Notebookcheck

TP-Link Neffos C9A Smartphone Review

Mike Wobker, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Katherine Bodner), 05/14/2019

For patient beginners. TP-Link directs its Neffos C9A at users with low expectations and demands from a smartphone. Users will need patience using this affordable Android device as the system can be a little slow. Find out which other characteristics the TP-Link Neffos C9A has to offer in our review.

TP-Link Neffos C9A

The Chinese manufacturer TP-Link has been trying to gain a foothold in the market of affordable smartphones for quite a while now. So far, we have only tested a few devices belonging to the Neffos brand. We can therefore only compare the device to the Neffos C5 from 2016 and the Neffos N1 from May 2018, which both got decent-enough ratings at 79 and 83%, respectively, but they did not really convince us entirely. 

The Neffos C9A is available for around $100 and is equipped with an Android OS, a MediaTek MT6739 SoC, a PowerVR GE8100 GPU, 2 GB of RAM and 16 GB of eMMC flash storage. This is sufficient to run Android, but we soon realized that we would have to be patient with this device.

There are a lot of competitors in the market of affordable smartphones. We will be comparing the C9A to some of them, including the Xiaomi Redmi 7, the Motorola Moto E5 Play, the Wiko Harry 2, the Oukitel C13 Pro and the Cubot J3 Pro.

TP-Link Neffos C9A (Neffos Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
5.45 inch 18:9, 1440 x 720 pixel 295 PPI, capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, 8 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD (FAT, FAT32, up to 128 GB), 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: compas, accelerometer, proximity sensor, microUSB
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.2, 2G GSM: bands 2 / 3 / 5 / 8, 3G UMTS WCDMA: bands 1 / 2 / 4 / 5 / 8, 4G LTE FDD: bands 1 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 7 / 8 / 20, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.3 x 146.5 x 70.9 ( = 0.33 x 5.77 x 2.79 in)
Battery
3020 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix PDAF
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 1, Keyboard: onscreen, USB AC adapter plus MicroUSB cable, cover, NFUI 8.0, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value (head): 0.326 W/kg, SAR value (body): 0.855 W/kg, fanless
Weight
145 g ( = 5.11 oz / 0.32 pounds), Power Supply: 59 g ( = 2.08 oz / 0.13 pounds)
Price
130 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case - an affordable smartphone in a plastic case

The Neffos C9A's case is made of plastic and appears to be of high quality. Potential buyers can choose between gray and silver and will receive a discreet, modest-looking smartphone. The back features a fingerprint reader and a simple main camera positioned towards the top. The volume rocker and power button as well as the nanoSIM/microSD slots are all positioned on the left side of the device. The display has visible bezels. There is a space of about half a centimeter above the display that contains the front camera, earpiece and sensors as well as an LED lamp.

Size Comparison

158.7 mm / 6.25 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs155.5 mm / 6.12 inch 76 mm / 2.99 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 177 g0.3902 lbs150.3 mm / 5.92 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs147.6 mm / 5.81 inch 71.3 mm / 2.81 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs146.5 mm / 5.77 inch 70.9 mm / 2.79 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 145 g0.3197 lbs

Connectivity - dual SIM functionality

TP-Link has equipped the Neffos C9A with a MediaTek MT6739 SoC and 2 GB of RAM. This combination can often be found in entry-level smartphones and is just powerful enough for smooth system performance. Graphics are displayed with the help of a PowerVR GE8100, which is used in devices with low requirements in the graphics department. Additional applications and personal data can be stored on the 16-GB eMMC flash storage, which can be expanded by up to 128 GB using the microSD card. Using a memory card does not mean that you are limited to one SIM card only. TP-Link offers sufficient space for a microSD and two nanoSIM cards. Both SIM cards can connect to LTE but are limited to VoLTE (not VoWLAN) - provided your network operator offers this service.

Data can also be transferred via cable using the device's MicroUSB connector, which supports the USB 2.0 standard. Headphones or external speakers can be connected via the 3.5-mm audio jack.

Software - Android smartphone from TP-Link

The Neffos C9A runs on Android Oreo, version 8.1, and it has security patches dating February 5, 2019. The user interface is the manufacturer's own NFUI 8.0, which is strongly reminiscent of pure Android. Users can expect slightly different symbols and a different settings structure. Newcomers and experienced users alike will quickly find their way around this phone. It might take a second or two longer to open apps than usual due to the hardware restrictions. This would not happen on mid-range phones. However, we did not encounter any real issues in terms of system performance during testing.

Apart from the apps CleanMaster and OfficeSuite, TP-Link has also included its own smart home regulation software Kasa and Tether, which helps you set up the manufacturer's own routers and network components from your smartphone. These apps can be deleted easily from the settings menu should users not need them. The Neffos C9A can also be configured to have several user accounts. Streaming is limited to DRM L3, which means that you cannot stream HD content from services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime or Maxdome.

Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A
Software TP-Link Neffos C9A

Communication and GPS - simple device with LTE

The TP-Link Neffos C9A supports the GSM, 3G and LTE networks. LTE connections are supported up to category 4, which corresponds to download speeds of up to 150 Mb/s and upload rates of up to 59 Mb/s. Bluetooth 4.2 and Wi-Fi with the standards 802.11b, g and n are also available.

The Neffos C9A reaches 55.5 Mb/s (receiving) and 52.3 Mb/s (sending) during our Wi-Fi test with the reference router Linksys EA8500. These results are on par with similar devices but still place the C9A towards the bottom of our comparison field.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=381)
221 MBit/s ∼100% +298%
Oukitel C13 Pro
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
84 (min: 7, max: 105) MBit/s ∼38% +51%
Wiko Harry 2
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
61 (min: 50, max: 63) MBit/s ∼28% +10%
Cubot J3 Pro
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
61 (min: 44, max: 62) MBit/s ∼28% +10%
TP-Link Neffos C9A
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
55.5 (min: 48, max: 55) MBit/s ∼25%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
51.4 (min: 49, max: 54) MBit/s ∼23% -7%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=381)
212 MBit/s ∼100% +305%
Oukitel C13 Pro
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
94 (min: 34, max: 102) MBit/s ∼44% +80%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Adreno 506, 632, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.4 (min: 52, max: 61) MBit/s ∼26% +6%
Cubot J3 Pro
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
53.3 (min: 49, max: 59) MBit/s ∼25% +2%
Wiko Harry 2
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
52.7 (min: 27, max: 57) MBit/s ∼25% +1%
TP-Link Neffos C9A
PowerVR GE8100, MT6739, 16 GB eMMC Flash
52.3 (min: 48, max: 55) MBit/s ∼25%
0102030405060Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø52.6 (48-55)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø52.2 (48-55)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

The app GPS Test helps us test how easily the TP-Link can identify our position. The affordable device can use GPS and GLONASS for localization and manages to position us within three meters outdoors. The Neffos C9A did not manage to establish a satellite connection indoors, however.

Our obligatory bike tour compares the navigation capabilities of the TP-Link C9A with those of our reference navigation system Garmin Edge 520. The route recorded by our test unit is often beside our actual path and the C9A does not follow bends and sudden changes in direction very well and often follows with a certain delay. We therefore conclude that the Neffos C9A is only suitable for very simple navigation.

GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - TP-Link Neffos C9A
GPS - Garmin Edge 520
GPS - Garmin Edge 520
GPS - Garmin Edge 520
GPS - Garmin Edge 520
GPS - Garmin Edge 520
GPS - Garmin Edge 520

Telephone and Voice Quality - Neffos C9A offers a good connection

TP-Link's telephone app opens on the call log and also lets you open a dial pad and contacts via tabs.

The simple smartphone offers good volume when telephoning, which makes it possible to talk even in loud surroundings. The phone filters out a certain amount of background noise and the speakerphone function is good if you use it in enclosed spaces.

Cameras - a simple camera

Picture taken with front camera
Picture taken with front camera

The Neffos C9A has a simple main camera with a 13-MP sensor, PDAF and an LED flash on the back as well as a 5-MP selfie camera on the front. The latter can be used to take mediocre pictures in portrait mode. The outlines of objects appear blurry and colors are washed-out. The front camera offers various color filters while more detailed customization options (such as a professional mode) are limited to the main camera.

The main camera takes very dark photos but reproduces the image quite well. Individual objects on the picture are clearly defined and even small details such as textures are recognizable. However, even the smallest zoom makes the picture rather blurry and grainy. Close-ups also turn out too dark, although edges are more clearly defined and the graininess is not as bad even at higher zoom levels. Colors still appear slightly washed-out. The main camera also manages to reproduce the subject in bad lighting conditions, although there are some very dark areas around the edges of the image. Colors are not reproduced very well and outlines are blurry.

Apart from the color filter we mentioned above, the main camera also offers an HDR and beauty mode as well as a professional mode for changing certain settings such as color tone, saturation, brightness and contrast. It also lets you manually set the ISO value, white balance, shutter speed, exposure and focus.

The video quality is similar to that of the photos but the camera cannot quite keep up with fast movements. Slow movements are recorded very well and the image stabilizer reliably corrects the strongest judders. Users can choose between 480p, 720p and 1080p recordings. Unfortunately, the app does not offer more precise settings such as an HFR mode.

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
ColorChecker passport
ColorChecker passport

The ColorChecker passport helps us evaluate the camera's color quality. Colors all appear too dark, as you can see from the image below.

The camera of the C9A reproduces our test chart at medium quality under controlled lighting. Colors appear weak but details and patterns are reproduced nicely. We also noticed two areas that appear significantly washed-out in the middle of the left and right edges.

TP-Link Neffos C9A - test chart
TP-Link Neffos C9A - test chart (detail)

Accessories and Warranty - protective case for the Neffos C9A

The scope of delivery of the TP-Link Neffos C9A includes a USB charger and a MicroUSB cable as well as a silicon case. The manufacturer does not offer any other accessories made specifically for the C9A.

The TP-Link Neffos C9A comes with a 24-month warranty period.  

Input Devices & Handling - fingerprint reader with weaknesses

TP-Link has installed the keyboard app TouchPal which works very well even when typing long sentences. The app also offers various customization options. The touchscreen responds to inputs very quickly and confirms them with a short vibration. The screen surface is not really smooth, however, which can make drag-and-drop gestures a little difficult to execute. The position sensor is reliable and adjusts screen content shortly after you change the smartphone's orientation.

The device can be unlocked via the fingerprint reader on the back of the C9A. It occasionally took us two or three tries to unlock the device via fingerprint.

Display - good contrast ratio

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The screen of the Neffos C9A is a 5.45-inch IPS panel that offers a resolution of 1440x720 pixels. The brightness is higher than on most competitors with an average of 535 cd/m² and good brightness distribution of 96%. The display actually reaches a maximum brightness of 540 cd/m² in our APL50 test and has a minimum of 0.5 cd/m².

There is some screen flickering at brightness levels below 40%. The frequency of 2222 Hz is comparably high, however, and should not cause too many problems even for users with sensitive eyes.

531
cd/m²
523
cd/m²
515
cd/m²
524
cd/m²
535
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
523
cd/m²
534
cd/m²
535
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 535 cd/m² Average: 527.8 cd/m² Minimum: 6.773 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 535 cd/m²
Contrast: 1274:1 (Black: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.18 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 1.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
91.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Xiaomi Redmi 7
IPS, 1520x720, 6.26
Wiko Harry 2
1440x720, 5.45
Oukitel C13 Pro
IPS LCD, 996x480, 6.18
Cubot J3 Pro
IPS, 960x480, 5.5
Screen
-27%
-34%
-100%
-118%
Brightness middle
535
444
-17%
479
-10%
388
-27%
476
-11%
Brightness
528
441
-16%
491
-7%
402
-24%
459
-13%
Brightness Distribution
96
90
-6%
87
-9%
88
-8%
88
-8%
Black Level *
0.42
0.45
-7%
0.2
52%
0.26
38%
0.75
-79%
Contrast
1274
987
-23%
2395
88%
1492
17%
635
-50%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.18
3.94
6%
6.17
-48%
9.2
-120%
8.14
-95%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.62
6.72
30%
11.46
-19%
18.4
-91%
16.68
-73%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.7
4.8
-182%
7.1
-318%
11.7
-588%
12.2
-618%
CCT
6502 100%
7445 87%
8441 77%
11121 58%
7643 85%
Gamma
2.294 96%
2.066 106%
2.58 85%
2.273 97%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
98.2

* ... 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 2222 Hz ≤ 40 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2222 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 40 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2222 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9618 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

According to our measurements, the Neffos C9A has a good contrast ratio of 1274:1 and a slightly elevated black value of 0.42 cd/m². Both values position the TP-Link smartphone in the center of our comparison field. Colors appear quite well defined, although there does seem to be a gray layer over black content.

The CalMAN analysis also shows that colors are comparatively balanced. Users cannot adjust colors manually, but there is a mode that lets users set the amount of blue light to be filtered out on an adjustable scale.

CalMAN - color space
CalMAN - color space
CalMAN - color accuracy
CalMAN - color accuracy
CalMAN - grayscales
CalMAN - grayscales
CalMAN - saturation
CalMAN - saturation

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↗ 11 ms rise
↘ 17 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 worse than the average of all tested devices (25.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
58 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 29 ms rise
↘ 29 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. » 93 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (40.6 ms).

The Neffos C9A is easy to use outdoors. Content is visible in bright surroundings if you look straight at the display. Looking at it from the side, you will see some reflections and glare, which limit the visibility of screen content.

Outdoor use
Outdoor use
Outdoor use
Outdoor use

The IPS panel of the TP-Link C9A has very stable viewing angles. Content can be seen correctly without distortions or inverted colors from almost every angle. As long as there are no reflections that limit visibility, the Neffos smartphone can be used from unusual positions.

Viewing-angle stability
Viewing-angle stability
Viewing-angle stability
Viewing-angle stability

Performance - a simple device with low power

The TP-Link Neffos C9A offers very basic hardware for users with low demands. The most common apps such as WhatsApp, Facebook and browsers work fine and you can even play some simple games.

The C9A does quite well in our benchmark tests and positions itself in the midfield of our comparison devices - although it did rank lower in some tests, particularly those concerning graphics. Users will have to accept short pauses when opening apps or navigating the user interface, but there were no major issues or long dropouts during testing. 

Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1434 Points ∼31%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3850 Points ∼83% +168%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1131 Points ∼24% -21%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1460 Points ∼32% +2%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1125 - 1460, n=12)
1210 Points ∼26% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (870 - 21070, n=269)
4623 Points ∼100% +222%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1789 Points ∼40%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4301 Points ∼96% +140%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1652 Points ∼37% -8%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1896 Points ∼42% +6%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
1447 Points ∼32% -19%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1418 - 1896, n=14)
1606 Points ∼36% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1174 - 11598, n=322)
4488 Points ∼100% +151%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
664 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1227 Points ∼93% +85%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
590 Points ∼45% -11%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
675 Points ∼51% +2%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
571 Points ∼43% -14%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (571 - 675, n=14)
585 Points ∼44% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (437 - 4824, n=323)
1324 Points ∼100% +99%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3126 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
5912 Points ∼100% +89%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2828 Points ∼48% -10%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
5377 Points ∼91% +72%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
2951 Points ∼50% -6%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2630 - 5377, n=15)
2721 Points ∼46% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6483 - 9974, n=330)
4852 Points ∼82% +55%
Work performance score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7117 Points ∼100%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3977 Points ∼56%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3742 Points ∼53%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
3956 Points ∼56%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0 - 4711, n=12)
3134 Points ∼44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4290 - 13531, n=499)
5280 Points ∼74%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
 
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2061 - 15735, n=23)
2627 Points ∼17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek MT6739
 
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (604 - 14536, n=23)
2626 Points ∼18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
Points ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼100%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
Points ∼0%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0 - 0, n=2)
0 Points ∼0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 14786, n=25)
2264 Points ∼15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
614 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2133 Points ∼100% +247%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
585 Points ∼27% -5%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
677 Points ∼32% +10%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
573 Points ∼27% -7%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (573 - 677, n=14)
480 Points ∼23% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4535, n=346)
1792 Points ∼84% +192%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
102 Points ∼7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
469 Points ∼31% +360%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
76 Points ∼5% -25%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
189 Points ∼12% +85%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
76 Points ∼5% -25%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (75 - 189, n=14)
76.4 Points ∼5% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (76 - 8206, n=346)
1535 Points ∼100% +1405%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
125 Points ∼9%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
567 Points ∼40% +354%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
94 Points ∼7% -25%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
225 Points ∼16% +80%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
94 Points ∼7% -25%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (93 - 225, n=14)
93.5 Points ∼7% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (94 - 6312, n=349)
1431 Points ∼100% +1045%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
627 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2147 Points ∼100% +242%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
584 Points ∼27% -7%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
698 Points ∼33% +11%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (530 - 698, n=14)
568 Points ∼26% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=361)
1769 Points ∼82% +182%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
169 Points ∼8%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
813 Points ∼38% +381%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
134 Points ∼6% -21%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
189 Points ∼9% +12%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (131 - 189, n=14)
147 Points ∼7% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=361)
2113 Points ∼100% +1150%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
202 Points ∼11%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
943 Points ∼52% +367%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
162 Points ∼9% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
225 Points ∼13% +11%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (159 - 225, n=14)
175 Points ∼10% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7980, n=362)
1797 Points ∼100% +790%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
587 Points ∼28%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2119 Points ∼100% +261%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
503 Points ∼24% -14%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
690 Points ∼33% +18%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
486 Points ∼23% -17%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (486 - 690, n=15)
521 Points ∼25% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4262, n=420)
1728 Points ∼82% +194%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
88 Points ∼7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
424 Points ∼33% +382%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
65 Points ∼5% -26%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
185 Points ∼15% +110%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
65 Points ∼5% -26%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (65 - 185, n=15)
79.1 Points ∼6% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (65 - 6362, n=422)
1271 Points ∼100% +1344%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
108 Points ∼9%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
516 Points ∼42% +378%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
81 Points ∼7% -25%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
221 Points ∼18% +105%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
80 Points ∼7% -26%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (80 - 221, n=15)
97.3 Points ∼8% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80 - 5734, n=430)
1216 Points ∼100% +1026%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
641 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
2132 Points ∼100% +233%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
512 Points ∼24% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
690 Points ∼32% +8%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (445 - 690, n=14)
559 Points ∼26% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4240, n=453)
1633 Points ∼77% +155%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
145 Points ∼8%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
807 Points ∼47% +457%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
104 Points ∼6% -28%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
185 Points ∼11% +28%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (102 - 185, n=14)
128 Points ∼7% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 9983, n=453)
1729 Points ∼100% +1092%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
175 Points ∼12%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
936 Points ∼63% +435%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
126 Points ∼8% -28%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
211 Points ∼14% +21%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (120 - 211, n=14)
153 Points ∼10% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7673, n=461)
1483 Points ∼100% +747%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
9513 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
15735 Points ∼100% +65%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
9182 Points ∼58% -3%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
10981 Points ∼70% +15%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
8980 Points ∼57% -6%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (7103 - 10981, n=14)
9344 Points ∼59% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8253 - 45072, n=615)
13397 Points ∼85% +41%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3588 Points ∼19%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14536 Points ∼75% +305%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2886 Points ∼15% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3700 Points ∼19% +3%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
2880 Points ∼15% -20%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2878 - 4346, n=14)
3348 Points ∼17% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3588 - 162695, n=615)
19336 Points ∼100% +439%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
4164 Points ∼26%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14786 Points ∼91% +255%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3405 Points ∼21% -18%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
4339 Points ∼27% +4%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
3392 Points ∼21% -19%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (3392 - 4339, n=14)
3848 Points ∼24% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4164 - 83518, n=616)
16160 Points ∼100% +288%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
6 fps ∼18%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
25 fps ∼74% +317%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
5 fps ∼15% -17%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
6.1 fps ∼18% +2%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
5 fps ∼15% -17%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (4.9 - 6.1, n=15)
5.59 fps ∼17% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6 - 251, n=640)
33.7 fps ∼100% +462%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
9.9 fps ∼27%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
37 fps ∼100% +274%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
8.2 fps ∼22% -17%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
15 fps ∼41% +52%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
13 fps ∼35% +31%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (8.2 - 15, n=15)
9.84 fps ∼27% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.8 - 120, n=643)
26.2 fps ∼71% +165%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.7 fps ∼15%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
11 fps ∼60% +307%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.2 fps ∼12% -19%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.7 fps ∼15% 0%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2.2 - 2.8, n=13)
2.55 fps ∼14% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.8 - 132, n=559)
18.4 fps ∼100% +581%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
5.4 fps ∼28%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
19 fps ∼100% +252%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
4.4 fps ∼23% -19%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
10 fps ∼53% +85%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
8.1 fps ∼43% +50%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (4.4 - 10, n=15)
5.62 fps ∼30% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.4 - 115, n=564)
17.1 fps ∼90% +217%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.6 fps ∼10%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼46% +338%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.3 fps ∼8% -19%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.7 fps ∼11% +6%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
1.3 fps ∼8% -19%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1.3 - 1.7, n=15)
1.487 fps ∼10% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 88, n=421)
15.3 fps ∼100% +856%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
3.4 fps ∼23%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
14 fps ∼95% +312%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.7 fps ∼18% -21%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
6.7 fps ∼46% +97%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
4.7 fps ∼32% +38%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (2.6 - 6.7, n=15)
3.51 fps ∼24% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.4 - 110, n=424)
14.7 fps ∼100% +332%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.64 fps ∼7%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4.2 fps ∼47% +556%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.61 fps ∼7% -5%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2 fps ∼22% +213%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0.61 - 2, n=3)
1.083 fps ∼12% +69%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 59, n=125)
8.92 fps ∼100% +1294%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
fps ∼0%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1.3 fps ∼21%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.21 fps ∼3%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.4 fps ∼6%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0 - 0.4, n=3)
0.2033 fps ∼3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.26 - 31, n=125)
6.2 fps ∼100%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.8 fps ∼14%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7 fps ∼53% +289%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.4 fps ∼11% -22%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.5 fps ∼19% +39%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
2.5 fps ∼19% +39%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1.4 - 2.5, n=4)
2.05 fps ∼15% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 59, n=126)
13.3 fps ∼100% +639%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.95 fps ∼6%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼26% +311%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.77 fps ∼5% -19%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.6 fps ∼4% -37%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
0.75 fps ∼5% -21%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0.6 - 0.95, n=4)
0.768 fps ∼5% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.94 - 63, n=125)
14.9 fps ∼100% +1468%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.88 fps ∼8%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
3.9 fps ∼38% +343%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.7 fps ∼7% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
0.6 fps ∼6% -32%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (0.6 - 0.91, n=13)
0.821 fps ∼8% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.89 - 54, n=350)
10.4 fps ∼100% +1082%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.5 fps ∼16%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
7.8 fps ∼84% +420%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1.2 fps ∼13% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
2.6 fps ∼28% +73%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
1.8 fps ∼19% +20%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1.1 - 2.6, n=14)
1.55 fps ∼17% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 58, n=354)
9.32 fps ∼100% +521%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
36768 Points ∼29%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
102781 Points ∼81% +180%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
39276 Points ∼31% +7%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
46951 Points ∼37% +28%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (26874 - 46951, n=13)
41995 Points ∼33% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (36768 - 374820, n=242)
126670 Points ∼100% +245%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
10 Points ∼1%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1071 Points ∼100% +10610%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
563 Points ∼53% +5530%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
624 Points ∼58% +6140%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
597 Points ∼56% +5870%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (7 - 624, n=14)
177 Points ∼17% +1670%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=573)
726 Points ∼68% +7160%
Graphics (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
186 Points ∼10%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1072 Points ∼57% +476%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
149 Points ∼8% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
190 Points ∼10% +2%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
150 Points ∼8% -19%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (18 - 190, n=14)
159 Points ∼9% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=573)
1866 Points ∼100% +903%
Memory (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1039 Points ∼59%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1758 Points ∼100% +69%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
420 Points ∼24% -60%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
818 Points ∼47% -21%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
524 Points ∼30% -50%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (420 - 1039, n=14)
750 Points ∼43% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=573)
1380 Points ∼78% +33%
System (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1425 Points ∼35%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
4090 Points ∼100% +187%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1140 Points ∼28% -20%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
1338 Points ∼33% -6%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
1103 Points ∼27% -23%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (1103 - 1526, n=14)
1289 Points ∼32% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=573)
2752 Points ∼67% +93%
Overall (sort by value)
TP-Link Neffos C9A
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
227 Points ∼13%
Xiaomi Redmi 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 3072
1695 Points ∼100% +647%
Wiko Harry 2
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
447 Points ∼26% +97%
Oukitel C13 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 2048
600 Points ∼35% +164%
Cubot J3 Pro
Mediatek MT6739, PowerVR GE8100, 1024
477 Points ∼28% +110%
Average Mediatek MT6739
  (162 - 637, n=14)
296 Points ∼17% +30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=577)
1365 Points ∼81% +501%

The browser benchmarks position the Neffos C9A in the midfield. This means that websites load at moderate speed and media needs a little longer to load.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (10.4 - 96.7, n=24)
30.1 Points ∼100% +190%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
26.9 Points ∼89% +159%
Oukitel C13 Pro (Chrome 73)
10.876 Points ∼36% +5%
Average Mediatek MT6739 (10.4 - 10.9, n=2)
10.6 Points ∼35% +2%
TP-Link Neffos C9A (Chrome 73)
10.39 Points ∼35%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (23 - 161, n=107)
63.7 Points ∼100% +177%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
58 Points ∼91% +152%
TP-Link Neffos C9A (Chrome 73)
23 Points ∼36%
Average Mediatek MT6739
23 Points ∼36% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
8258 Points ∼100% +161%
Average of class Smartphone (3126 - 43280, n=633)
6012 Points ∼73% +90%
TP-Link Neffos C9A (Chrome 73)
3167 Points ∼38%
Oukitel C13 Pro (Chrome 73)
3126 Points ∼38% -1%
Average Mediatek MT6739 (2093 - 3202, n=14)
2914 Points ∼35% -8%
Wiko Harry 2 (Chrome 71)
2775 Points ∼34% -12%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Wiko Harry 2 (Chrome 71)
17145 ms * ∼100% -10%
Average Mediatek MT6739 (15335 - 18154, n=15)
16616 ms * ∼97% -7%
Cubot J3 Pro (Chrome 73)
16599 ms * ∼97% -7%
TP-Link Neffos C9A (Chrome 73)
15556.6 ms * ∼91%
Oukitel C13 Pro (Chrome 73)
15334.7 ms * ∼89% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=653)
11004 ms * ∼64% +29%
Xiaomi Redmi 7 (Chrome 73)
4856.4 ms * ∼28% +69%

* ... smaller is better

The internal eMMC flash storage in the TP-Link Neffos C9A has a capacity of 16 GB, of which only 8 GB is available for installing apps and storing personal data. The results of the storage benchmarks place our test unit in the center of our test field again. The read and write rates do not have a negative impact on everyday use.

According to the manufacturer, the storage of the C9A can be expanded by up to 128 GB using a microSD card. However, it is not possible to offload apps or format the microSD card as internal storage. In our test with the reference card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 the card reader reached read and write rates that are slightly above average for smartphones of this price range.

TP-Link Neffos C9AXiaomi Redmi 7Wiko Harry 2Oukitel C13 ProCubot J3 ProAverage 16 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
30%
-3%
-4%
-13%
-35%
15%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
63.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
63.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
62.05
-1%
60.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
38.3 (6.38 - 65.4, n=122)
-39%
47.9 (9.5 - 87.1, n=382)
-23%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
82 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
85.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
5%
80.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
81.25
-1%
74.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-9%
57.1 (8.1 - 87.7, n=122)
-30%
66 (8.1 - 96.5, n=382)
-20%
Random Write 4KB
12.2
14.4
18%
11.6
-5%
9.99
-18%
10.1
-17%
7.68 (0.49 - 43.2, n=237)
-37%
18.9 (0.14 - 250, n=684)
55%
Random Read 4KB
43.11
73.6
71%
35.47
-18%
22.98
-47%
27.2
-37%
20.6 (2.49 - 61.7, n=237)
-52%
43 (1.59 - 174, n=684)
0%
Sequential Write 256KB
49.64
84.7
71%
59.13
19%
69.7
40%
47.5
-4%
41.7 (8.74 - 97.6, n=237)
-16%
88.8 (2.99 - 388, n=684)
79%
Sequential Read 256KB
259.86
298
15%
227.26
-13%
264.76
2%
235.6
-9%
161 (9.66 - 294, n=237)
-38%
250 (12.1 - 1468, n=684)
-4%

Games - only simple gaming available

The Neffos C9A is equipped with a PowerVR GE8100 graphics unit. This is suitable for simple games with low demands on graphics performance. This means that games such as Temple Run 2 are displayed smoothly and without any issues, but more complex games such as Arena of Valor can only be played at the lowest settings and still don't always have stable frame rates. Controlling the games via the touchpad is made a little difficult due to the subpar gliding capabilities. 

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Temple Run 2
Temple Run 2

Emissions - affordable Android phone with audio jack

Temperature

The Neffos C9A reached a surface temperature of 26.9 °C while idling during our test and reached up to 39.3 °C under load. This only makes the device feel warm, and it is never too hot to hold. We did not encounter any temperature-related performance restrictions even when using the device for a long time.

Max. Load
 39.3 °C
103 F
36 °C
97 F
35.3 °C
96 F
 
 38.3 °C
101 F
35.8 °C
96 F
37.3 °C
99 F
 
 37.4 °C
99 F
35.4 °C
96 F
36.3 °C
97 F
 
Maximum: 39.3 °C = 103 F
Average: 36.8 °C = 98 F
34.6 °C
94 F
35.4 °C
96 F
37.4 °C
99 F
34.8 °C
95 F
35.7 °C
96 F
36.9 °C
98 F
33.9 °C
93 F
35.7 °C
96 F
36.3 °C
97 F
Maximum: 37.4 °C = 99 F
Average: 35.6 °C = 96 F
Power Supply (max.)  39.9 °C = 104 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36.8 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.4 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.5 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
Heat map - front
Heat map - front
Heat map - back
Heat map - back

Speaker

Pink noise speaker characteristics
Pink noise speaker characteristics

The TP-Link Neffos C9A does not offer a separate speaker - it only emits sounds via the earpiece. This reaches a comparatively high volume although the sound is a little unbalanced with very high and middle frequencies being too strong. The C9A can be used to occasionally play media, but we would definitely recommend using external speakers or headphones in general. These can be connected via the 3.5-mm audio jack, which works very well and does not impact sound quality.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204343.82539.140.13132.935.54038.836.75042.243.56332.435.78026.730.810025.929.912529.228.516024.930.820020.131.625019.135.431518.942.440018.547.750019.554.463017.161.980016.166.9100016.272.5125015.675.3160016.470.720001769.7250016.368315015.364.7400015.463.8500015.265.3630015.263.8800015.475.31000015.574.41250015.471.11600015.555.3SPL66.728.782.2N18.51.248.5median 16.3median 63.8Delta2.413.742.247.642.141.534.636.537.337.439.841.132.734.527.727.927.826.625.725.323.332.32339.921.44821.454.120.159.520.567.121.873.420.474.62074.318.273.218.971.9187319.172.518.268.91865.71958.51865.418.163.818.165.218.267.218.150.465.66267.731.382.818.514.623.11.652.7median 19.1median 65.41.811.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseTP-Link Neffos C9AXiaomi Redmi 7
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
TP-Link Neffos C9A audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 66% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 78% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Redmi 7 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 67% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Runtime - Neffos C9A with a short runtime

Power Consumption

The Neffos C9A consumes at least 1.4 watts while idling and a maximum of 4.9 watts under load according to our measurements. This makes the TP-Link device one of the most energy-efficient smartphones in our comparison field. Only the Xiaomi Redmi 7 consumes less power. 

The included charger has a rated output of 5 watts and is large enough to provide the Neffos C9A with sufficient power.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.4 / 1.6 / 2.2 Watt
Load midlight 4.2 / 4.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
TP-Link Neffos C9A
3020 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Wiko Harry 2
2900 mAh
Oukitel C13 Pro
3000 mAh
Cubot J3 Pro
2800 mAh
Average Mediatek MT6739
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
7%
-8%
-6%
-20%
-22%
4%
Idle Minimum *
1.4
1
29%
1.2
14%
1.33
5%
1.4
-0%
1.522 (0.87 - 2.8, n=16)
-9%
0.883 (0.2 - 3.4, n=714)
37%
Idle Average *
1.6
1.7
-6%
2
-25%
2.53
-58%
1.8
-13%
2.17 (1.6 - 3.5, n=16)
-36%
1.735 (0.6 - 6.2, n=713)
-8%
Idle Maximum *
2.2
2.1
5%
2.7
-23%
2.58
-17%
2.4
-9%
2.86 (1.68 - 6.3, n=16)
-30%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=714)
8%
Load Average *
4.2
3.3
21%
4.2
-0%
3.18
24%
5.5
-31%
4.73 (2.8 - 7, n=16)
-13%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=708)
3%
Load Maximum *
4.9
5.6
-14%
5.2
-6%
4.15
15%
7.2
-47%
5.99 (3.5 - 11.9, n=16)
-22%
5.85 (1.2 - 14.2, n=708)
-19%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Our practical Wi-Fi test measures a runtime of just over six hours. This result is significantly shorter than for most comparable devices, which sometimes manage longer runtimes despite having a lower battery capacity.

The included USB charger recharges the 3020-mAh battery in around three hours.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 10min
TP-Link Neffos C9A
3020 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 7
4000 mAh
Wiko Harry 2
2900 mAh
Oukitel C13 Pro
3000 mAh
Cubot J3 Pro
2800 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
370
848
129%
613
66%
429
16%
532
44%

Pros

+ low price
+ simultaneous use of dual SIM and storage expansion
+ good workmanship

Cons

- system can be a little slow
- average battery runtime

Verdict - simple smartphone for low requirements

Review: TP-Link Neffos C9A. Test unit provided by Cyberport
Review: TP-Link Neffos C9A. Test unit provided by Cyberport

The Neffos C9A from TP-Link fulfills all our expectations of an entry-level smartphone. The performance is average for the hardware used and design and workmanship are good, too. The phone also offers the use of two nanoSIM cards and a microSD card at the same time.

TP-Link's Neffos C9A offers just enough performance for the Android operating system and can be used for simple apps or browsing the web. Buyers should not expect more than that.

The device does not have anything else to offer. System performance is slow and only suitable for patient users. The low storage space available is already filled up by third-party apps - although these can be removed easily. The camera is of low quality but should be good enough for the occasional snapshot in good lighting. If you do not expect fancy features from a smartphone or are simply looking for an affordable secondary device, this device is a good bet. If, however, you are hoping for more value for money, you might be better off with one of the competitors, for example the Xiaomi Redmi 7.

TP-Link Neffos C9A - 05/11/2019 v6
Mike Wobker

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
38 / 60 → 63%
Weight
93%
Battery
88%
Display
87%
Games Performance
7 / 63 → 11%
Application Performance
33 / 70 → 47%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
57 / 91 → 63%
Camera
61%
Average
69%
80%
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 > TP-Link Neffos C9A Smartphone Review
Mike Wobker, 2019-05-14 (Update: 2019-05-15)