Notebookcheck

Sharp Aquos C10 Smartphone Review

Florian Wimmer, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Mark Riege), 08/22/2018

Sharp Comeback. With the Sharp Aquos C10 mid-range smartphone, the manufacturer that is quite successful in Japan also tries to get a foot in the door in the West again as well. Thanks to a good performance and ample screen real estate, the smartphone might be attractive. You can find out in our review whether the comeback is successful.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Sharp Aquos C10

There are always some rumors that Sharp wants to become active as a smartphone manufacturer in Europe, since the company is quite successful in this area in Japan. Almost exactly a year ago at the IFA 2017, things finally happened and the first models were introduced. But after that, not much happened for a long time. Finally, two models have now appeared: the more affordable Sharp B10 and the Sharp Aquos C10 mid-range device with a large display area, small notch for the camera, and fingerprint sensor in front. Does the smartphone offer something special, or is it just another mid-range smartphone for about 400 Euros (~$458)? We want to find out in the test.

In terms of competitors, there is the JVC J20, which also carries a Japanese name but comes from Turkey. The LG Q7 Plus, the BQ Aquaris X2 Pro, and even the larger Honor View 10 are currently in the same price range as the Sharp Aquos C10. Let's see how the newcomer fares in comparison to these strong competitors.

Sharp Aquos C10 (Aquos Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
5.5 inch 17:9, 2040 x 1080 pixel 420 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 50 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: Audio output via USB-C, Card Reader: microSD up to 128 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, USB-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (850/​900/​1800/​1900), UMTS (850/​900/​1900/​2100), LTE (B1/​B3/​B7/​B8/​B20), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 141.8 x 72 ( = 0.31 x 5.58 x 2.83 in)
Battery
10.26 Wh, 2700 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 8.0 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual camera system: 12 MP, f/​1.75, phase comparison AF (dual-pixel), dual LED flash, videos @1080p/​30fps (main camera), 8 MP, f/​2.0, depth sharpness (secondary camera)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker at the bottom edge, Keyboard: Virtual keyboard, Quick charger, USB cable, bumper case, SIM tool, USB-C to 3.5 mm adapter, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat.4 (download: 150 Mbit/s / upload: 50 Mbit/s); SAR 0,353 W/kg (head), 1,73 (body), fanless
Weight
140 g ( = 4.94 oz / 0.31 pounds), Power Supply: 61 g ( = 2.15 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
399 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case – A shiny back for the Sharp Aquos C10

The unusual 17:9 format makes the Sharp Aquos C10 slightly wider than most other current smartphones, and it is also a bit shorter. Below the display is some space for the fingerprint sensor, which currently can be found on the back of most other devices. There is also a discrete notch for the front camera in the center of the top edge of the screen. The smartphone has a metal frame and the front and back are covered by glass, with the glossy back being very prone to fingerprints and also not appearing very high-quality. That is a shame, since otherwise the smartphone offers a sturdy and good-quality impression.

At 140 grams (4.9 oz), the smartphone is quite light. Currently, the Sharp smartphone is only available in the color black.

Size Comparison

Equipment – Sharp smartphone with mid-range equipment

4 GB of RAM and 64 GB of storage are exactly the amounts you would expect for a mid-range smartphone in the current market. The storage can be expanded via microSD card without any problems. According to the manufacturer, up to 128 GB is possible. The storage card can only be formatted as external storage, and apps cannot be installed on it. When inserting a microSD card, it will occupy one of the two SIM slots.

While the USB port has the USB-C format and supports USB-OTG, it transfers data only at USB-2.0 speed. It also serves as the single audio output of the smartphone. The device also supports NFC as well as the modern Bluetooth 5.0.

Bottom: microphone, USB-C port, speaker
Bottom: microphone, USB-C port, speaker
Top: no connections
Top: no connections
Left: SIM slot
Left: SIM slot
Right: standby key, volume rocker
Right: standby key, volume rocker

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!

Software – No bloatware on the Sharp smartphone

The manufacturer has installed Android 8.0 on its smartphone. Sharp relies almost completely on Google's original version and has made only smaller modifications, for example in the settings and the Telephone app. At the time of this test, the security patches are on the level of June 1, 2018 and thus still fairly current. Sharp does not preinstall any software from third-party vendors on the Aquos C10, which is positive, since it allows users to decide themselves which apps they would like on their smartphone.

Software Sharp Aquos C10
Software Sharp Aquos C10
Software Sharp Aquos C10
Software Sharp Aquos C10

Communication and GPS – Sharp Aquos C10 with fast WLAN

The Sharp Aquos C10 contains a fast WLAN module that is able to communicate in the 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac standards. It offers access to the less-used 5-GHz net and provides quite good transfer speeds, as our WLAN test shows, where we set up the devices at a fixed distance of one meter to our Linksys EA8500 reference router and measure the transfer speeds using fixed parameters. The Sharp Aquos C10 presents itself faster than most of the comparison devices, and only the BQ Aquaris X2 Pro is able to keep up. Near the router, the pages are loaded quickly, but there are small wait times to load images. At this close distance, all the reception bars are available. At a 10-meter distance and through three walls, 3/4 of the reception remains available, and subjectively the pages load as fast as close to the router.

In terms of mobile networks, the Sharp Aquos C10 offers only the absolutely necessary, which includes all the bands required in central Europe for GSM, UMTS, and LTE. However, there are no more than that, so the Sharp smartphone is not a global phone and you will not find an LTE network when traveling to the US, for example. In the German D2 network, which is well established, the reception is good and we also get full signal strength indoors most of the time. If your network operator supports VoLTE, you can also use it on the Sharp Aquos C10.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Sharp Aquos C10
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
308 MBit/s ∼100%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
281 MBit/s ∼91% -9%
JVC J20
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
221 MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=307)
211 MBit/s ∼69% -31%
Honor View 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
200 MBit/s ∼65% -35%
LG Q7 Plus
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750S, 64 GB eMMC Flash
42.7 MBit/s ∼14% -86%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
346 MBit/s ∼100% +11%
Sharp Aquos C10
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
313 MBit/s ∼90%
JVC J20
Adreno 508, 630, 64 GB eMMC Flash
226 MBit/s ∼65% -28%
Honor View 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
223 MBit/s ∼64% -29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=307)
207 MBit/s ∼60% -34%
LG Q7 Plus
Mali-T860 MP2, MT6750S, 64 GB eMMC Flash
54.5 MBit/s ∼16% -83%
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

The Sharp smartphone is able to determine our location indoors, but only if we stay close to the window, and at an accuracy of 14 meters, the location is not very accurate. However, outdoors the accuracy increases to a very good four meters almost at once. A quick check in Google Maps also delivers positive results: The location and compass are very accurate.

Our practical test consists of going on a ride on a mountain bike, taking our test unit as well as the Garmin Edge 520, which is a professional navigation device for bikes, for comparison. The route measured by the Sharp Aquos C10 is slightly shorter, and the device likes to record some shortcuts we did not take through fields or houses on our path. However, this remains within limits and the location recording is on a good level. The professional navigation device shows the fine differences, so we are able to see, for example, on which side of the road we went and being able to follow the route significantly more accurately. But we can still recommend the Sharp Aquos C10 for leisure navigation.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – forest
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – forest
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – overview
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – overview
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – forest
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – forest
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – bridge
GPS Sharp Aquos C10 – bridge

Telephone Functions and Voice Quality – Voices sometimes come across with emphasized highs

The Telephone app hides behind the Contacts icon and not the Phone icon that is known from stock Android, which is a bit confusing in the beginning. Compared to the standard app, this app includes some changes, but they are mainly visual and the extent of functionality is quite similar.

The voice quality is rather meager, and the voice of our conversation partner sounds a bit thin through the ear piece, even though the maximum volume is not bad and does not produce many additional noises. But due to the sound reproduction being heavily weighted towards the highs, the voice of our conversation partner does not sound very present. On the other hand, the voice of the Sharp Aquos C10 user arrives cleanly and without any additional noises on the other side. If you use the built-in speaker-phone you have to expect a similar sound experience as with the ear piece: Since the highs are too emphasized, the voice of your conversation partner will sound thin and far away. The microphone is unable to record quiet voices.

Cameras – Sharp lenses in the Sharp smartphone

Picture taken with front camera
Picture taken with front camera

A decent mid-range device also needs a decent camera. Sharp has equipped the Aquos C10 with a dual camera system in the back, which uses the second lens for the calculation of depth sharpness. At 12 and 8 megapixels, the two lenses on the back have the usual resolution. Images appear to be exposed well. The dynamic is good in light areas but could have been slightly higher in dark areas. The image sharpness is decent, and so is the level of details. Even in dark surroundings, it succeeds in getting fairly sharp images that represent the objects quite clearly. The camera app offers an adjustable Bokeh level, a blurring effect for portraits, a panorama mode, and a professional mode where you can adjust many parameters manually. By default, images are taken in the full screen mode of the smartphone, which is the 17:9 format. Those who prefer square or 4:3 images can manually change the setting.

You can take videos with the main camera in Ultra-HD at 30 FPS. The exposure reacts quickly and without any visible steps to changes in the brightness. The detail sharpness is also good, and the auto-focus responds quickly and accurately. There is also a time-lapse mode, but there is no time-lapse function in the preinstalled app.

The front camera has a resolution of 8 megapixels. Within the range of the fixed focus, it takes very sharp pictures, and we also like the colors a lot.

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

Under controlled light conditions in the lab, we notice the very dark reproduction of the test image, which we also already saw in the realistic photos that we took. In black text in front of brown background, you cannot recognize the writing anymore. The colors are also distorted and reproduced much too dark. On the other hand, the image sharpness is very good here as well, and it does not diminish even in the edge areas.

ColorChecker: The target color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.
ColorChecker: The target color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.
Picture taken of the test chart
Picture taken of the test chart
Test chart detail
Test chart detail

Accessories and Warranty – Bumper case included

The Sharp Aquos C10 includes various accessories such as a silicon bumper case that protects the device from falls. The smartphone also includes a USB-C to 3.5 mm adapter, allowing you to connect conventional headphones to the smartphone. In addition, there is also a quick charger and the corresponding USB-C cable, as well as a SIM tool. The manufacturer does not offer any additional accessories at this time.

The manufacturer's warranty is 24 months.

Input Devices and Navigation – Many options, good fingerprint sensor

Google's GBoard is used as the keyboard. The app allows you to type well on the Sharp smartphone, and there are many adjustment options.

The touchscreen is very accurate and can also be operated very well in the corners and edges. There are various options for movement control. For example, you can flip the smartphone to turn off the sound, or trigger a screenshot with three fingers on the display. There is a small circle on the display which Sharp calls "Short key" and which can be moved freely on the screen. It can take the functions of the navigation keys that are otherwise displayed at the bottom of the screen and cannot be hidden.

Below the display is the fingerprint sensor that operates very accurately and is able to unlock the smartphone from standby very quickly. The fingerprint sensor can also be used for navigation. For example, a long press will bring you back to the Home screen and swiping left or right will trigger the Back or the app overview functions, respectively. However, navigation using this is not always 100% accurate and needs some getting used to.

Keyboard, portrait
Keyboard, portrait
Keyboard, landscape
Keyboard, landscape

Display – Bright and with fairly good color accuracy

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

With a slightly expanded Full HD resolution and a 5.5-inch display, the Sharp Aquos C10 is at the same level as the competitors. The IPS display shines with an average of 535 cd/m² at the maximum brightness adjustment, which is a very good value. However, the BQ Aquaris X2 Pro can even produce significantly more brightness, if needed. At 92%, the brightness distribution of our test unit is also very even, so that large color areas appear evenly. We notice some screen flickering below 10% brightness. The frequency is 250 Hz, which could lead to some problems for sensitive persons. For this, it would be best if you could try out the display before buying it.

548
cd/m²
551
cd/m²
509
cd/m²
544
cd/m²
548
cd/m²
518
cd/m²
533
cd/m²
533
cd/m²
532
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 551 cd/m² Average: 535.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.44 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 548 cd/m²
Contrast: 1118:1 (Black: 0.49 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.21 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 6.1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
95.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.228
Sharp Aquos C10
IPS, 2040x1080, 5.5
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
LTPS, 2160x1080, 5.65
JVC J20
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.65
LG Q7 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.5
Honor View 10
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Screen
11%
-32%
-12%
29%
Brightness middle
548
675
23%
411
-25%
431
-21%
530
-3%
Brightness
535
650
21%
426
-20%
419
-22%
523
-2%
Brightness Distribution
92
92
0%
82
-11%
89
-3%
88
-4%
Black Level *
0.49
0.46
6%
0.53
-8%
0.58
-18%
0.35
29%
Contrast
1118
1467
31%
775
-31%
743
-34%
1514
35%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.21
5.9
-13%
8.84
-70%
6.2
-19%
2.4
54%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
13.47
9.5
29%
15.08
-12%
10.1
25%
5.5
59%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.1
6.6
-8%
10.7
-75%
6.2
-2%
2.2
64%
Gamma
2.228 99%
2.36 93%
2.433 90%
2.26 97%
2.25 98%
CCT
7538 86%
7846 83%
10717 61%
8064 81%
6598 99%

* ... 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 250 Hz ≤ 10 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 250 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 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Thanks to a decent black value of 0.49 cd/m², not only do dark areas appear with a fair amount of depth and only a slight gray tint but the contrast is also good at 1118:1. Colors appear quite vibrant on the display.

In our lab tests with the spectral photometer and the CalMAN software we notice a slight green tint in the standard settings for the display. Using the dynamic display mode you can slightly enhance the colors and using the white balance you can make the colors appear slightly warmer or cooler. There is also a blue light filter to protect your eyes, but this only works in automatic mode or via a timer and you can only activate it permanently using some roundabout ways. Our measurements were all performed using the default settings, and the color deviation is within the range of those of most other devices. Only the Honor View 10 stands out positively here.

CalMAN Grayscales
CalMAN Grayscales
CalMAN Color Space
CalMAN Color Space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Color Accuracy

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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7 ms rise
↘ 13 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. » 19 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
40 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 21 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. » 44 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

Despite its high brightness level, the display cannot come through in bright light outdoors. Due to reflections, you can only recognize the screen content with great difficulties. On the other hand, you can use the smartphone in the shade without any problems.

While the display is good in steep viewing angles from the sides, there are some slight shifts in the brightness.

Outdoor use, minimum brightness
Outdoor use, minimum brightness
Outdoor use, medium brightness
Outdoor use, medium brightness
Outdoor use, maximum brightness
Outdoor use, maximum brightness
Outdoor use, brightness sensor
Outdoor use, brightness sensor
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance – Sharp Aquos C10 with mid-range performance

The Sharp smartphone is equipped with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 SoC. In our comparison field, only the JVC J20 also uses this SoC. With eight processor cores and a clock speed of up to 2.2 GHz, most of the time the Sharp Aquos C10 is at the same level as the JVC J20 in the benchmarks, but in terms of the performance capabilities both of these devices can be found more in the lower half of our comparison field. The BQ Aquaris X2 Pro and the Honor View 10 offer significantly more power. However, in practice the power of the Sharp Aquos C10 is also sufficient for smooth operation and quick changing between apps.

Similar to the processor section of the SoC, the Qualcomm Adreno 508 graphics unit also places in the middle of the field of our comparison devices.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
71531 Points ∼41%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
115834 Points ∼67% +62%
JVC J20
67408 Points ∼39% -6%
LG Q7 Plus
44064 Points ∼25% -38%
Honor View 10
173653 Points ∼100% +143%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (44128 - 73617, n=12)
68642 Points ∼40% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=390)
76481 Points ∼44% +7%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
89351 Points ∼63%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
140875 Points ∼100% +58%
JVC J20
89279 Points ∼63% 0%
LG Q7 Plus
52855 Points ∼38% -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (87300 - 90674, n=10)
89507 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=170)
118332 Points ∼84% +32%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
4636 Points ∼69%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5965 Points ∼89% +29%
JVC J20
4836 Points ∼72% +4%
LG Q7 Plus
3080 Points ∼46% -34%
Honor View 10
6724 Points ∼100% +45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (4636 - 5085, n=11)
4876 Points ∼73% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=256)
4551 Points ∼68% -2%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
5377 Points ∼65%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
6332 Points ∼76% +18%
JVC J20
5762 Points ∼69% +7%
LG Q7 Plus
3969 Points ∼48% -26%
Honor View 10
8306 Points ∼100% +54%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (5083 - 6264, n=12)
5689 Points ∼68% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (6412 - 13531, n=423)
4958 Points ∼60% -8%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
666 Points ∼56%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1146 Points ∼97% +72%
JVC J20
862 Points ∼73% +29%
LG Q7 Plus
751 Points ∼63% +13%
Honor View 10
1184 Points ∼100% +78%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (666 - 936, n=12)
863 Points ∼73% +30%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=499)
698 Points ∼59% +5%
Graphics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1502 Points ∼39%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2279 Points ∼59% +52%
JVC J20
1470 Points ∼38% -2%
LG Q7 Plus
631 Points ∼16% -58%
Honor View 10
3892 Points ∼100% +159%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1470 - 1523, n=12)
1501 Points ∼39% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=499)
1737 Points ∼45% +16%
Memory (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
998 Points ∼23%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2494 Points ∼58% +150%
JVC J20
1159 Points ∼27% +16%
LG Q7 Plus
800 Points ∼19% -20%
Honor View 10
4276 Points ∼100% +328%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (838 - 1405, n=12)
1217 Points ∼28% +22%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=499)
1244 Points ∼29% +25%
System (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1763 Points ∼34%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5048 Points ∼97% +186%
JVC J20
3288 Points ∼63% +87%
LG Q7 Plus
1407 Points ∼27% -20%
Honor View 10
5195 Points ∼100% +195%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1763 - 3319, n=12)
3147 Points ∼61% +79%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=499)
2512 Points ∼48% +42%
Overall (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1152 Points ∼36%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2394 Points ∼75% +108%
JVC J20
1483 Points ∼47% +29%
LG Q7 Plus
855 Points ∼27% -26%
Honor View 10
3181 Points ∼100% +176%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1152 - 1570, n=12)
1487 Points ∼47% +29%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=503)
1255 Points ∼39% +9%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
2910 Points ∼32%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5688 Points ∼63% +95%
JVC J20
3681 Points ∼41% +26%
LG Q7 Plus
2084 Points ∼23% -28%
Honor View 10
9015 Points ∼100% +210%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (2910 - 3956, n=11)
3714 Points ∼41% +28%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=197)
4524 Points ∼50% +55%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
2246 Points ∼33%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
5856 Points ∼86% +161%
JVC J20
4220 Points ∼62% +88%
LG Q7 Plus
2135 Points ∼31% -5%
Honor View 10
6785 Points ∼100% +202%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (883 - 4234, n=12)
3733 Points ∼55% +66%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=247)
4308 Points ∼63% +92%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
710 Points ∼37%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1579 Points ∼82% +122%
JVC J20
879 Points ∼46% +24%
LG Q7 Plus
639 Points ∼33% -10%
Honor View 10
1918 Points ∼100% +170%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (710 - 4210, n=12)
1132 Points ∼59% +59%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=248)
1270 Points ∼66% +79%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1719 Points ∼59%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2628 Points ∼90% +53%
JVC J20
1765 Points ∼60% +3%
LG Q7 Plus
1031 Points ∼35% -40%
Honor View 10
2931 Points ∼100% +71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1631 - 1822, n=12)
1742 Points ∼59% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼56% -4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
712 Points ∼24%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1196 Points ∼40% +68%
JVC J20
721 Points ∼24% +1%
LG Q7 Plus
80 Points ∼3% -89%
Honor View 10
2994 Points ∼100% +321%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (707 - 729, n=12)
719 Points ∼24% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼40% +67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
819 Points ∼27%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1361 Points ∼46% +66%
JVC J20
830 Points ∼28% +1%
LG Q7 Plus
101 Points ∼3% -88%
Honor View 10
2980 Points ∼100% +264%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (811 - 839, n=12)
827 Points ∼28% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼38% +38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1725 Points ∼65%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2638 Points ∼100% +53%
JVC J20
1770 Points ∼67% +3%
LG Q7 Plus
1029 Points ∼39% -40%
Honor View 10
1906 Points ∼72% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1698 - 1816, n=12)
1751 Points ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=384)
1540 Points ∼58% -11%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1286 Points ∼66%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
1938 Points ∼99% +51%
JVC J20
1257 Points ∼64% -2%
LG Q7 Plus
96 Points ∼5% -93%
Honor View 10
1954 Points ∼100% +52%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1234 - 1289, n=12)
1259 Points ∼64% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=384)
1632 Points ∼84% +27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
1363 Points ∼66%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
2059 Points ∼100% +51%
JVC J20
1344 Points ∼65% -1%
LG Q7 Plus
120 Points ∼6% -91%
Honor View 10
1943 Points ∼94% +43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (1318 - 1374, n=12)
1343 Points ∼65% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=392)
1387 Points ∼67% +2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
12667 Points ∼66%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
19050 Points ∼100% +50%
JVC J20
13153 Points ∼69% +4%
LG Q7 Plus
9903 Points ∼52% -22%
Honor View 10
14556 Points ∼76% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (12667 - 13217, n=12)
13007 Points ∼68% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=539)
12880 Points ∼68% +2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
16508 Points ∼56%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
29306 Points ∼100% +78%
JVC J20
18471 Points ∼63% +12%
LG Q7 Plus
9656 Points ∼33% -42%
Honor View 10
22429 Points ∼77% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (16508 - 18635, n=12)
18313 Points ∼62% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=539)
17994 Points ∼61% +9%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
15466 Points ∼59%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
26175 Points ∼100% +69%
JVC J20
16948 Points ∼65% +10%
LG Q7 Plus
9710 Points ∼37% -37%
Honor View 10
20022 Points ∼76% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (15466 - 17032, n=12)
16789 Points ∼64% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=540)
15114 Points ∼58% -2%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
30 fps ∼24%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
46 fps ∼37% +53%
JVC J20
29 fps ∼23% -3%
LG Q7 Plus
17 fps ∼14% -43%
Honor View 10
125 fps ∼100% +317%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (29 - 30, n=12)
29.8 fps ∼24% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=564)
31.4 fps ∼25% +5%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
30 fps ∼51%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
51 fps ∼86% +70%
JVC J20
28 fps ∼47% -7%
LG Q7 Plus
16 fps ∼27% -47%
Honor View 10
59 fps ∼100% +97%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (28 - 31, n=12)
29.5 fps ∼50% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=567)
25 fps ∼42% -17%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
14 fps ∼21%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
23 fps ∼35% +64%
JVC J20
14 fps ∼21% 0%
LG Q7 Plus
7.1 fps ∼11% -49%
Honor View 10
66 fps ∼100% +371%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (13 - 14, n=12)
13.9 fps ∼21% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=486)
16.8 fps ∼25% +20%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
14 fps ∼25%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
22 fps ∼40% +57%
JVC J20
13 fps ∼24% -7%
LG Q7 Plus
6.8 fps ∼12% -51%
Honor View 10
55 fps ∼100% +293%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (13 - 15, n=12)
14 fps ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=489)
16 fps ∼29% +14%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
10 fps ∼48%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
15 fps ∼71% +50%
JVC J20
9.7 fps ∼46% -3%
LG Q7 Plus
4.7 fps ∼22% -53%
Honor View 10
21 fps ∼100% +110%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (5.2 - 10, n=12)
9.38 fps ∼45% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼68% +43%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
9.8 fps ∼27%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
14 fps ∼39% +43%
JVC J20
9.2 fps ∼26% -6%
LG Q7 Plus
4.5 fps ∼13% -54%
Honor View 10
36 fps ∼100% +267%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (5.3 - 11, n=12)
9.49 fps ∼26% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼39% +42%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
5.6 fps ∼27%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
9.1 fps ∼43% +63%
JVC J20
5.5 fps ∼26% -2%
LG Q7 Plus
2.5 fps ∼12% -55%
Honor View 10
21 fps ∼100% +275%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (5.3 - 5.6, n=12)
5.5 fps ∼26% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼47% +76%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Sharp Aquos C10
6 fps ∼29%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
8.6 fps ∼41% +43%
JVC J20
5.2 fps ∼25% -13%
LG Q7 Plus
2.4 fps ∼11% -60%
Honor View 10
21 fps ∼100% +250%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (5.2 - 6, n=12)
5.58 fps ∼27% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼42% +48%

Legend

 
Sharp Aquos C10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Qualcomm Adreno 508, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
JVC J20 Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, Qualcomm Adreno 508, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG Q7 Plus Mediatek MT6750S, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Honor View 10 HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

When surfing the Internet, we find a similar situation: While there are significantly faster devices in this price range than the Sharp Aquos C10, it performs at the expected level overall. Demanding HTML pages such as Google's Interland are loaded quite fast and run smoothly.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
49.396 Points ∼100% +75%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=422)
36.7 Points ∼74% +30%
Honor View 10 (Chrome 63)
34.871 Points ∼71% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (27.4 - 30.8, n=12)
28.3 Points ∼57% 0%
Sharp Aquos C10 (Chrome 68)
28.27 Points ∼57%
JVC J20 (Chrome 68)
28.25 Points ∼57% 0%
LG Q7 Plus (Chrome 67)
18.694 Points ∼38% -34%
Octane V2 - Total Score
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
9582 Points ∼100% +84%
Honor View 10 (Chrome 63)
6729 Points ∼70% +29%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=558)
5562 Points ∼58% +7%
Sharp Aquos C10 (Chrome 68)
5202 Points ∼54%
JVC J20 (Chrome 68)
5117 Points ∼53% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (4398 - 5202, n=12)
4971 Points ∼52% -4%
LG Q7 Plus (Chrome 67)
3422 Points ∼36% -34%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
LG Q7 Plus (Chrome 67)
13670.9 ms * ∼100% -43%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=578)
11474 ms * ∼84% -20%
JVC J20 (Chrome 68)
9660 ms * ∼71% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (8396 - 10236, n=12)
9656 ms * ∼71% -1%
Sharp Aquos C10 (Chrome 68)
9532.6 ms * ∼70%
Honor View 10 (Chrome 63)
6013 ms * ∼44% +37%
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
4093.5 ms * ∼30% +57%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro (Chrome 67)
159 Points ∼100% +37%
Honor View 10 (Chrome 63)
157 Points ∼99% +35%
Sharp Aquos C10 (Chrome 68)
116 Points ∼73%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼70% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630 (86 - 117, n=10)
106 Points ∼67% -9%
LG Q7 Plus (Chrome 67)
70 Points ∼44% -40%

* ... smaller is better

In the final part of our performance section, we also take a look at the storage performance. Using our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference storage card, the card reader performs at the expected level, which is also the range of the comparison devices. None of the devices in our comparison is able to come even close to the possible transfer rates the card allows. While the eMMC storage in the Sharp smartphone is not unusual in this price range, the Honor View 10 shows that much higher transfer rates can be achieved with UFS storage. However, compared to the other devices with eMMC storage, the Sharp Aquos C10 is at a good level.

Sharp Aquos C10BQ Aquaris X2 ProJVC J20LG Q7 PlusHonor View 10Average 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-1%
-8%
-14%
205%
-5%
-26%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
60.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
61.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
63 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
62.2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
65.06 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
7%
54.3 (14.1 - 74.7, n=68)
-11%
45.6 (3.4 - 87.1, n=319)
-25%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
83.35 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
82.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
81.45 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
81 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
73.2 (21.1 - 86.9, n=68)
-12%
63.8 (8.2 - 96.5, n=319)
-23%
Random Write 4KB
16.9
15.43
-9%
6.3
-63%
11.91
-30%
160
847%
19.8 (3.4 - 87.1, n=78)
17%
16.1 (0.14 - 164, n=607)
-5%
Random Read 4KB
48.2
51.25
6%
58.3
21%
35.8
-26%
144.3
199%
50.3 (11.4 - 149, n=78)
4%
38.3 (1.59 - 173, n=607)
-21%
Sequential Write 256KB
213.4
204.83
-4%
199.7
-6%
186.55
-13%
194.3
-9%
164 (40 - 246, n=78)
-23%
79.9 (2.99 - 246, n=607)
-63%
Sequential Read 256KB
283.8
280.78
-1%
270.6
-5%
235.9
-17%
810.3
186%
269 (115 - 704, n=78)
-5%
230 (12.1 - 895, n=607)
-19%

Games – No 60-FPS gaming

The Sharp Aquos C10 is quite suitable for occasional gaming, but gaming at a continuous 60 FPS is not possible. In Shadow Fight 3 there are significant drops and in Arena of Valor the mode for high frame rates does not get activated at all, and it does not even stay at a constant 30 FPS. However, it should be sufficient for the occasional gamer. But those who want to play games at a higher level should look for a different device.

The control via touchscreen and position sensor can be tested easily in Game Temple Run. Both respond very fast.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Arena of Valor
 SettingsValue
 min31 fps
 high HD30 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Shadow Fight 3
 SettingsValue
 high56 fps
 minimal55 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!

Emissions – The Sharp smartphone throttles

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

With a maximum temperature of 42.8 °C (109 °F), the Sharp Aquos C10 warms noticeably but always stays within limits and does not heat up uncomfortably. 

Unfortunately, the smartphone is unable to maintain its full performance under load. It drops by 16% after 28 runs in the GFXBench battery test. That is quite a performance drop that you can even notice in practice after using the smartphone under full load for a longer period of time.

Max. Load
 40.1 °C
104 F
38.9 °C
102 F
38.7 °C
102 F
 
 40.4 °C
105 F
39.1 °C
102 F
39.9 °C
104 F
 
 39.2 °C
103 F
39.1 °C
102 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
Maximum: 40.4 °C = 105 F
Average: 39.3 °C = 103 F
37.4 °C
99 F
38.5 °C
101 F
40.9 °C
106 F
37.2 °C
99 F
38.2 °C
101 F
42.8 °C
109 F
37.4 °C
99 F
38.1 °C
101 F
42.2 °C
108 F
Maximum: 42.8 °C = 109 F
Average: 39.2 °C = 103 F
Power Supply (max.)  42.1 °C = 108 F | Room Temperature 22.2 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.4 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 35.7 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 42.8 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 34.2 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.4 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
Heat map, front
Heat map, front
Heat map, back
Heat map, back

Speaker

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

The speaker is positioned at the bottom edge of the smartphone. Even though the earpiece also has a grid, it cannot be used as a second speaker, which is unfortunate since that probably would have improved the audio quality of the Aquos C10 some more. But even without it, the sound is at a good level. Even though for our tastes, voices and songs appear artificially raised a bit too much, at least the understandability is good this way. There are no adjustment options for the sound installed by default, but the sound is quite warm and comfortable and at a maximum volume of 79 dB(A) is also fairly loud if needed.

There is no 3.5-mm audio port in the Aquos C10. Instead, you need to use the included adapter, or a USB-C headset. The adapter transfers the sound cleanly to the headphones, and the sound also arrives cleanly via Bluetooth.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032332531.931.23131.7314031.128.15036.235.46326.326.58022.224.710022.522.912525.425.216018.931.420017.140.125016.944.23151448.540013.55650013.857.363012.559.380012.157.4100011.462.6125011.265.616001168.6200010.870250010.569.3315010.868400010.367.3500010.368.6630010.468.6800010.564.31000010.461.51250010.357.51600010.441.4SPL64.65370.765.523.879N16.87.52718.20.541.3median 11.2median 59.3Delta2.512.338.138.637.637.235.936.428.130.828.627.627.824.129.824.230.425.422.227.223.9342041.319.445.517.247.816.454.816.556.915.159.615.161.114.662.514.467.313.772.712.373.812.173.411.871.411.767.811.76111.657.811.652.111.556.311.55311.642.966.356.725.98116.810.40.840.9median 14.4median 56.93.39.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSharp Aquos C10JVC J20
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Sharp Aquos C10 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

JVC J20 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 54% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery life – Small battery, long battery life

Power Consumption

The Sharp smartphone is not particularly economic, using up to 8 watts under full load. For example, the JVC J20 is much more efficient. In terms of its average load consumption and idle consumption, our test unit also uses more power than the comparison devices most of the time. At least the device consumes very little when turned off and in standby mode, so that you can leave it for a few days without it getting discharged too much.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.05 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.9 / 2.2 / 3.8 Watt
Load midlight 6.2 / 8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Sharp Aquos C10
2700 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
3100 mAh
JVC J20
3400 mAh
LG Q7 Plus
3000 mAh
Honor View 10
3750 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 630
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
21%
21%
27%
4%
29%
27%
Idle Minimum *
0.9
0.63
30%
1
-11%
1
-11%
1.05
-17%
0.733 (0.35 - 1.4, n=12)
19%
0.88 (0.2 - 3.4, n=637)
2%
Idle Average *
2.2
2.16
2%
1.6
27%
1.57
29%
2.36
-7%
1.808 (1 - 2.31, n=12)
18%
1.719 (0.6 - 6.2, n=636)
22%
Idle Maximum *
3.8
2.18
43%
2.8
26%
1.64
57%
2.41
37%
2.16 (1.4 - 3.8, n=12)
43%
1.997 (0.74 - 6.6, n=637)
47%
Load Average *
6.2
4.48
28%
4
35%
4.1
34%
4.93
20%
3.85 (2.82 - 6.2, n=12)
38%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=631)
35%
Load Maximum *
8
7.87
2%
5.9
26%
6.02
25%
9.04
-13%
5.64 (4.56 - 8, n=12)
29%
5.75 (1.2 - 14.2, n=631)
28%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The battery of the Sharp Aquos C10 can only provide 2700 mAh, having the smallest capacity among our comparison devices. However, this does not seem to affect the smartphone in terms of its battery life, and the apparent high consumption is also balanced by good power management. 11:12 hours in the WLAN test is on or even above the level of most other devices in this price range. Only the JVC J20 is able to top this by a few more minutes.

Using the quick charger, the Sharp Aquos C10 is completely recharged within a maximum of two hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
23h 45min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 12min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
12h 15min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 27min
Sharp Aquos C10
2700 mAh
BQ Aquaris X2 Pro
3100 mAh
JVC J20
3400 mAh
LG Q7 Plus
3000 mAh
Honor View 10
3750 mAh
Battery Runtime
-18%
8%
-23%
11%
Reader / Idle
1425
1374
-4%
980
-31%
1671
17%
H.264
735
658
-10%
455
-38%
819
11%
WiFi v1.3
672
605
-10%
726
8%
620
-8%
679
1%
Load
267
145
-46%
230
-14%
305
14%

Pros

+ bright display
+ sharp camera images
+ good battery life
+ no bloatware
+ fast operation
+ fast WLAN

Cons

- mediocre voice quality
- no 3.5-mm audio port
- few LTE bands
- throttling after longer load

Verdict – A good mid-range smartphone from Sharp

In review: Sharp Aquos C10. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Sharp Aquos C10. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

Sharp's return to the Western smartphone market is quite a task, and with the Sharp Aquos C10, it succeeds on the first try in bringing a solid mid-range device to market. The smartphone can convince with a bright screen, good cameras, a decent battery life, and a fast WLAN. The performance is completely sufficient, and the Sharp smartphone seems fast overall. However, there are some smartphones in this price range that bring significantly more power. In addition, the Sharp Aquos C10 throttles noticeably during longer load.

With the Aquos C10, Sharp succeeds at a good re-entry into the Western market. Particularly the cameras, the WLAN speed, and the battery life are convincing.

On the other hand, a potential buyer might be annoyed by the lack of a 3.5-mm port, the mediocre voice quality, and of course by the notch that represents a deal breaker for some. Those who can appreciate the unusual form factor of the Sharp Aquos C10 and do not need quite as much power will get a good smartphone that not everyone has.

Sharp Aquos C10 - 08/20/2018 v6
Florian Wimmer

Chassis
77%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
90%
Connectivity
46 / 60 → 76%
Weight
93%
Battery
94%
Display
84%
Games Performance
34 / 63 → 53%
Application Performance
46 / 70 → 66%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
54 / 91 → 59%
Camera
76%
Average
73%
84%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Sharp Aquos C10 Smartphone Review
Florian Wimmer, 2018-08-22 (Update: 2018-08-23)