Notebookcheck

Nokia 3.1 Plus Smartphone Review

Mike Wobker, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Finn D. Boerne), 02/12/2019

Svelte marathon runner. The Nokia 3.1 Plus claims several days of battery life while at the same time offering a fast and svelte Android One experience on decent hardware. Find out in our review what to expect from the Nokia 3.1 Plus.

Nokia 3.1 Plus

HMD Global has managed to establish Nokia as a brand that offers high-quality smartphones for every budget. Thanks to Android One, users do not need to worry about unwanted bloatware. Our most recent Nokia 2.1Nokia 5.1 Plus, and Nokia 8.1 reviews found little fault with this concept save for the meager memory configuration.

Today’s review unit can be considered an enhanced version of the Nokia 3.1 entry-level smartphone. Its Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 SoC and PowerVR GE8320 GPU are slightly faster, however, its RAM and eMMC storage configuration of 2 and 16 GB, respectively, have remained unmodified. The rear-facing camera features a dual-lens setup (13+5 MP), and the device has grown in size due to the larger 6-inch display.

In this review, we are going to compare it not just to the Nokia but also other comparatively priced devices such as the HTC U12 Life, the Huaweis P Smart Plus (2018), and the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2018).

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
German-English-Translator - Details here

Nokia 3.1 Plus (3 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
, LPPDDR3 (2GB or 3GB)
Display
6 inch 18:9, 1440 x 720 pixel 268 PPI, capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, (16GB or 32GB), 7 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm audio, Card Reader: microSD (up to 400 GB), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, e-compass, gyroscope, microUSB
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.1, GSM (850/950/1,800/1,900), UMTS WCDMA (1/2/5/8), LTE (1/3/5/7/8/20/28/38/40/41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.2 x 156.9 x 76.4 ( = 0.32 x 6.18 x 3.01 in)
Battery
3500 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix Dual: 13MP (3L5/f2.0) + 5MP (5E9/f2.4)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix 4H7/FF/f2.2
Additional features
Speakers: 1 speaker, Keyboard: on-screen, Keyboard Light: yes, USB power supply, microUSB cable, stereo headset, SIM tool, Android One, 24 Months Warranty, Head SAR: 0.411 W/kg, body SAR: 1.576 W/kg, fanless
Weight
180 g ( = 6.35 oz / 0.4 pounds), Power Supply: 59 g ( = 2.08 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
200 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The case is made of sturdy aluminum and clad in a matte blue color. The tight-fitting openings are machined very precisely, and all buttons are located on the right-hand side. The large 6-inch display dominates the well-nigh bezel-less front. Unlike other smartphones the Nokia 3.1 Plus does not feature a notch to house the front-facing camera but a narrow band atop the display instead. The fingerprint reader is located at the rear in the top third, and easily reachable for both left- and right-handers. The rear-facing camera and the LED flash sit above the fingerprint reader.

When compared with other 6-inch devices of its class our review unit is about the same size but a bit heavier than most due to its sturdy aluminum case. In fact, at 180 g (~6.3 oz) it turned out to be the heaviest contender in our test group.

Nokia 3.1 Plus
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Nokia 3.1 Plus

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Powered by a Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 SoC and a PowerVR GE8320 the Nokia 3.1 Plus features 2 GB of RAM and 16 GB of internal eMMC storage. This hardware configuration is slightly better than the average entry-level smartphone, and internal storage can further be expanded with microSD cards of up to 400 GB. Thanks to separate slots for the microSD card and the two Nano SIM cards, the phone’s dual SIM capabilities are not hindered by installing a microSD card.

If supported by your carrier and your plan, you should be able to utilize VoWLAN and VoLTE. In addition to NFC and Bluetooth 4.1 the smartphone also features a 3.5-mm headphone jack for wired analog speakers or headsets and a microUSB port at the bottom for charging as well as transferring data from and to the device. Unfortunately, it only supports USB 2.0.

Software

Out of the box, the Nokia 3.1 Plus came with Android Oreo 8.1 with security patches as of January 5, 2019 preinstalled. Due to its Android One certification the device is free of bloatware, and you can choose freely which apps you would like to install on your smartphone. In addition, Nokia promises operating system updates for at least two years and security patches for at least three. Accordingly, the Nokia 3.1 Plus offers a pure and vanilla Android experience with nothing but the standard Google applications preloaded.

Unlimited photo cloud storage is available for all users by default, and the internal storage can be expanded by installing a microSD card. Unfortunately, it cannot be formatted as internal storage and thus not be used to offload installed apps. However, certified apps can offload their user data onto the external storage, and it can for example be used to store a satnav app’s map data.

Software Nokia 3.1 Plus
Software Nokia 3.1 Plus
Software Nokia 3.1 Plus
Software Nokia 3.1 Plus
Software Nokia 3.1 Plus
Software Nokia 3.1 Plus

Communication and GPS

The device supports cellular communication in 2G (GSM), 3G (UMTS), and 4G (LTE Cat. 4) networks offering download and upload data rates of up to 150 and 50 Mbps, respectively. Near-field wireless communication via NFC, Bluetooth 4.1, and Wi-Fi is also supported.

Since it only supports 802.11b/g/n, the 3.1 Plus yielded below average data rates of 56 Mbps (receive) and 48 Mbps (transmit) in our Wi-Fi test. In addition, transfer rates plummeted regularly while performing our tests, which was most likely caused by the Wi-Fi modem itself.

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HTC U12 Life
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
330 (min: 63, max: 342) MBit/s ∼100% +490%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Mali-G71 MP2, 7885, 64 GB eMMC Flash
279 (min: 265, max: 284) MBit/s ∼85% +399%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=339)
214 MBit/s ∼65% +283%
Nokia 3.1
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750N, 16 GB eMMC Flash
112 MBit/s ∼34% +100%
Huawei P Smart Plus
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
56.6 (min: 52, max: 59) MBit/s ∼17% +1%
Nokia 3.1 Plus
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 16 GB eMMC Flash
55.9 (min: 28, max: 64) MBit/s ∼17%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Mali-G71 MP2, 7885, 64 GB eMMC Flash
320 (min: 164, max: 362) MBit/s ∼100% +572%
HTC U12 Life
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
259 (min: 252, max: 263) MBit/s ∼81% +444%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=339)
208 MBit/s ∼65% +337%
Nokia 3.1
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750N, 16 GB eMMC Flash
100 MBit/s ∼31% +110%
Huawei P Smart Plus
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
54.2 (min: 50, max: 57) MBit/s ∼17% +14%
Nokia 3.1 Plus
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 16 GB eMMC Flash
47.6 (min: 15, max: 59) MBit/s ∼15%
010203040506070Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø53.8 (28-64)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø47.7 (15-59)
GPS-Test indoors
GPS-Test indoors
GPS-Test outdoors
GPS-Test outdoors

We use the GPS test app to determine GPS accuracy. According to the specs sheet, the Nokia 3.1 Plus supports GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, and Galileo location services. Despite the fact that it took comparatively long to obtain GPS lock, the outdoor accuracy was very good at just 4 m (~13 ft). Indoors, we were unable to obtain GPS lock at all.

We take every device out on a quick bike tour around the block in order to compare it to a professional Garmin Edge 520 GPS unit. The recorded track was off most often in bends and turns, but very accurate on longer straights in return. In other words: the Nokia 3.1 Plus is only good enough for modest and occasional satellite navigation.

Telephony and Call Quality

Phone calls are made and received via Google’s default telephony app. It offers access to a dial pad, a recent calls list, and your contacts. Call quality was very decent, and both conversational partners were able to hear each other very clearly. The internal microphone’s ambient noise cancelling algorithms and the earphone’s high volume were sufficient enough to have a conversation even in loud environments. The included headset was very loud and optimized for voice output.

Cameras

Front-facing camera
Front-facing camera

At the back we find a 13+5 MP dual-camera with f/2.0 and f/2.5 aperture. At the front, an 8 MP shooter with f/2.2 awaits. Selfies taken in normal daylight were comparatively pale and dark, but the motif itself remained well visible with plenty of fine details. Darker areas tended to suffer from loss of detail and fine structures due to the camera’s poor light sensitivity. The settings menu is pretty bare-bones and only offers a beauty mode, a timer, and an on/off switch for the flash. A manual mode allows for individual white balance and brightness adjustment, and the device also supports AutoHDR.

Panorama photos taken with the main camera were underexposed yet rich in detail. Transitions between objects were well-defined and only became blurry when zoomed in almost all the way. Close-ups produced similar results, but were more susceptible to uneven lighting conditions: light areas tended to overexpose while dark objects tended to be too dark. Transitions were just as well-defined and colors were slightly more pronounced. Low-light scenarios were too much to ask for. The light source is clearly visible and blurry details of the objects in the photo can be made out, but the photo turned out too dark overall. The settings menu includes modes for panorama, bokeh, and portraits. A manual mode offers aperture presets for macro, infinite, and automatic as well as adjustments for white color and brightness. The aforementioned AutoHDF feature is also available.

Video quality was comparable to photo quality. Image stabilization makes for steady and smooth videos, and the settings include a time laps and slow-motion mode as well as 480p, HD 720p, and Full HD 1080p presets for video quality and resolution. Neither a high frame rate mode with more than 30 FPS nor a manual mode are supported.

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 Passport
ColorChecker Passport

When tested in our lab with the ColorChecker Passport under normalized conditions the Nokia 3.1 Plus captured colors brighter than expected. The reason as to why contrary to these findings, our test photos turned out too dark is quite simple: the camera was unable to cope with the real-world uneven light distribution.

Our test chart photo yielded a similar result. Under normalized and controlled lighting conditions, the colors were too bright yet the photos were rich in details and fine structures. Colors faded noticeably on both sides in the middle.

Nokia 3.1 Plus - test chart
Nokia 3.1 Plus - test chart (details)

Accessories and Warranty

Included in the box are a USB charger, a MicroUSB cable, and a stereo headset. Additional accessories made specifically for the Nokia 3.1 Plus were not available at the time of writing.

By default, European customers get two years of warranty while US customers are once again limited to just twelve months.

Input Devices & Handling

Unsurprisingly, the Nokia 3.1 Plus uses Google’s default GBoard keyboard app for text input, which allows for comfortable input of longer texts and supports vibration feedback. The touchscreen was very responsive and fast, and worked very well up to its edges. However, the touchscreen’s surface was uncomfortably grippy and offered too much fingertip resistance. Consequently, we had trouble with drag & drop operations. Rotating the screen via the built-in orientation sensor was slightly laggy but reliable.

Unlocking the phone can be achieved via the rear-mounted fingerprint reader. It worked very well and rarely ever required us to repeat our unlocking attempts.

Display

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The 6-inch 18:9 IPS panel offers a native resolution of 1440x720 at an average maximum brightness of 510 nits, which was the second brightest display in our test group. Brightness distribution was determined to be a very good 94%. With sensor support the display can even reach up to 526 nits, and we were able to determine a maximum of 527 nits during the ALP50 test.

We found PMW flickering at brightness levels of 15% and below. At 2,427 Hz the frequency was fairly high, and thus should not cause any problems even for more sensitive users.

506
cd/m²
513
cd/m²
493
cd/m²
514
cd/m²
526
cd/m²
504
cd/m²
513
cd/m²
524
cd/m²
497
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 526 cd/m² Average: 510 cd/m² Minimum: 3.9 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 526 cd/m²
Contrast: 3094:1 (Black: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.64 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 6.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
91.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.344
Nokia 3.1 Plus
IPS, 1440x720, 6
HTC U12 Life
IPS, 2160x1080, 6
Huawei P Smart Plus
IPS/LTPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Super AMOLED, 2220x1080, 6
Nokia 3.1
IPS, 1440x720, 5.2
Screen
-46%
-16%
40%
-13%
Brightness middle
526
468
-11%
479
-9%
570
8%
506
-4%
Brightness
510
452
-11%
471
-8%
565
11%
490
-4%
Brightness Distribution
94
90
-4%
94
0%
93
-1%
93
-1%
Black Level *
0.17
0.62
-265%
0.27
-59%
0.24
-41%
Contrast
3094
755
-76%
1774
-43%
2108
-32%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.64
6.09
8%
6.24
6%
1.5
77%
6.4
4%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.02
10.23
-2%
10.05
-0%
3.6
64%
11.1
-11%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.4
6.8
-6%
7.4
-16%
1.2
81%
7.5
-17%
Gamma
2.344 94%
2.708 81%
2.39 92%
2.07 106%
2.2 100%
CCT
7989 81%
6972 93%
8942 73%
6504 100%
8643 75%

* ... 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 detected 2427 Hz ≤ 15 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2427 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 15 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2427 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9254 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

According to our measurements, the 3.1 Plus’s display offered a great contrast ratio of 3,094:1 and a very low black level of just 0.17 nits. Unsurprisingly, it was outperformed by the only AMOLED display in our test group on the Samsung Galaxy A7 (2018).

Our CalMAN analysis further revealed a very pronounced blue tint and very low levels of red. These color inaccuracies cannot be addressed since the device’s settings menu does not offer any options to do so.

CalMAN - color accuracy
CalMAN - color accuracy
CalMAN - color space
CalMAN - color space
CalMAN - saturation
CalMAN - saturation
CalMAN - grayscale
CalMAN - grayscale

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
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 5 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. » 32 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
54 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 29 ms rise
↘ 25 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. » 89 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (40.9 ms).

Outdoor usability was decent, and the Nokia 3.1 Plus remained very quite usable in the shade. Thanks to its bright display it remained usable even on bright days. However, due to its highly reflective nature both direct sunlight as well as bright artificial light sources were too much to ask for.

Outdoors
Outdoors
Outdoors
Outdoors

As expected of an IPS panel viewing angles were superb, and the Nokia 3.1 Plus remained quite usable and readable even from acute angles. Neither colors nor contents distorted visibly. Reflections permitting the display can even be used from very odd and unusual positions and angles.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 SoC, a PowerVR GE8320, 2 GB of RAM, and 16 GB of storage make for a smooth overall system performance. This hardware configuration is slightly above average for an entry-level device, and it should offer plenty of oomph for everyday apps such as WhatsApp, YouTube, and FaceBook. Even gaming is not completely out of the question as long as one sticks to less demanding titles.

When compared to all MT6762-equipped smartphones the 3.1 Plus’s benchmark results were slightly above average. The 3.1 Plus was also able to outperform its Nokia 3.1 predecessor, and scored a very respectable position in the middle of the pack. GPU-heavy benchmarks told a different story, though, and more often than not the device was barely fast enough for second to last place outperforming only its own predecessor.

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4838 Points ∼69%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5730 Points ∼82% +18%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7027 Points ∼100% +45%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5387 Points ∼77% +11%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
3138 Points ∼45% -35%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (4801 - 4838, n=2)
4820 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2828 - 9868, n=285)
4681 Points ∼67% -3%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6238 Points ∼69%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6412 Points ∼71% +3%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
9017 Points ∼100% +45%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
5625 Points ∼62% -10%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
3885 Points ∼43% -38%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (6200 - 6238, n=2)
6219 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3977 - 13531, n=453)
5108 Points ∼57% -18%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1025 Points ∼41%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2386 Points ∼95% +133%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2510 Points ∼100% +145%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1845 Points ∼74% +80%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
1031 Points ∼41% +1%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (955 - 1025, n=2)
990 Points ∼39% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (585 - 4439, n=304)
1750 Points ∼70% +71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
415 Points ∼28%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
869 Points ∼59% +109%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1194 Points ∼81% +188%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
629 Points ∼43% +52%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
266 Points ∼18% -36%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (376 - 415, n=2)
396 Points ∼27% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (76 - 8206, n=304)
1471 Points ∼100% +254%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
478 Points ∼35%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1012 Points ∼74% +112%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1351 Points ∼98% +183%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
737 Points ∼54% +54%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
319 Points ∼23% -33%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (435 - 478, n=2)
457 Points ∼33% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (94 - 5200, n=307)
1374 Points ∼100% +187%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1015 Points ∼38%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2343 Points ∼87% +131%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2685 Points ∼100% +165%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1871 Points ∼70% +84%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
1013 Points ∼38% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (971 - 1015, n=2)
993 Points ∼37% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=321)
1723 Points ∼64% +70%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
687 Points ∼34%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1403 Points ∼68% +104%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1317 Points ∼64% +92%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
954 Points ∼47% +39%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
397 Points ∼19% -42%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (647 - 687, n=2)
667 Points ∼33% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=321)
2050 Points ∼100% +198%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
740 Points ∼43%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1540 Points ∼89% +108%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1485 Points ∼86% +101%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1071 Points ∼62% +45%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
459 Points ∼26% -38%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (699 - 740, n=2)
720 Points ∼41% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7856, n=322)
1735 Points ∼100% +134%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1026 Points ∼38%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2281 Points ∼84% +122%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2716 Points ∼100% +165%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1821 Points ∼67% +77%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
1144 Points ∼42% +12%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (1023 - 1026, n=2)
1025 Points ∼38% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (503 - 4216, n=379)
1682 Points ∼62% +64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
363 Points ∼30%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
815 Points ∼68% +125%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
793 Points ∼66% +118%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
634 Points ∼53% +75%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
150 Points ∼13% -59%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (309 - 363, n=2)
336 Points ∼28% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (82 - 5246, n=380)
1199 Points ∼100% +230%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
424 Points ∼37%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
951 Points ∼83% +124%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
941 Points ∼82% +122%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
741 Points ∼64% +75%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
186 Points ∼16% -56%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (366 - 424, n=2)
395 Points ∼34% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (103 - 4734, n=388)
1151 Points ∼100% +171%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1021 Points ∼39%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2364 Points ∼90% +132%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2637 Points ∼100% +158%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1829 Points ∼69% +79%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
1099 Points ∼42% +8%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (1021 - 1050, n=2)
1036 Points ∼39% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4215, n=413)
1580 Points ∼60% +55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
575 Points ∼35%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1336 Points ∼81% +132%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1275 Points ∼78% +122%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
845 Points ∼51% +47%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
103 Points ∼6% -82%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (523 - 575, n=2)
549 Points ∼33% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (46 - 8312, n=413)
1641 Points ∼100% +185%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
637 Points ∼43%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1479 Points ∼100% +132%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1440 Points ∼97% +126%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
960 Points ∼65% +51%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
129 Points ∼9% -80%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (589 - 637, n=2)
613 Points ∼41% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 6454, n=421)
1406 Points ∼95% +121%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
11590 Points ∼68%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
16924 Points ∼99% +46%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
17015 Points ∼100% +47%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
13914 Points ∼82% +20%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
10044 Points ∼59% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (11048 - 11590, n=2)
11319 Points ∼67% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3958 - 37475, n=569)
13098 Points ∼77% +13%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
10412 Points ∼48%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
20778 Points ∼96% +100%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21538 Points ∼100% +107%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
15567 Points ∼72% +50%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
8163 Points ∼38% -22%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (9536 - 10412, n=2)
9974 Points ∼46% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1152 - 162695, n=569)
18353 Points ∼85% +76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
10653 Points ∼52%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
19777 Points ∼97% +86%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
20337 Points ∼100% +91%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
15167 Points ∼75% +42%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
8517 Points ∼42% -20%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (9835 - 10653, n=2)
10244 Points ∼50% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2915 - 77599, n=570)
15461 Points ∼76% +45%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
20 fps ∼51%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
36 fps ∼92% +80%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
39 fps ∼100% +95%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
13 fps ∼33% -35%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (19 - 20, n=2)
19.5 fps ∼50% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.1 - 251, n=594)
32 fps ∼82% +60%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
27 fps ∼75%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
35 fps ∼97% +30%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
36 fps ∼100% +33%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
20 fps ∼56% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (26 - 27, n=2)
26.5 fps ∼74% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6.9 - 120, n=597)
25.5 fps ∼71% -6%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
9.7 fps ∼46%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
16 fps ∼76% +65%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21 fps ∼100% +116%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
5.5 fps ∼26% -43%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (9.4 - 9.7, n=2)
9.55 fps ∼45% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.2 - 132, n=516)
17.2 fps ∼82% +77%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
17 fps ∼89%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
15 fps ∼79% -12%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19 fps ∼100% +12%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
10 fps ∼53% -41%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (17 - 17, n=2)
17 fps ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.1 - 115, n=519)
16.4 fps ∼86% -4%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6 fps ∼41%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
10 fps ∼68% +67%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
14 fps ∼96% +133%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
3.6 fps ∼25% -40%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (4.6 - 6, n=2)
5.3 fps ∼36% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.7 - 88, n=377)
14.6 fps ∼100% +143%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
11 fps ∼77%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
9.8 fps ∼69% -11%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
13 fps ∼92% +18%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
7.8 fps ∼55% -29%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (11 - 11, n=2)
11 fps ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5 - 110, n=380)
14.2 fps ∼100% +29%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4.3 fps ∼46%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
3.6 fps ∼39% -16%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.1 fps ∼44% -5%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (4.3 - 4.3, n=2)
4.3 fps ∼46% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 59, n=86)
9.34 fps ∼100% +117%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1.3 fps ∼21%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2.2 fps ∼36% +69%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼42% +100%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (1.3 - 1.4, n=2)
1.35 fps ∼22% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 31, n=86)
6.18 fps ∼100% +375%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6.8 fps ∼50%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.7 fps ∼42% -16%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.4 fps ∼47% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (6.8 - 6.8, n=2)
6.8 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 59, n=86)
13.7 fps ∼100% +101%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.6 fps ∼24%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6 fps ∼41% +67%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼47% +94%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (3.5 - 3.6, n=2)
3.55 fps ∼24% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.77 - 63, n=85)
14.8 fps ∼100% +311%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2.7 fps ∼27%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6.3 fps ∼64% +133%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.6 fps ∼77% +181%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
2 fps ∼20% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (2.1 - 2.7, n=2)
2.4 fps ∼24% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.5 - 54, n=308)
9.92 fps ∼100% +267%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
5.1 fps ∼57%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6 fps ∼67% +18%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.7 fps ∼75% +31%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
4.1 fps ∼46% -20%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (4.8 - 5.1, n=2)
4.95 fps ∼55% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.8 - 58, n=311)
8.99 fps ∼100% +76%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
76153 Points ∼54%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
116595 Points ∼83% +53%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
139998 Points ∼100% +84%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
122826 Points ∼88% +61%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (75706 - 76153, n=2)
75930 Points ∼54% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (54871 - 348178, n=200)
120266 Points ∼86% +58%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
55264 Points ∼49%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
95287 Points ∼85% +72%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
112639 Points ∼100% +104%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
87728 Points ∼78% +59%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
43987 Points ∼39% -20%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
  (55264 - 57169, n=2)
56217 Points ∼50% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (23275 - 254229, n=419)
78635 Points ∼70% +42%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
784 Points ∼65%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1061 Points ∼88% +35%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1212 Points ∼100% +55%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1090 Points ∼90% +39%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
671 Points ∼55% -14%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
784 Points ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=528)
706 Points ∼58% -10%
Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
754 Points ∼43%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1597 Points ∼90% +112%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1459 Points ∼83% +94%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1356 Points ∼77% +80%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
499 Points ∼28% -34%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
754 Points ∼43% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=528)
1766 Points ∼100% +134%
Memory (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1231 Points ∼34%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1979 Points ∼55% +61%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3630 Points ∼100% +195%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2445 Points ∼67% +99%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
1033 Points ∼28% -16%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
1231 Points ∼34% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=528)
1299 Points ∼36% +6%
System (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2423 Points ∼44%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
4563 Points ∼82% +88%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5568 Points ∼100% +130%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4506 Points ∼81% +86%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
2097 Points ∼38% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
2423 Points ∼44% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=528)
2606 Points ∼47% +8%
Overall (sort by value)
Nokia 3.1 Plus
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1152 Points ∼47%
HTC U12 Life
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1978 Points ∼81% +72%
Huawei P Smart Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2445 Points ∼100% +112%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
Samsung Exynos 7885, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2009 Points ∼82% +74%
Nokia 3.1
Mediatek MT6750N, Mali-T860 MP2, 2048
923 Points ∼38% -20%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
1152 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=532)
1291 Points ∼53% +12%

The same must be said about the browser benchmarks: the 3.1 Plus was barely fast enough to outperform its own Nokia 3.1 predecessor. Every other device in our test group was faster. That said, everyday web browsing performance was adequate and smooth, and even heavy websites and multimedia contents loaded and displayed fairly quickly.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei P Smart Plus (Chrome 71)
50.246 Points ∼100% +104%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
47.986 Points ∼96% +95%
HTC U12 Life (Chrome 70)
44.314 Points ∼88% +80%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=452)
37.3 Points ∼74% +52%
Nokia 3.1 Plus (Chrome 71)
24.61 Points ∼49%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 (22.7 - 24.6, n=2)
23.7 Points ∼47% -4%
Nokia 3.1 (Chrome 67)
18.015 Points ∼36% -27%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei P Smart Plus (Chrome 71)
9303 Points ∼100% +106%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
9165 Points ∼99% +103%
HTC U12 Life (Chrome 70)
9121 Points ∼98% +102%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=588)
5730 Points ∼62% +27%
Nokia 3.1 Plus (Chrome 71)
4508 Points ∼48%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 (4257 - 4508, n=2)
4383 Points ∼47% -3%
Nokia 3.1 (Chrome 67)
3274 Points ∼35% -27%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Nokia 3.1 (Chrome 67)
14115.5 ms * ∼100% -30%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=608)
11282 ms * ∼80% -4%
Nokia 3.1 Plus (Chrome 71)
10887.7 ms * ∼77%
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762 (10846 - 10888, n=2)
10867 ms * ∼77% -0%
HTC U12 Life (Chrome 70)
4757.5 ms * ∼34% +56%
Huawei P Smart Plus (Chrome 71)
4310 ms * ∼31% +60%
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70)
4122.8 ms * ∼29% +62%

* ... smaller is better

The device features 16 GB of internal storage, however a total of 9 GB was already taken up by the operating system, resulting in just 7 GB of user accessible storage space for apps and data. In addition, the 3.1 Plus’s internal storage turned out to be the slowest of all devices in our test group, which resulted in a short yet noticeable lag when loading photos of files.

The internal microSD card reader supports microSD cards of up to 400 GB. Unfortunately, they cannot be formatted as internal storage and thus not be used for storing apps. However, certified apps can use the expansion to store their data, such as a satnav applications’s map data. When benchmarked with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card, the card reader performed as expected and was comparable to other devices in its class.

Nokia 3.1 PlusHTC U12 LifeHuawei P Smart PlusSamsung Galaxy A7 2018 Nokia 3.1Average 16 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
100%
224%
60%
1%
-26%
29%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
55.23 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
60.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
51.94 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-6%
64.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
17%
59.84 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
8%
37.9 (6.38 - 65.4, n=116)
-31%
47 (3.4 - 87.1, n=348)
-15%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
81.32 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
82.35 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
76.93 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
78.15 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
77.17 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-5%
57 (10.8 - 87.7, n=116)
-30%
65.3 (8.2 - 96.5, n=348)
-20%
Random Write 4KB
8.33
16.2
94%
74
788%
15.45
85%
9.2
10%
7.67 (0.49 - 43.2, n=231)
-8%
17.5 (0.14 - 250, n=636)
110%
Random Read 4KB
52.37
56.71
8%
102.5
96%
83.98
60%
48.62
-7%
20.5 (2.49 - 61.7, n=231)
-61%
40.2 (1.59 - 173, n=636)
-23%
Sequential Write 256KB
35.72
209.45
486%
200.5
461%
104.87
194%
35.26
-1%
41.6 (8.74 - 97.6, n=231)
16%
83.9 (2.99 - 253, n=636)
135%
Sequential Read 256KB
272.51
272.79
0%
303.2
11%
295.76
9%
281.54
3%
160 (9.66 - 294, n=231)
-41%
238 (12.1 - 912, n=636)
-13%

Gaming

Gaming is definitely not the Nokia 3.1 Plus’s strong suit. While older and modest games should run smoothly by and large modern games with demanding graphics will most likely not, at least not on maximum details. The two games tested by us, "Temple Run 2" and "Dead Trigger 2", ran very smoothly. We should also note that many demanding games, such as "Asphalt 9: Legends" or "Arena of Valor" might fail to install at all due to the lack of internal storage space.

The touchscreen worked reliably while gaming. However, as noted before it offered too much resistance and was not as smooth as we would have wished for. Thus, games that require drag & drop operations can be rather cumbersome to play. In return, the orientation sensor worked flawlessly and fast.

Temple Run 2
Temple Run 2
Dead Trigger 2
Dead Trigger 2

Emissions

Temperature

During our tests, we were able to measure surface temperatures of 27 °C (~81 °F) when idle and up to 40 °C (~104 °F) under load. Overall, the Nokia 3.1 Plus felt comparatively warm due to its aluminum case, but it never turned uncomfortable and too hot to be held in hand. We noticed no restrictions of any kind that could be traced back to high temperatures during our everyday use.

Max. Load
 39.7 °C
103 F
36.9 °C
98 F
36.4 °C
98 F
 
 39.2 °C
103 F
36.9 °C
98 F
37 °C
99 F
 
 38.2 °C
101 F
37 °C
99 F
37.3 °C
99 F
 
Maximum: 39.7 °C = 103 F
Average: 37.6 °C = 100 F
37.1 °C
99 F
37.5 °C
100 F
38.6 °C
101 F
36.7 °C
98 F
37.3 °C
99 F
37.3 °C
99 F
36.7 °C
98 F
37.3 °C
99 F
38 °C
100 F
Maximum: 38.6 °C = 101 F
Average: 37.4 °C = 99 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.3 °C = 106 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.6 °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 39.7 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.6 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heatmap - front
Heatmap - front
Heatmap - back
Heatmap - back

Speakers

Volume characteristics
Volume characteristics

The single speaker offers a mediocre maximum volume and a fairly balanced soundscape. In quiet environments, we had no trouble with media playback whatsoever. However, you may want to consider using headphones or external speakers for an improved audio experience. The 3.5-mm headphone jack was tight and worked flawlessly without any negative impact on sound quality. The included stereo headset was very obviously made with phone calls in mind. It offers poor music quality and frequently fell out of our ears.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.135.32539.135.83130.330.84034.234.55031.438.36327.529.48021.823.510022.823.212524.322.516020.526.120019.335.725018.742.931517.349.240016.755.650016.559.763016.663.380015.663100015.162.8125014.163.3160014.161.6200014.462.8250013.962315013.868.2400013.663.5500014.666.263001466.9800014.266.41000013.767.71250013.763.31600013.947.1SPL63.426.976.6N16.80.938.5median 14.6median 62.8Delta28.333.930.528.436.636.133.230.930.330.629.922.23224.92524.427.923.52720.326.719.83118.237.317.447.516.657.117.159.415.963.815.970.515.969.716.773.21673.815.971.216.275.416.477.21776.816.573.516.472.716.675.81775.616.565.916.950.628.685.91.162.6median 16.6median 69.71.613.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseNokia 3.1 PlusNokia 3.1
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Nokia 3.1 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Nokia 3.1 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 36.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 61% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 77% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

According to our measurements, the Nokia 3.1 Plus had a minimum power consumption of 1 W when idle and a maximum of 5 W under load. It may not be the most efficient device on the planet, but it is not the worst either and landed somewhere in-between.

The included 10-W charger is amply dimensioned and capable of providing more than enough power for the Nokia 3.1 Plus.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.4 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1 / 2.4 / 2.9 Watt
Load midlight 3.7 / 5.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Nokia 3.1 Plus
3500 mAh
HTC U12 Life
3600 mAh
Huawei P Smart Plus
3340 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
3300 mAh
Nokia 3.1
2990 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
4%
-24%
8%
23%
15%
11%
Idle Minimum *
1
0.7
30%
1.3
-30%
0.71
29%
0.68
32%
0.8 (0.6 - 1, n=2)
20%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=671)
12%
Idle Average *
2.4
1.5
37%
2.5
-4%
1.36
43%
1.33
45%
1.85 (1.3 - 2.4, n=2)
23%
1.729 (0.6 - 6.2, n=670)
28%
Idle Maximum *
2.9
2.5
14%
3.6
-24%
1.47
49%
1.37
53%
2.5 (2.1 - 2.9, n=2)
14%
2.01 (0.74 - 6.6, n=671)
31%
Load Average *
3.7
4.7
-27%
5
-35%
5.13
-39%
4.02
-9%
3.35 (3 - 3.7, n=2)
9%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=665)
-9%
Load Maximum *
5.5
7.4
-35%
7
-27%
7.89
-43%
5.89
-7%
4.95 (4.4 - 5.5, n=2)
10%
5.8 (1.2 - 14.2, n=665)
-5%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The device performed admirably in our real-world Wi-Fi test, and managed to outperform its entire competition by a long shot. Charging the 3,500 mAh battery from near empty to full using the included 10-W power supply took a bit over three hours.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 20min
Nokia 3.1 Plus
3500 mAh
HTC U12 Life
3600 mAh
Huawei P Smart Plus
3340 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
3300 mAh
Nokia 3.1
2990 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
920
603
-34%
512
-44%
605
-34%
562
-39%

Pros

+ solid case
+ long battery life
+ Dual SIM plus microSD

Cons

- not much internal memory
- poor front-facing camera

Verdict

In review: Nokia 3.1 Plus. Review unit courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Nokia 3.1 Plus. Review unit courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Overall, the Nokia 3.1 Plus turned out to be an improved version of the Nokia 3.1. The overall experience was smooth, and the device offered enough performance for everyday applications. We were particularly impressed by the dedicated microSD slot that does not have to share its space with the secondary Nano SIM slot and thus does not have any impact on the device’s dual SIM capabilities. The cameras, on the other hand, were fairly unimpressive, to say the least. Wi-Fi performance was also comparatively poor, but in return the device supports NFC for contactless payment technologies such as Google Play.

The Nokia 3.1 Plus is a solid smartphone with too little internal storage.

Its biggest drawbacks when compared to the competition are the meager internal storage and the poor cameras. While the latter remain usable for occasional snapshots the almost tiny internal storage was a challenge over and over again. Just 7 GB of user-accessible space is simply not enough for apps, photos, music, and other data. MicroSD storage expansion is commendable, however as long as it cannot be used as internal storage to outsource large apps and games its usability remains questionable at best.

Nokia 3.1 Plus - 02/11/2019 v6
Mike Wobker

Chassis
81%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
37 / 60 → 62%
Weight
90%
Battery
99%
Display
84%
Games Performance
24 / 63 → 38%
Application Performance
48 / 70 → 69%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
62 / 91 → 68%
Camera
59%
Average
71%
81%
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 > Nokia 3.1 Plus Smartphone Review
Mike Wobker, 2019-02-12 (Update: 2019-02-13)