321 Points ∼100% +64%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
3655 Points ∼16%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
13510 Points ∼60% +270%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
5712 Points ∼25% +56%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
5487 Points ∼24% +50%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2878 - 4346, n=16)
3382 Points ∼15% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=684)
22437 Points ∼100% +514%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
4197 Points ∼23%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
13315 Points ∼74% +217%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
6379 Points ∼35% +52%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
6133 Points ∼34% +46%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (3392 - 4339, n=16)
3890 Points ∼21% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=684)
18114 Points ∼100% +332%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
6 fps ∼16%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
23 fps ∼60% +283%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
7.6 fps ∼20% +27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
7.6 fps ∼20% +27%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (4.9 - 6.1, n=17)
5.64 fps ∼15% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=704)
38.4 fps ∼100% +540%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
LG K20
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
15 fps ∼43%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
35 fps ∼100% +133%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
20 fps ∼57% +33%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
14 fps ∼40% -7%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (8.2 - 15, n=17)
10.1 fps ∼29% -33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=713)
28.3 fps ∼81% +89%
LG K20Xiaomi Redmi 7AMotorola Moto E5 PlayNokia 2.1Average 16 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
107%
164%
117%
28%
137%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
60.31 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
64.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
28.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-52%
61.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
39.7 (6.38 - 65.8, n=131)
-34%
49.5 (1.7 - 87.1, n=436)
-18%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
78.42 (Tohsiba Exceria Pro M501)
85.24 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
83.74 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
79.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
59 (8.1 - 87.7, n=131)
-25%
67.7 (8.1 - 96.5, n=436)
-14%
Random Write 4KB
8.1
9.6
19%
43.16
433%
13.45
66%
7.9 (0.49 - 44.9, n=249)
-2%
23.1 (0.14 - 259, n=762)
185%
Random Read 4KB
29.7
57.8
95%
46.31
56%
50.46
70%
21.4 (2.49 - 62.1, n=249)
-28%
48.5 (1.59 - 226, n=762)
63%
Sequential Write 256KB
71.8
68.7
-4%
52.2
-27%
51.18
-29%
42.8 (8.74 - 106, n=249)
-40%
99.5 (2.99 - 590, n=762)
39%
Sequential Read 256KB
41.9
258
516%
279
566%
288.26
588%
165 (9.66 - 294, n=249)
294%
280 (12.1 - 1781, n=762)
568%

Temperature

Max. Load
 37.2 °C
99 F
33.6 °C
92 F
32.3 °C
90 F
 
 36.6 °C
98 F
32.8 °C
91 F
32.3 °C
90 F
 
 35.4 °C
96 F
33 °C
91 F
32.8 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 37.2 °C = 99 F
Average: 34 °C = 93 F
31 °C
88 F
32.7 °C
91 F
37.9 °C
100 F
30.8 °C
87 F
32.7 °C
91 F
37.3 °C
99 F
31.3 °C
88 F
33.3 °C
92 F
36.4 °C
98 F
Maximum: 37.9 °C = 100 F
Average: 33.7 °C = 93 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.2 °C = 88 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34 °C / 93 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 37.2 °C / 99 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 37.9 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.6 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.


Heat map of the top
Heat map of the top
Heat map of the bottom
Heat map of the bottom

Loudspeakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204345.92536.840.73132.832.44033.7365040.136.56331.331.18024.726.410025.623.412522.123.516019.920.620019.320.325017.226.331517.43940017.148.750017.3586301563.18001565.1100018.674.3125014.575160015.773.2200014.470.4250014.469.1315014.169.8400014.266.7500014.363.5630014.559.8800014.5661000014.570.71250014.564.51600014.756.7SPL63.567.562.464.460.727.582N15.12015.51612.9147.2median 15median 63.5Delta1.514.846.938.238.336.431.83034.135.14439.731.729.8252626.729.523.922.921.832.620.343.519.65018.855.317.560.720.16619.771.217.372.517.473.815.471.416.471.816.472.115.568.515.665.415.76516.169.91669.316.568.616.368.415.968.615.859702969.78225.31.223.752.9median 16.5median 68.428.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseLG K20Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
LG K20 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 37.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 86% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Redmi 7A audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 37% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

LG K20
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto E5 Play
2120 mAh
Nokia 2.1
4000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
674
853
27%
382.9
-43%
809
20%
663 (223 - 2636, n=628)
-2%
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 14min

Pros

+ stable WLAN signal
+ compact and lightweight
+ tidy chassis
+ dedicated microSD slot

Cons

- comparatively weak performance
- mediocre speaker
- very long reaction times
- partly blurred camera images
- strong blue cast in the display
- low resolution

Verdict - Is the LG K20 worth considering?

In review: LG K20.
In review: LG K20.

"What can you expect for less than 100 euros?" So one could say, if one looks at the LG K20: It's a compact smartphone with very low specifications, sufficient for the simplest tasks, but never really fun. But on the other hand, there are also competing devices that offer more for similarly little money: More battery, more power, more screen resolution.

Positive aspects of the LG K20 are the low heat build-up under load, the dedicated microSD slot, a decent chassis and a stable WLAN signal. The moderate speaker, the low-resolution screen with a strong blue cast, the partly blurred camera images and the screen's long response times are on the negative side.

The LG K20 is a cheap smartphone that doesn't offer much that's extraordinary.

The LG K20 would have to be a bit cheaper again to overlook the weak points. So it remains a pretty average cheap smartphone.

LG K20 - 12/01/2019 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
59%
Keyboard
61 / 75 → 81%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
32 / 70 → 45%
Weight
92%
Battery
89%
Display
74%
Games Performance
2 / 64 → 3%
Application Performance
37 / 86 → 43%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
48 / 90 → 53%
Camera
35%
Average
62%
68%
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 > LG K20 Smartphone Review – Mobile phone under 100 Euro
Florian Schmitt, 2019-12- 1 (Update: 2019-12- 1)