Notebookcheck

Nokia 8.1 Smartphone Review

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 02/07/2019

Room for improvement. HMD Global is positioning the Nokia 8.1 as an upper midrange device. However, the company has priced the 8.1 at €400 (~$456), which puts it in the sights of last year's flagships. Read on to see what the Nokia 8.1 offers in the face of strong opposition.

Nokia 8.1

HMD Global markets the Nokia 8.1 as an upper midrange smartphone and has given the device a modern glass and metal design. The 8.1 has Zeiss branded dual rear-facing cameras and runs Android One, which Google should regularly provide with updates. The Finnish company positions the 8.1 below the Nokia 8 and has equipped the former with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 SoC, which is not as powerful as the Snapdragon 835 found in the Nokia 8. The 8.1 retails at €399 ($450), which is correspondingly much cheaper than what HMD Global initially charged for the Nokia 8.

We have chosen to compare the Nokia 8.1 against other comparably priced midrange smartphones and some of last year’s flagships that have now reduced in price. Our comparison devices will include the Nokia 8 Sirocco, the Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018), the Sony Xperia XZ2 and the Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S.

Nokia 8.1 (8 Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.18 inch 18,7:9, 2246 x 1080 pixel 408 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 51 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm headphone jack, Card Reader: up to 400 GB microSD cards, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Proximity sensor,, USB Type-C
Networking
Qualcomm Wi-Fi B/G/N/AC (2x2) (b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM: 850, 900, 1800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS: 850, 900, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. LTE: Bands 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20., Dual SIM, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 154.8 x 75.8 ( = 0.31 x 6.09 x 2.98 in)
Battery
13.3 Wh, 3500 mAh Lithium-Ion, 18 W quick charger
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix , f/1.8, Dual-pixel Phase-detection autofocus (PDAF), OIS, dual-LED flash, Videos at up to 2160p/30 FPS (main camera). 13.0 MP, f/2.4, Depth of Field (Secondary Camera)
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix , f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker on the underside of the device, Keyboard: Virtual, Quick charger, USB Type-C cable, Headphones, SIM tool, Android One, Nokia Mobile Care, 24 Months Warranty, SAR values: Body – 1.490 W/kg, Head - 0.514 W/kg; FM radio; LTE Cat. 6 – up to 300 MBit/s download and 50 MBit/s upload speeds; VoLTE, VoWiFi., fanless
Weight
180 g ( = 6.35 oz / 0.4 pounds), Power Supply: 72 g ( = 2.54 oz / 0.16 pounds)
Price
400 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The Nokia 8.1 has a simple design, but that should not detract from its special features. The back is, like many current smartphones, made of glass, while the metal frame has a matte finish that catches the light. The rear camera housing and fingerprint reader have silver accents too, which contrasts nicely with the glass back of our black review unit. In short, the materials used, and the finish of the case makes the Nokia 8.1 look and feel like a premium smartphone. HMD Global currently sells the Nokia 8.1 in either, blue, black or copper.

The Nokia 8.1 is lighter than all but the Nokia 8 Sirocco of our comparison devices and is almost 20 g (~0.7 oz) lighter than the Sony Xperia XZ2. Our test unit also measures 8 mm (~0.3 in) thick, which is rather slim, but its rear-facing camera protrudes a few millimetres from its case, so the device never lies flat on a table.

Our review device is well-built too. We could not get the display to warp regardless of how hard we pressed on the screen or the back case. Moreover, we could only twist the case slightly, although the case does creak when we try to bend it.

Size Comparison

162.5 mm / 6.4 inch 77 mm / 3.03 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 183 g0.4034 lbs153 mm / 6.02 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 11.1 mm / 0.437 inch 198 g0.4365 lbs154.8 mm / 6.09 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs150.9 mm / 5.94 inch 74.9 mm / 2.95 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs140.9 mm / 5.55 inch 72.97 mm / 2.87 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 176 g0.388 lbs

Connectivity

The Nokia 8.1 has 64 GB of internal storage and 4 GB of RAM, which were commonplace for flagships released in 2017 or 2018, just as devices such as the Galaxy S9 and the Xperia XZ2 demonstrate. Standards have moved in 2019 though, and put Nokia 8.1 firmly in the midrange bracket in this regard. Some OEMs have even started equipping their midrange devices with 128 GB of storage and 6 GB of RAM, but 64 GB and 4 GB should still be plenty for most people in our opinion.

HMD Global has equipped the Nokia 8.1 with NFC too for use with services such as Google Pay and a Bluetooth 5.0 modem.

The Nokia 8.1 has two SIM slots and supports up to 400 GB microSD cards should you need more storage. However, the second SIM slot is also the microSD card slot, so you must compromise between dual-SIM functionality and microSD card expansion, which is unfortunate.

Right-hand side: Volume rocker, Power button
Right-hand side: Volume rocker, Power button
Left-hand side: Card slot
Left-hand side: Card slot
Topside: 3.5 mm jack
Topside: 3.5 mm jack
Underside: Speaker, USB Type-C port, Microphone
Underside: Speaker, USB Type-C port, Microphone

Software

The Nokia 8.1 is Android One certified, which means that Google supplies updates with no OEM interface. The idea behind Android One is to provide devices with more regular system and security updates while reducing the amount of fragmentation within the Android ecosystem.

The Nokia 8.1 ships with Android 9 Pie and Google has committed to delivering two major system updates, which should see the device eventually running Android 11. The company had also pushed out January 1, 2019 security patches to our review unit at the time of testing, which were the most recent patches available at the time.

The device also supports multiple user accounts and has hardly any third-party apps pre-installed. Our review unit only has the Nokia support app other than Google software, which can help people get quickly acclimatised to their device should they be unfamiliar with Android.

Google should deliver timely updates to Android One devices
Google should deliver timely updates to Android One devices
Nokia mobile Care app
Nokia mobile Care app
Default app drawer
Default app drawer
Default home screen
Default home screen

Communication & GPS

The Nokia 8.1 supports up to IEEE 802.11 ac Wi-Fi and can connect to either 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz networks. Our review unit finished in the midfield of our iperf3 Client comparison tables and averaged around 300 MBit/s in both tests that we conducted. These speeds are typical of modern midrange smartphones but are now over 50% slower than modern flagships such as the Xperia XZ2 and the Mi Mix 2S.

The Nokia 8.1 has limited LTE support though. The device utilises just 6 LTE bands, which is the bare minimum for use in areas such as central Europe, but globetrotters will struggle to connect to LTE networks in many countries. Our review unit maintained decent mobile network reception in urban environments though, so most people should have no problems with connecting to an LTE network if you are in a country that uses one of the 6 LTE bands that the Nokia 8.1 supports.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Sony Xperia XZ2
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
669 MBit/s ∼100% +114%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
654 MBit/s ∼98% +110%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Adreno 512, 660, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
584 (min: 557, max: 605) MBit/s ∼87% +87%
Nokia 8.1
Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
312 (min: 273, max: 341) MBit/s ∼47%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
278 MBit/s ∼42% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=367)
219 MBit/s ∼33% -30%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
668 MBit/s ∼100% +123%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
633 MBit/s ∼95% +111%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
550 MBit/s ∼82% +83%
Nokia 8.1
Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
300 (min: 169, max: 367) MBit/s ∼45%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Adreno 512, 660, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
285 (min: 249, max: 304) MBit/s ∼43% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=367)
210 MBit/s ∼31% -30%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø311 (273-341)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø294 (169-367)
GPS test: Inside
GPS test: Inside
GPS test: At a window
GPS test: At a window
GPS test: Outside
GPS test: Outside

Our test device can also locate us with up to 14 metres (~46 ft) accuracy indoors whether we stand next to a window or in the middle of a room. This may not sound that accurate, but many midrange smartphones have been unable to locate us in identical tests. Predictably, GPS accuracy improved when we tested the device outside, with the Nokia 8.1 able to maintain a satellite fix with up to 4 metres (~13 ft) accuracy.

Google Maps also found our location with an accuracy of up to a few meters after a few seconds. The compass worked reliably throughout testing.

We also took the Nokia 8.1 on a bike ride to measures its GPS accuracy against the Garmin Edge 520, a professional navigation device. Our test device deviated by 210 metres (~230 yd) from the 4.09 km (~2.5 mi) route that the Garmin plotted, but that is not the whole story. The Nokia 8.1 occasionally struggled to record the route that we took accurately, but it did a better job than the Garmin during the looped section of our bike ride. However, sharp turns often caught the Nokia 8.1 unawares, which then caused it to cut corners to keep up with us.

Overall, the Nokia 8.1 has decent GPS accuracy for a midrange smartphone and should be good enough for most general navigation tasks. However, we would recommend using a different device if you need precise location data.

GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Overview
GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Overview
GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Loop
GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Loop
GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Bridge
GPS test: Nokia 8.1 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge

Telephone Features & Call Quality

The Nokia 8.1 uses the Google suite of apps for handling calls, contacts and messages. The apps work just as well as they do on other devices that we have tested. The device supports voice over LTE (VoLTE) and voice over Wi-Fi (VoWiFi), but your carrier must provision the Nokia 8.1 on its network before either technology will work.

Our review unit has decent call quality and reproduced our call partner’s voice loudly throughout our tests, while it also did a good job at filtering out background noise. In short, you should always be able to hear who you are talking to, but their voice may not always sound completely clear.

By contrast, the microphone reproduced our voice well, although it performed worse when we tried making a call over speakerphone. Quiet voices are practically unintelligible, while loud voices sound too distorted for our liking.

Cameras

Photo taken with the front-facing camera
Photo taken with the front-facing camera

HMD Global has equipped the Nokia 8.1 with a 20 MP front-facing camera, which is an unusually high resolution sensor for a midrange smartphone. The camera can only produce software-based bokeh effects as it is not supported by a depth-of-field sensor, and the default camera app does not include any augmented reality (AR) filters as we have seen with the Apple iPhone XS or the Samsung Galaxy S9.

The Nokia 8.1 also has Zeiss branded dual rear-facing cameras, the main sensor of which is a 12 MP camera that supports optical image stabilisation (OIS) and has an f/1.8 aperture. The primary camera is supported by a 13 MP sensor that helps our review unit create convincing bokeh effect photos, an example of which we have included below. Pictures taken in the standard mode look more detailed in our opinion and capture objects more sharply than in the bokeh effect mode.

The Nokia 8.1 also takes considerably wider-angle photos than the iPhone XS Max, which is most noticeable when shooting landscapes like in scene 2. Our test device takes more detailed pictures than the OnePlus 5T, for example, but our comparison devices tend to expose scenes better than the Nokia 8.1 can. This difference became particularly apparent during our low-light photography tests as can be seen in scene 3.

The rear-facing camera can record videos in up to 4K at 30 FPS. The image quality is good, but it cannot adjust exposure smoothly, which is disappointing for a $450 smartphone. By contrast, our review unit recorded audio cleanly, which is not always the case with midrange smartphones.

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
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera with Live-Bokeh activated
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera with Live-Bokeh activated
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera with a narrower viewing angle
Photo taken with the rear-facing camera with a narrower viewing angle

We also subjected the Nokia 8.1 to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. Our review unit reproduced our test chart well and did a good job at delineating black text from blocks of colour. The 12 MP cannot maintain contrast levels across the entire chart though, with there being a noticeable reduction in the top-left hand corner of the image.

The Nokia 8.1 also reproduces colours accurately, as demonstrated by the ColorChecker Passport chart below. However, the main camera replicates white and grey tones too darkly.

A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
Our test chart in detail
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

Accessories & Warranty

HMD Global includes an 18-W charger and a USB-C cable in the box, along with a set of headphones. The latter sits well in our ears and produce listenable sound, but music lacks depth, which makes everything sound too tinny for our liking.

The Nokia 8.1 comes with 24 months manufacturer’s warranty. Please see our Guarantees, Return policies and Warranties article for more country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation

The Nokia 8.1 comes with Google GBoard pre-installed as its default keyboard, which works just as well as it does on other devices that we have tested. The touchscreen worked flawlessly throughout our tests and is sensitive into the corners of the display. The screen has a smooth finish that feels premium too and is easy to perform swiping gestures on.

HMD Global has also included a fingerprint scanner that is located on the back of the device. The fingerprint reader on our review unit unlocked the device quickly throughout our tests without any issues. The Nokia 8.1 does not currently support facial authentication, but HMD Global has subsequently added this feature to its other devices in an update, so the company may do this again at some point.

The Nokia 8.1 also supports numerous gestures and shortcuts that can trigger a variety of functions. Double pressing the power button launches the camera while flipping over the device rejects an incoming call. You can also bring the notification shade down by swiping downwards on the fingerprint sensor.

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

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Nokia 8.1 has a 6.18-inch display that operates natively at 2,246x1,080. The screen has a large notch too, which houses the earpiece, the front-facing camera and the ambient light sensor. The skewed aspect ratio causes content that was shot in 16:9 to appear letterboxed, but that is the case with most modern smartphones that do not have 16:9 aspect ratio displays.

Our review unit achieved an average maximum brightness of 547 cd/m², according to X-Rite i1Pro 2, which is much brighter than the display in the Mi Mix 2S, but is around 16% darker than the Xperia XZ2. The display is also 92% evenly lit, which is on par with the average of our comparison devices.

523
cd/m²
543
cd/m²
541
cd/m²
566
cd/m²
567
cd/m²
536
cd/m²
553
cd/m²
546
cd/m²
550
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 567 cd/m² Average: 547.2 cd/m² Minimum: 4.88 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 567 cd/m²
Contrast: 930:1 (Black: 0.61 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.39 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 4.9 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.248
Nokia 8.1
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
OLED, 2220x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Sony Xperia XZ2
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.7
Nokia 8 Sirocco
P-OLED, 2560x1440, 5.5
Screen
25%
4%
35%
-5%
Brightness middle
567
553
-2%
492
-13%
630
11%
576
2%
Brightness
547
553
1%
463
-15%
632
16%
597
9%
Brightness Distribution
92
96
4%
90
-2%
96
4%
85
-8%
Black Level *
0.61
0.59
3%
0.44
28%
Contrast
930
834
-10%
1432
54%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.39
2.2
50%
2.4
45%
1.5
66%
5
-14%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.28
5.1
30%
6.2
15%
4.3
41%
8
-10%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.9
1.7
65%
4.5
8%
2.1
57%
5.4
-10%
Gamma
2.248 98%
2.06 107%
2.25 98%
2.17 101%
2.3 96%
CCT
7642 85%
6434 101%
6395 102%
6513 100%
7730 84%

* ... 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 75.76 Hz ≤ 10 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 75.76 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 75.76 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9705 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Disappointingly, the Nokia 8.1 has a 0.61 cd/m² black value, which is frankly too high and results in an underwhelming 930:1 contrast ratio. Our test device has a more vibrant display than the Mi Mix 2S, but it is resoundingly beaten by the Xperia XZ2.

We also subjected our review unit to display tests with a spectrophotometer and CalMAN analysis software. Our tests determined that the display has a slight blue tint to it and its average DeltaE deviations are above ideal values. Furthermore, our comparison devices offer more colour accurate displays than the Nokia 8.1.

HMD Global has included three colour modes and a dynamic mode that automatically selects the best colour preset depending on what is being displayed onscreen. We tested the Nokia 8.1 with its Vivid mode selected, while its Cinema and Basic modes offer a warmer white balance. The Cinema mode also reproduces colours more vividly than the Basic mode does.

Our test device completely covers the sRGB colour space, according to CalMAN, although its results are not completely accurate, so we would recommend taking them with a pinch of salt. It is a shame that HMD Global did not include an option to adjust the white balance manually, but there are numerous third-party apps that are available on the Google Play Store, which could do this should your display also suffer from a blue tint like the one in our review unit does.

CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Space – sRGB
CalMAN: Colour Space – sRGB
CalMAN: Colour Space - AdobeRGB
CalMAN: Colour Space - AdobeRGB
 

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
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15 ms rise
↘ 13 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 59 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9 ms rise
↘ 27 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. » 27 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.7 ms).

You should have no issues with using the Nokia 8.1 outside on cloudy days. However, reflections will overwhelm the display in direct sunlight as demonstrated in the pictures below. Hence, we would suggest finding a shady spot where possible if you must use your device outside on a sunny day.

The Nokia 8.1 has good viewing angles too, but the screen suffers from slight brightness shifts at acute viewing angles. These look more pronounced in our photos than they do to our eyes, so we doubt that they will be an issue for most people in daily use. In short, the Nokia 8.1 should remain readable from almost any angle.

Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at minimum brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at minimum brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at medium brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at medium brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at maximum brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors at maximum brightness
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors with the brightness sensor activated
Using the Nokia 8.1 outdoors with the brightness sensor activated
Viewing Angles
Viewing Angles

Performance

The Nokia 8.1 is the first smartphone that we have tested, which has a Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 SoC. The Snapdragon 710 is an upper midrange chip that Qualcomm manufactures on a 10 nm FinFET process, and which should be more energy efficient than its predecessors. The SoC delivers considerably better single-core performance than chips such as the Snapdragon 660 too, but there is hardly any difference in multi-core performance between generations. Perhaps predictably, high-end SoCs such as the Snapdragon 835 and Snapdragon 845 achieve higher scores in synthetic benchmarks. However, the former only scored around 15% more in Geekbench 4.3, while the Snapdragon 710 even outscored the Snapdragon 835 in some 3DMark benchmarks.

The Snapdragon 710 integrates a Qualcomm Adreno 616 GPU, which supports all modern graphics APIs, and should be future proofed for the next few years. The Adreno 616 should deliver around 30% better performance than its predecessors.

Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
6813 Points ∼47%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5542 Points ∼39% -19%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
14362 Points ∼100% +111%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7865 Points ∼55% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (6601 - 6813, n=3)
6730 Points ∼47% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (870 - 21070, n=254)
4647 Points ∼32% -32%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5856 Points ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5826 Points ∼65% -1%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8937 Points ∼100% +53%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8510 Points ∼95% +45%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
6701 Points ∼75% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5754 - 5856, n=3)
5818 Points ∼65% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1174 - 11598, n=307)
4457 Points ∼50% -24%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1799 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1601 Points ∼65% -11%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2456 Points ∼100% +37%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2464 Points ∼100% +37%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
1952 Points ∼79% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1799 - 1829, n=3)
1814 Points ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (437 - 4824, n=308)
1311 Points ∼53% -27%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
6887 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5789 Points ∼72% -16%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8078 Points ∼100% +17%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8069 Points ∼100% +17%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7193 Points ∼89% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (6419 - 6887, n=4)
6682 Points ∼83% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2828 - 9868, n=317)
4826 Points ∼60% -30%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
8309 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
6338 Points ∼68% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
9179 Points ∼98% +10%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
9319 Points ∼100% +12%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
7925 Points ∼85% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (7154 - 8414, n=4)
7874 Points ∼84% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2695 - 13531, n=486)
5249 Points ∼56% -37%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2534 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2774 Points ∼78% +9%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2246 Points ∼64% -11%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3537 Points ∼100% +40%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2382 Points ∼67% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1836 - 2534, n=4)
2199 Points ∼62% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4439, n=332)
1783 Points ∼50% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1845 Points ∼32%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1268 Points ∼22% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4621 Points ∼81% +150%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5690 Points ∼100% +208%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4187 Points ∼74% +127%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1845 - 1871, n=4)
1862 Points ∼33% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (76 - 8206, n=332)
1525 Points ∼27% -17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1964 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1433 Points ∼29% -27%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3742 Points ∼75% +91%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5012 Points ∼100% +155%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3584 Points ∼72% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1862 - 1981, n=4)
1921 Points ∼38% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (94 - 5913, n=335)
1421 Points ∼28% -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2516 Points ∼71%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2645 Points ∼75% +5%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2270 Points ∼64% -10%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3540 Points ∼100% +41%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2119 Points ∼60% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1846 - 2526, n=4)
2268 Points ∼64% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=347)
1760 Points ∼50% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2855 Points ∼35%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1757 Points ∼21% -38%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5228 Points ∼64% +83%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8233 Points ∼100% +188%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4514 Points ∼55% +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2855 - 2887, n=4)
2874 Points ∼35% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=347)
2103 Points ∼26% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2772 Points ∼44%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1898 Points ∼30% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4054 Points ∼64% +46%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
6359 Points ∼100% +129%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3608 Points ∼57% +30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2554 - 2798, n=4)
2704 Points ∼43% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7856, n=348)
1786 Points ∼28% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2514 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2073 Points ∼57% -18%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2606 Points ∼72% +4%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3630 Points ∼100% +44%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2946 Points ∼81% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2054 - 2514, n=4)
2359 Points ∼65% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4216, n=408)
1714 Points ∼47% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1702 Points ∼33%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1185 Points ∼23% -30%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5181 Points ∼100% +204%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
5122 Points ∼99% +201%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3926 Points ∼76% +131%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1701 - 1714, n=4)
1707 Points ∼33% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (65 - 6355, n=410)
1254 Points ∼24% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1834 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1354 Points ∼29% -26%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4248 Points ∼91% +132%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
4693 Points ∼100% +156%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3656 Points ∼78% +99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1774 - 1836, n=4)
1816 Points ∼39% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80 - 5509, n=418)
1200 Points ∼26% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2467 Points ∼68%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2741 Points ∼75% +11%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2159 Points ∼59% -12%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3642 Points ∼100% +48%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
2287 Points ∼63% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1878 - 2495, n=4)
2320 Points ∼64% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4215, n=441)
1618 Points ∼44% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2763 Points ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1918 Points ∼24% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6630 Points ∼82% +140%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8122 Points ∼100% +194%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
4511 Points ∼56% +63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2745 - 2767, n=4)
2758 Points ∼34% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 9963, n=441)
1706 Points ∼21% -38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2691 Points ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2054 Points ∼32% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4540 Points ∼71% +69%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
6378 Points ∼100% +137%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3709 Points ∼58% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2490 - 2694, n=4)
2636 Points ∼41% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7166, n=449)
1462 Points ∼23% -46%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14820 Points ∼41%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
18523 Points ∼52% +25%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
30245 Points ∼84% +104%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
35856 Points ∼100% +142%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
21407 Points ∼60% +44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (13687 - 14820, n=4)
14425 Points ∼40% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10981 - 37475, n=602)
13339 Points ∼37% -10%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
39655 Points ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
29065 Points ∼36% -27%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
76078 Points ∼95% +92%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
80233 Points ∼100% +102%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
58018 Points ∼72% +46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (38163 - 39655, n=4)
38975 Points ∼49% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3700 - 162695, n=602)
19097 Points ∼24% -52%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
28895 Points ∼46%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
25783 Points ∼41% -11%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
56913 Points ∼90% +97%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
62926 Points ∼100% +118%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
42040 Points ∼67% +45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (27310 - 28895, n=4)
28271 Points ∼45% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4339 - 77599, n=603)
16007 Points ∼25% -45%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
65 fps ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
46 fps ∼31% -29%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
150 fps ∼100% +131%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
150 fps ∼100% +131%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
106 fps ∼71% +63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (65 - 65, n=3)
65 fps ∼43% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.4 - 251, n=626)
33.2 fps ∼22% -49%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
57 fps ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
50 fps ∼83% -12%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (55 - 57, n=3)
56 fps ∼93% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (11 - 120, n=629)
26.1 fps ∼44% -54%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
32 fps ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
23 fps ∼28% -28%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
74 fps ∼90% +131%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
82 fps ∼100% +156%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
54 fps ∼66% +69%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (32 - 33, n=3)
32.3 fps ∼39% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.7 - 132, n=544)
18.1 fps ∼22% -43%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
31 fps ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
21 fps ∼36% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼100% +90%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
59 fps ∼100% +90%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
37 fps ∼63% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (29 - 31, n=3)
30.3 fps ∼51% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6.2 - 115, n=549)
17 fps ∼29% -45%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
23 fps ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
15 fps ∼25% -35%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +161%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
60 fps ∼100% +161%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
41 fps ∼68% +78%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (23 - 23, n=3)
23 fps ∼38% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.3 - 88, n=406)
15.2 fps ∼25% -34%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
22 fps ∼40%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
14 fps ∼25% -36%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
55 fps ∼100% +150%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
55 fps ∼100% +150%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
24 fps ∼44% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (20 - 22, n=3)
21.3 fps ∼39% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.8 - 110, n=409)
14.6 fps ∼27% -34%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
8.2 fps ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
3 fps ∼32% -63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5.9 - 8.4, n=3)
7.5 fps ∼81% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2 - 59, n=110)
9.27 fps ∼100% +13%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5 fps ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
4.8 fps ∼75% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5 - 7.8, n=3)
6 fps ∼93% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.4 - 31, n=110)
6.42 fps ∼100% +28%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
7.5 fps ∼55% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (12 - 13, n=3)
12.7 fps ∼93% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.5 - 59, n=111)
13.6 fps ∼100% +5%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14 fps ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
8.6 fps ∼56% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (14 - 14, n=3)
14 fps ∼92% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 63, n=110)
15.3 fps ∼100% +9%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
9.1 fps ∼26% -30%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35 fps ∼100% +169%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
35 fps ∼100% +169%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
26 fps ∼74% +100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (13 - 13, n=3)
13 fps ∼37% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.6 - 54, n=335)
10.3 fps ∼29% -21%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
12 fps ∼35%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
8.3 fps ∼24% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
34 fps ∼100% +183%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
33 fps ∼97% +175%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
15 fps ∼44% +25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (12 - 13, n=3)
12.3 fps ∼36% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 58, n=339)
9.3 fps ∼27% -22%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14.3 fps ∼47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (14.3 - 15.5, n=3)
14.9 fps ∼49% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7.98 - 651, n=46)
30.6 fps ∼100% +114%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
12.1 fps ∼43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (10.1 - 12.1, n=2)
11.1 fps ∼40% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.1 - 606, n=42)
28 fps ∼100% +131%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (11.4 - 13, n=3)
12.2 fps ∼36% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (11.4 - 739, n=41)
34.2 fps ∼100% +163%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
169262 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
140878 Points ∼53% -17%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
266601 Points ∼100% +58%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
266981 Points ∼100% +58%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
209729 Points ∼79% +24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (155493 - 169262, n=4)
162648 Points ∼61% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (41483 - 374820, n=229)
125377 Points ∼47% -26%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
135848 Points ∼60%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
116969 Points ∼52% -14%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
162183 Points ∼72% +19%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
225663 Points ∼100% +66%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
185487 Points ∼82% +37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (135848 - 137693, n=3)
136892 Points ∼61% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (23275 - 274007, n=437)
81300 Points ∼36% -40%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1681 Score ∼86%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1681 - 1708, n=3)
1699 Score ∼87% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1029 - 5025, n=46)
1962 Score ∼100% +17%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1077 Points ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1105 Points ∼82% +3%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1234 Points ∼92% +15%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
1346 Points ∼100% +25%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
1202 Points ∼89% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (1070 - 1100, n=4)
1086 Points ∼81% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=559)
722 Points ∼54% -33%
Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
3086 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2332 Points ∼29% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
7918 Points ∼100% +157%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
7868 Points ∼99% +155%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
6084 Points ∼77% +97%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2980 - 3102, n=4)
3056 Points ∼39% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=559)
1848 Points ∼23% -40%
Memory (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2947 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2393 Points ∼76% -19%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3012 Points ∼95% +2%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
2193 Points ∼69% -26%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3162 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2947 - 3518, n=4)
3133 Points ∼99% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=559)
1358 Points ∼43% -54%
System (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5681 Points ∼68%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5063 Points ∼60% -11%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5792 Points ∼69% +2%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
8402 Points ∼100% +48%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
5888 Points ∼70% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (5603 - 5782, n=4)
5682 Points ∼68% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=559)
2719 Points ∼32% -52%
Overall (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2731 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2364 Points ∼63% -13%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3614 Points ∼97% +32%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 4096
3738 Points ∼100% +37%
Nokia 8 Sirocco
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Adreno 540, 6144
3416 Points ∼91% +25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (2731 - 2843, n=4)
2771 Points ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=563)
1349 Points ∼36% -51%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
482 Points ∼65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
  (479 - 488, n=3)
483 Points ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (36.3 - 2754, n=85)
744 Points ∼100% +54%

The Nokia 8.1 also performed well in browser benchmarks and traded blows with our more powerful comparison devices in our comparison tables.

Subjectively, websites load quickly on our review unit, as do media content such as pictures. The difference in browser performance is also negligible between the Nokia 8.1 and devices such as the Mi Mix 2S; such is the power of the Snapdragon 710 SoC.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Sony Xperia XZ2 (Chrome 65)
89.54 Points ∼100% +36%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
69.765 Points ∼78% +6%
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71)
66.048 Points ∼74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (65.3 - 66, n=3)
65.8 Points ∼73% 0%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
62.157 Points ∼69% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
51.786 Points ∼58% -22%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 273, n=470)
37.8 Points ∼42% -43%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Sony Xperia XZ2 (Chrome 65)
16774 Points ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
14491 Points ∼86% +14%
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71)
12717 Points ∼76%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (12209 - 12802, n=3)
12576 Points ∼75% -1%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
11544 Points ∼69% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
10145 Points ∼60% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (3126 - 43280, n=619)
5931 Points ∼35% -53%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=638)
11085 ms * ∼100% -265%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
4812.6 ms * ∼43% -59%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
3841.8 (min: 1) ms * ∼35% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (3035 - 3177, n=3)
3090 ms * ∼28% -2%
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71)
3034.9 ms * ∼27%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
2868 ms * ∼26% +5%
Sony Xperia XZ2 (Chrome 65)
2394.3 ms * ∼22% +21%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
98 Points ∼100% +36%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
77 Points ∼79% +7%
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71)
72 Points ∼73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (70 - 72, n=3)
71 Points ∼72% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (24 - 161, n=93)
64.4 Points ∼66% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
59 Points ∼60% -18%
Sony Xperia XZ2
Points ∼0% -100%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Sony Xperia XZ2 (Chrome 65)
262 Points ∼100% +25%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
228 Points ∼87% +9%
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71)
209 Points ∼80%
Nokia 8 Sirocco (Chrome 66)
204 Points ∼78% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (189 - 209, n=3)
199 Points ∼76% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 (Chrome 70)
167 Points ∼64% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (251 - 362, n=313)
118 Points ∼45% -44%

* ... smaller is better

We tested the speed of our review unit’s microSD card reader with our reference card, the Toshiba Exceria Pro M501. The Nokia 8.1 will win no awards here, but it does achieve above average read and write speeds. It is worth keeping in mind that the device does not support the exFAT file system, which limits the Nokia 8.1 to only being able to read files that are smaller than 4 GB from expandable memory.

The internal memory storage is considerably slower than our comparison devices though. HMD Global has equipped the Nokia 8.1 with eMMC flash storage, which is much slower than the UFS 2.1 memory in our comparison devices. The flash memory in our review unit is not necessarily fast by eMMC standards either, which is disappointing.

Nokia 8.1Samsung Galaxy A9 2018Xiaomi Mi Mix 2SSony Xperia XZ2Nokia 8 SiroccoAverage 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
46%
481%
47%
119%
26%
0%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
58.27 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
59.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
30.12 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-48%
55.7 (58.4 - 74.7, n=92)
-4%
47.4 (9.5 - 87.1, n=371)
-19%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
84.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-13%
34.25 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-60%
73.9 (81.2 - 87.2, n=92)
-13%
65.5 (8.1 - 96.5, n=371)
-23%
Random Write 4KB
7.3
19.79
171%
128.36
1658%
17
133%
22.4
207%
23.1 (3.4 - 88.2, n=101)
216%
18.5 (0.14 - 250, n=669)
153%
Random Read 4KB
69.9
116.76
67%
135.14
93%
149.4
114%
140.7
101%
53 (11.4 - 149, n=101)
-24%
42.1 (1.59 - 174, n=669)
-40%
Sequential Write 256KB
203.8
194.65
-4%
208.1
2%
198.7
-3%
211.6
4%
172 (40 - 246, n=101)
-16%
87.6 (2.99 - 388, n=669)
-57%
Sequential Read 256KB
279.3
426.63
53%
756.07
171%
679.2
143%
737.5
164%
272 (115 - 704, n=101)
-3%
246 (12.1 - 912, n=669)
-12%

Games

The Nokia 8.1 generally performed well in our gaming tests. Our review unit will run games at 60 FPS if they support it, although there are some slight dips in framerates in games such as "Arena of Valor" when played at high graphics. We did not notice these fluctuations while playing though.

"Asphalt 9:Legends" never dropped lower than 25 FPS, but we noticed some jerkiness while playing. By contrast, the accelerometer and touchscreen worked perfectly throughout our gaming tests.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Asphalt 9: Legends
 SettingsValue
 High Quality29 fps
 Standard / low29 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 SettingsValue
 min60 fps
 high HD60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Shadow Fight 3
 SettingsValue
 high60 fps
 minimal60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
PUBG Compare
010203040506070Tooltip
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Arena of Valor; min; 1.27.1.2: Ø59.9 (57-60)
Sony Xperia XZ2 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Arena of Valor; min: Ø60 (58-61)
Nokia 8 Sirocco Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Arena of Valor; min; 1.21.1.2: Ø59.7 (53-60)
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.27.1.2: Ø59.6 (47-60)
Sony Xperia XZ2 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Arena of Valor; high HD: Ø60 (56-61)
Nokia 8 Sirocco Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.21.1.2: Ø59.8 (54-60)
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 1.3.1a: Ø28.9 (25-31)
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 Adreno 512, 660, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality: Ø27.7 (24-30)
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 1.3.1a: Ø29.3 (28-31)
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Shadow Fight 3; high; 1.16.1: Ø59.1 (53-60)
Sony Xperia XZ2 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Shadow Fight 3; high: Ø59.1 (53-61)
Nokia 8 Sirocco Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Shadow Fight 3; high; 1.9.4: Ø59.5 (54-60)
Nokia 8.1 Adreno 616, 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Shadow Fight 3; minimal; 1.16.1: Ø59.5 (57-60)
Sony Xperia XZ2 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Shadow Fight 3; minimal: Ø59.3 (53-61)
Nokia 8 Sirocco Adreno 540, 835, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Shadow Fight 3; minimal; 1.9.4: Ø59.5 (54-60)

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench Battery test
GFXBench Battery test

The Nokia 8.1 does not thermal throttle even under sustained load, as we determined by running a looped GFXBench Battery test. You should have no issues with pushing the device hard in daily use.

However, our test device does get hot under load. We measured surface temperatures reaching 46.1 °C (~115 °F) during our stress test, with the whole device averaging above 40 °C (~104 °F), which will feel hot to the touch and may feel make the Nokia 8.1 uncomfortable to hold.

By contrast, the device remained cool when idling and had no hot spots.

Max. Load
 46.1 °C
115 F
41.4 °C
107 F
42.6 °C
109 F
 
 44.6 °C
112 F
41.2 °C
106 F
42.8 °C
109 F
 
 43.2 °C
110 F
40.8 °C
105 F
41.2 °C
106 F
 
Maximum: 46.1 °C = 115 F
Average: 42.7 °C = 109 F
38.6 °C
101 F
39.6 °C
103 F
44.1 °C
111 F
38.6 °C
101 F
39.7 °C
103 F
43.8 °C
111 F
38.5 °C
101 F
40.3 °C
105 F
42.1 °C
108 F
Maximum: 44.1 °C = 111 F
Average: 40.6 °C = 105 F
Power Supply (max.)  44.6 °C = 112 F | Room Temperature 21.6 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 42.7 °C / 109 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 46.1 °C / 115 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 44.1 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heatmap of the back of the device under load
Heatmap of the back of the device under load
Heatmap of the front of the device under load
Heatmap of the front of the device under load

Speakers

Pink noise speaker test
Pink noise speaker test

The Nokia 8.1 has a mono speaker on the underside of its frame. The single speaker gets reasonably loud, but the sound produced is treble-heavy, to the extent that pop songs sound too shrill for our ears. The speaker sounds best when the volume is set just below maximum, at which point it delivers a full and clear sound. In short, the Nokia 8.1 has a decent speaker by smartphone standards, but only if you do not max out the volume.

The device also has a 3.5 mm headphone jack and supports Bluetooth 5.0 for connecting external speakers or headphones. Both outputted clean audio throughout our tests.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.1372539.138.23130.331.84034.2315031.431.76327.526.98021.822.610022.82612524.332.616020.539.320019.345.125018.750.831517.353.640016.758.350016.56263016.665.680015.666.7100015.172.4125014.171.4160014.163.7200014.462250013.959.8315013.866400013.662.8500014.670.863001470.9800014.270.31000013.762.61250013.758.41600013.948.9SPL69.763.426.979.8N22.916.80.946.1median 14.6median 62Delta2832.83924.328.518.619.924.330.133.835.221.223.424.82318.525.216.436.617.144.517.941.816.850.714.953.915.158.714.262.913.966.514.86814.269.414.771.214.473.414.372.31475.313.880.214.88114.475.61573.714.773.614.870.514.860.814.75526.787.50.865.9median 14.8median 680.610.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseNokia 8.1Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Nokia 8.1 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy A9 2018 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life

Power Consumption

The Nokia 8.1 is an efficient device and consumes less power on average than our comparison devices. Our review unit consumes a minimum of 0.8 W, which is higher than our Snapdragon 835 and Snapdragon 845 powered devices, but it came into its own in our other power consumption tests. The Nokia 8.1 consistently consumed less at idle and under load than both the Mi Mix 2S and the Xperia XZ2. The Nokia 8 Sirocco also achieved impressively low power consumption in our tests, which speaks to HMD Global’s ability to optimise its smartphones effectively.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.05 / 0.3 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.5 / 1.8 Watt
Load midlight 3.2 / 5.4 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Nokia 8.1
3500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3400 mAh
Sony Xperia XZ2
3180 mAh
Nokia 8 Sirocco
3260 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-24%
-40%
-35%
-5%
-7%
-15%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
1.06
-33%
0.75
6%
0.72
10%
0.78
2%
0.787 (0.76 - 0.8, n=3)
2%
0.884 (0.2 - 3.4, n=700)
-11%
Idle Average *
1.5
1.94
-29%
2.25
-50%
2.21
-47%
1.53
-2%
1.657 (1.4 - 2.07, n=3)
-10%
1.737 (0.6 - 6.2, n=699)
-16%
Idle Maximum *
1.8
1.98
-10%
2.26
-26%
2.22
-23%
1.57
13%
2 (1.8 - 2.31, n=3)
-11%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=700)
-12%
Load Average *
3.2
3.56
-11%
4.89
-53%
4.6
-44%
3.49
-9%
3.62 (3.2 - 3.97, n=3)
-13%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=694)
-27%
Load Maximum *
5.4
7.49
-39%
9.6
-78%
9.34
-73%
6.96
-29%
5.44 (5.1 - 5.82, n=3)
-1%
5.84 (1.2 - 14.2, n=694)
-8%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Nokia 8.1 has a 3,500 mAh battery that is larger than most of the batteries in our comparison devices. Our test device achieved decent runtimes in our battery life tests and should last for up to 2 days with moderate use before needing to be recharged. The Nokia 8.1 runs out of charge in 4 hours under sustained load, but this is only beaten by the Nokia 8 Sirocco of our comparison devices. In short, the Nokia 8.1 has excellent battery life on Wi-Fi and when watching videos, which outlasts almost all our comparison devices.

Our review unit takes just under two hours to recharge fully with the included 18 W charger.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
28h 02min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 18min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
14h 17min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 06min
Nokia 8.1
3500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A9 2018
3800 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3400 mAh
Sony Xperia XZ2
3180 mAh
Nokia 8 Sirocco
3260 mAh
Battery Runtime
-0%
-6%
-19%
1%
Reader / Idle
1682
1780
6%
1678
0%
1402
-17%
1603
-5%
H.264
857
1005
17%
718
-16%
722
-16%
725
-15%
WiFi v1.3
738
689
-7%
716
-3%
679
-8%
693
-6%
Load
246
205
-17%
239
-3%
159
-35%
317
29%

Pros

+ premium case
+ good performance
+ decent cameras
+ low power consumption
+ solid battery life
+ no throttling under load
+ bright display

Cons

- support for only a few LTE bands
- low and slow internal storage
- high display black level

Verdict

The Nokia 8.1 smartphone review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.
The Nokia 8.1 smartphone review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.

The $450 bracket for smartphones is a tough market, which is made even more competitive by last year’s flagships now coming down in price. On paper, it looked as if the Nokia 8.1 might struggle against the likes of the Sony Xperia XZ2, but HMD Global has done a great job at creating a well-rounded smartphone that has a lot to offer.

The device has a stylish and premium design, which even gives more expensive smartphones a run for their money. Moreover, its modern SoC can compete with older flagship chips, and it has an outstanding battery life. Its display is just as bright as those found in last year’s flagships too, and will be caught out in bright direct sunlight. Additionally, its cameras impressed us during our tests, even if it lacks some of the gimmicks that many flagship smartphones have.

The Nokia 8.1 does the basics well and dispenses with frivolities to blur the lines between midrange and flagship smartphones.

The Nokia 8.1 has its drawbacks though. HMD Global has equipped it with slow eMMC flash storage, and there are fewer LTE bands than we would have liked to see. Additionally, its display has a comparatively high black value and a weak contrast ratio. However, if you are something of an Android purist and want a near flagship experience at an affordable price, then the Nokia 8.1 should be on the shortlist for your next smartphone.

Nokia 8.1 - 02/06/2019 v6
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
87%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
97%
Connectivity
42 / 60 → 70%
Weight
90%
Battery
95%
Display
86%
Games Performance
57 / 63 → 91%
Application Performance
64 / 70 → 91%
Temperature
86%
Noise
100%
Audio
56 / 91 → 62%
Camera
73%
Average
77%
87%
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 8.1 Smartphone Review
Florian Schmitt, 2019-02- 7 (Update: 2019-02-23)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor
I got my first smartphone aged 11, my first PC aged 12 and I have been tinkering with electronics ever since. I like to keep abreast of the latest news and technology, which inevitably leads me to switch my laptop and phone every few months. When I'm not writing for Notebookcheck, you will find me seeking out new coffee shops, bars and trying to find some hidden gems in record stores.