Notebookcheck

UMI Plus Smartphone Review

Plus size, small price. Budget Chinese smartphones are looking and performing better every year. The UMI Plus is no exception at the cost of a larger form factor and subpar camera.

Budget smartphones are packing more power than ever and are well on their way to being as feature-heavy as pricier mainstream alternatives. The UMI Plus is such an example and is essentially the existing UMI Max with slightly upgraded hardware and features to justify the $20 USD higher price tag. Nonetheless, the Plus sounds like a bargain at just $170 USD with its mainstream Helio P10 SoC, large 5.5-inch 1080p display, high capacity 4000 mAh non-removable battery, and roomy 4 GB of LPDDR3 RAM.

Immediate competitors include the Oukitel U7 Plus and the ZTE Blade A452, but even these 5-inch smartphones are using lower resolution 720p screens compared to the FHD UMI. It's not until the $200 to $300 USD range where smartphones begin carrying similar specifications to the UMI Plus such as the Huawei G8, Moto X Play, and Honor 5C.

We recommend checking out our existing review on the UMI Max since the Plus sports nearly all of its features and hardware.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

UMI Plus (Plus Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, 8x 2.00GHz Cortex-A53 (Mediatek MT6755 Helio P10, 64bit
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
, LPDDR3
Display
5.5 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 401 PPI, LTPS, Capacitive touch screen, glossy: yes
Storage
32GB, microSD slot (shared until 256GB)
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Sensors: accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, light sensor, compass, fingerprint sensor
Networking
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4), Bluetooth 4.1, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.8 x 155 x 75 ( = 0.35 x 6.1 x 2.95 in)
Operating System
Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix 13.0MP, f / 2.0, phase comparison-AF, Dual LED flash, video @ 1080p
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
24 Months Warranty
Weight
185 g ( = 6.53 oz / 0.41 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The chassis on the Plus is nearly identical to the Max except for the relocation of the rear fingerprint reader to the front Home button. The Plus is also slightly thicker (8.8 mm vs. 8.5 mm) and longer (155 mm vs. 150.8 mm) than its sibling, so they are not a perfect twin.

Quality and materials include the aluminum housing on the back and the plastic strips along the top and bottom for optimal antenna reception. Its rounded edges and corners feel strong and rigid with no unintended gaps in between. The chrome-cut finish where the metal meets the 2.5D glass on front adds another touch to the iPhone-esque design. Attempting to twist the phone results in minimal warping and no audible creaking.

Side buttons include the volume rocker, power button, and a customizable "Smart" button for instant access to the camera or a user-defined app. Like on the Max, however, these buttons are slightly on the soft side with weak feedback when pressed. The overall case still leaves a very good impression even for a sub $200 USD asking price.

As for size and weight, the UMI Plus is slightly thicker, taller, and heavier than many existing 5.5-inch smartphones. The extra mass adds a more substantial feel to the smartphone without being too heavy, so this may work to its benefit. Otherwise, most 5.5-inch alternatives are smaller with higher screen-to-body ratios.

155 mm / 6.1 inch 75 mm / 2.95 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 185 g0.4079 lbs155.3 mm / 6.11 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 5.19 mm / 0.2043 inch 136 g0.2998 lbs152.6 mm / 6.01 inch 77.4 mm / 3.05 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 155 g0.3417 lbs151.7 mm / 5.97 inch 75 mm / 2.95 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs150.8 mm / 5.94 inch 75 mm / 2.95 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 199 g0.4387 lbs148.9 mm / 5.86 inch 74.9 mm / 2.95 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 139 g0.3064 lbs146 mm / 5.75 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 161 g0.3549 lbs

Connectivity

Internal eMMC 5.1 memory is 32 GB to be twice that of the UMI Max, though only 25 GB is available to the end-user after factoring in the OS. MicroSD cards are supported up to 256 GB and the slot is shared with the secondary Micro-SIM card.

The USB Type-C port is limited to the USB 2.0 standard not unlike on the OnePlus 3. Thus, owners receive no benefits over the standard Micro-USB port other than the hassle-free reversible plug of USB Type-C. This unfortunately makes USB OTG more frustrating to use as you will now need USB Type-C adapters instead of Micro-USB adapters.

Wireless features from the Max return here including integrated FM radio, dual SIM functionality, Miracast, 802.11n WLAN, and Bluetooth 4.1.

Communication and GPS

According to UMI, both Micro-SIM slots support 4G LTE FDD up to 150 Mbps download (2600, 2100, 1800, 800 MHz frequencies). The two slots, however, cannot utilize 4G simultaneously as one will automatically be set to receive only. Here in the U.S., we were only able to connect to T-Mobile's 3G network with no 4G bands supported. This is unfortunately quite common on Chinese smartphones designed more for international users.

Call quality is sufficiently loud through the integrated earpiece with no significant static from both the caller and listener. In contrast, the speakerphone unfortunately sounds cheap and distorted especially on higher volume settings. Reception isn't very good either at just half bars even in a metropolitan area like the outer San Francisco.

WLAN is limited to 802.11n speeds with support for both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Oddly enough, WLAN reception is weaker on the UMI compared to the LG G3 even when standing just two meters away from our EA8500 WLAN source. When moving about 15 meters away, however, reception becomes roughly the same on both smartphones.

The integrated GPS in the UMI is less accurate than on the LG G3 as shown by our GPS Test results below. We discovered similar results on the UMI Max as well, but the smartphone is nonetheless sufficient for general navigation while driving. More accurate solutions are recommended when off-road or on twisting trails.

UMI Plus (GPS Test)
UMI Plus (GPS Test)
LG G3 (GPS Test)
LG G3 (GPS Test)
LG G3 (2 m from source)
LG G3 (2 m from source)
UMI Plus (2 m from source)
UMI Plus (2 m from source)
LG G3 (15 m from source)
LG G3 (15 m from source)
UMI Plus (15 m from source)
UMI Plus (15 m from source)
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
UMI Plus
Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755
31.2 MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
UMI Plus
Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755
34.4 MBit/s ∼100%

Cameras

Camera quality from the rear Samsung 3L8 13 MP is only average. Colors have a tendency to be greener than normal, overexposed, and generally softer overall. Video recording is limited to 1080p at up to 30 FPS with unreliable auto-focusing even when panning slowly. Meanwhile, the front-facing 5 MP camera works well enough for video calls due to its low latency and automatic face detection. Performance in dim ambient lighting is also acceptable whereas most cheaper front-facing cameras are typically muddy.

UMI Plus
UMI Plus
UMI Plus
UMI Plus
UMI Plus
UMI Plus
LG G3
LG G3
LG G3
LG G3
LG G3
LG G3
UMI Plus
UMI Plus
Canon EOS Rebel XSi
Canon EOS Rebel XSi
LG G3
LG G3

Accessories and Warranty

Included extras are a needle key for inserting SIM or MicroSD cards, a European AC plug, USB Type-C charger, and a small user guide. There are no included earphones and the MicroUSB cable appears to be for charging only (no data).

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific warranty information.

Input Devices

Touchscreen

The 5-point capacitive touchscreen responds quickly and reliably to scrolls and multi-touch gestures with no major latency issues. The edges and corners also respond swiftly to touch inputs without any "dead zones" or noticeable odd behavior.

The bottom Home button feels cheap to the touch. Travel is shallow and feedback is weak, so pressing down on it feels very uneven as a result. It's fortunately touch-sensitive and simply tapping on its surface will bring you back to the Home screen. The adjacent Tabs and Back touch-sensitive buttons are also present in the same positioning as a Samsung smartphone (i.e., Tabs to the left and Back to the right), but there is no backlighting for either of them.

Touch ID for fingerprint unlocking works quickly, albeit not always reliably. The sensor recognizes a finger only most of the time and we recommend saving multiple entries of the same finger to reduce the chances of errors.

Display

Subjectively, the edge-to-edge Gorilla Glass display offers a clean and crisp picture due to the dense FHD resolution. The screen itself is very close to the surface of the glass, so colors and pictures appear to "pop" to mimic the screens of costlier mainstream and flagship smartphones. Brightness levels and especially contrast levels are very high for a budget phone, although our measurements don't show the screen to be nearly as bright as on the UMI Max and it is generally still dimmer than many mainstream competitors. The maximum brightness of the center of the screen can be as high as 462 nits when automatic brightness control is active. When automatic control is deactivated, the manual brightness limit becomes slightly lower at 433 nits. The Plus is slightly brighter on the bottom half of the screen compared to the top half.

Slight backlight bleeding can be observed on the top and bottom edges of the screen when displaying all black and on maximum brightness. This is hardly noticeable during everyday use and is not significant enough to be an issue.

Very slight backlight bleeding from the edges
Very slight backlight bleeding from the edges
Subpixel array (401 PPI)
Subpixel array (401 PPI)
405.4
cd/m²
419.2
cd/m²
457.4
cd/m²
405.2
cd/m²
432.8
cd/m²
457.1
cd/m²
407.1
cd/m²
416.7
cd/m²
472.2
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Maximum: 472.2 cd/m² Average: 430.3 cd/m² Minimum: 12.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 432.8 cd/m²
Contrast: 1866:1 (Black: 0.232 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.93 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 5.18 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
Gamma: 2.4
UMI Plus
LTPS, 5.5, 1920x1080
UMI Max
Sharp, IPS, 5.5, 1920x1080
Sony Xperia XZ
IPS, 5.2, 1920x1080
ZTE Axon 7
AMOLED, 5.5, 2560x1440
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
IPS, 5.5, 1920x1080
Response Times
-25%
-88%
88%
-47%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
36 (14, 22)
40 (17, 23)
-11%
52 (22, 30)
-44%
4.8 (2.4, 2.4)
87%
56 (17, 39)
-56%
Response Time Black / White *
26 (5.2, 20.8)
36 (15, 21)
-38%
60 (21, 39)
-131%
3.2 (1.6, 1.6)
88%
36 (15, 21)
-38%
PWM Frequency
240.4 (100)
Screen
-13%
-13%
-11%
-18%
Brightness middle
432.8
522
21%
544
26%
328
-24%
658
52%
Brightness
430
498
16%
521
21%
334
-22%
633
47%
Brightness Distribution
86
86
0%
93
8%
88
2%
93
8%
Black Level *
0.232
0.23
1%
0.37
-59%
0.66
-184%
Contrast
1866
2270
22%
1470
-21%
997
-47%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.93
6.9
-40%
5.8
-18%
4.6
7%
4.9
1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.34
12.3
-47%
9.8
-18%
14.7
-76%
9.1
-9%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.18
9.2
-78%
7.2
-39%
2.8
46%
5.8
-12%
Gamma
2.4 92%
2.38 92%
2.18 101%
2.29 96%
2.26 97%
CCT
7461 87%
8687 75%
8619 75%
6612 98%
7840 83%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-19% / -15%
-51% / -28%
39% / 14%
-33% / -24%

* ... smaller is better

Colors on the Plus are relatively accurate across all tested saturation levels despite having average grayscale and RGB balance. With that said, both colors are grayscale still appear to be slightly more accurate than on the UMI Max and even the Sony Xperia XZ whereas the costlier ZTE Axon 7 is far ahead.

Grayscale
Grayscale
Saturation Sweeps
Saturation Sweeps
ColorChecker
ColorChecker

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
26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5.2 ms rise
↘ 20.8 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. » 47 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14 ms rise
↘ 22 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. » 30 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is usable under shade and just average under sunlight. The wide viewing angles help in reducing the inevitable heavy glare from the glossy screen.

Performance

The UMI Plus uses the same Helio P10 MT6755 SoC as many other mainstream smartphones including the HTC Desire 10 Pro, Blackview R7, and the Sony Xperia XA. It also carries more RAM than the immediate competition at 4 GB compared to 2 to 3 GB on the Honor 5C and even the similar UMI Max. Raw processor performance according to 3DMark Ice Storm Physics is about 30 to 40 percent slower than the flagship Snapdragon 820 found on many flagship smartphones.

Transfer rates are slow from the integrated MicroSD reader. Sequential read and write speeds with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M401 MicroSD test card average about 36 MB/s and 22 MB/s, respectively, while the MicroSD card itself is rated for maximum read and write rates of 90 MB/s and 80 MB/s, respectively.

Subjectively, system performance is very fast with only minor latency and hiccups when multi-tasking between heavy applications like games. The Android Marshmallow experience feels pure even though the smartphone uses an UMI-specific UI since the overlay stays close to the vanilla Android visual style.

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
ZTE Axon 7
51.34 MB/s ∼59% +138%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
50.07 MB/s ∼57% +132%
Sony Xperia XZ
29.8 MB/s ∼34% +38%
Honor 5C
24.21 MB/s ∼28% +12%
UMI Plus
21.55 MB/s ∼25%
Coolpad Modena 2
18.25 MB/s ∼21% -15%
UMI Max
18.07 MB/s ∼21% -16%
UMI Super Euro Edition
17.88 MB/s ∼21% -17%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
79.22 MB/s ∼82% +120%
ZTE Axon 7
78.39 MB/s ∼81% +118%
Honor 5C
51.93 MB/s ∼54% +44%
UMI Max
36.64 MB/s ∼38% +2%
UMI Super Euro Edition
36.22 MB/s ∼38% +1%
UMI Plus
35.95 MB/s ∼37%
Coolpad Modena 2
35.59 MB/s ∼37% -1%
Sony Xperia XZ
33.5 MB/s ∼35% -7%
Random Write 4KB
ZTE Axon 7
16.22 MB/s ∼6% +41%
Honor 5C
15.7 MB/s ∼6% +36%
Google Pixel XL 2016
14.56 MB/s ∼6% +26%
UMI Super Euro Edition
11.88 MB/s ∼5% +3%
UMI Plus
11.54 MB/s ∼4%
UMI Max
10.91 MB/s ∼4% -5%
Sony Xperia XZ
10.5 MB/s ∼4% -9%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
7.4 MB/s ∼3% -36%
Coolpad Modena 2
6.79 MB/s ∼3% -41%
Leagoo Shark 1
6.4 MB/s ∼2% -45%
Acer Liquid Z630S
5.82 MB/s ∼2% -50%
Random Read 4KB
ZTE Axon 7
121.07 MB/s ∼53% +370%
Google Pixel XL 2016
87.67 MB/s ∼39% +240%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
74 MB/s ∼33% +187%
Sony Xperia XZ
71.5 MB/s ∼32% +178%
Honor 5C
61.7 MB/s ∼27% +140%
Leagoo Shark 1
29.6 MB/s ∼13% +15%
Acer Liquid Z630S
28.43 MB/s ∼13% +10%
UMI Super Euro Edition
28.17 MB/s ∼12% +9%
UMI Max
26.66 MB/s ∼12% +4%
UMI Plus
25.75 MB/s ∼11%
Coolpad Modena 2
23.03 MB/s ∼10% -11%
Sequential Write 256KB
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
188 MB/s ∼32% +46%
ZTE Axon 7
150.92 MB/s ∼26% +17%
Sony Xperia XZ
138 MB/s ∼23% +7%
UMI Plus
128.53 MB/s ∼22%
UMI Super Euro Edition
126.95 MB/s ∼22% -1%
Google Pixel XL 2016
83.38 MB/s ∼14% -35%
Honor 5C
75.5 MB/s ∼13% -41%
UMI Max
69.5 MB/s ∼12% -46%
Acer Liquid Z630S
67.7 MB/s ∼11% -47%
Coolpad Modena 2
42.56 MB/s ∼7% -67%
Leagoo Shark 1
39.6 MB/s ∼7% -69%
Sequential Read 256KB
ZTE Axon 7
406.49 MB/s ∼23% +67%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
282 MB/s ∼16% +16%
Sony Xperia XZ
281 MB/s ∼16% +15%
Leagoo Shark 1
264.1 MB/s ∼15% +8%
Honor 5C
263 MB/s ∼15% +8%
Google Pixel XL 2016
258.23 MB/s ∼15% +6%
UMI Max
257.9 MB/s ∼14% +6%
UMI Super Euro Edition
257.8 MB/s ∼14% +6%
Acer Liquid Z630S
249.01 MB/s ∼14% +2%
UMI Plus
244.1 MB/s ∼14%
Coolpad Modena 2
147.04 MB/s ∼8% -40%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score
Google Pixel XL 2016
138641 Points ∼47% +186%
Sony Xperia XZ
129317 Points ∼44% +166%
ZTE Axon 7
122524 Points ∼42% +152%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
62484 Points ∼21% +29%
Honor 5C
53143 Points ∼18% +9%
UMI Super Euro Edition
50072 Points ∼17% +3%
UMI Max
49057 Points ∼17% +1%
UMI Plus
48558 Points ∼17%
Acer Liquid Z630S
35585 Points ∼12% -27%
Leagoo Shark 1
34261 Points ∼12% -29%
Coolpad Modena 2
24875 Points ∼8% -49%
Geekbench 4.0
Compute RenderScript Score
Google Pixel XL 2016
7047 Points ∼56% +390%
Sony Xperia XZ
7046 Points ∼56% +390%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2515 Points ∼20% +75%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1561 Points ∼12% +9%
UMI Plus
1437 Points ∼11%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Google Pixel XL 2016
4167 Points ∼12% +55%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
4042 Points ∼11% +50%
ZTE Axon 7
3867 Points ∼11% +43%
Sony Xperia XZ
3701 Points ∼10% +37%
UMI Super Euro Edition
2818 Points ∼8% +5%
UMI Max
2701 Points ∼8% 0%
UMI Plus
2695 Points ∼8%
Coolpad Modena 2
1274 Points ∼4% -53%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Sony Xperia XZ
1647 Points ∼26% +138%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1513 Points ∼24% +118%
ZTE Axon 7
1280 Points ∼20% +85%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
820 Points ∼13% +18%
UMI Max
734 Points ∼12% +6%
UMI Super Euro Edition
727 Points ∼12% +5%
UMI Plus
693 Points ∼11%
Coolpad Modena 2
459 Points ∼7% -34%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2119 Points ∼27% +71%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2044 Points ∼26% +65%
Sony Xperia XZ
1613 Points ∼20% +30%
Honor 5C
1440 Points ∼18% +16%
UMI Plus
1242 Points ∼16%
ZTE Axon 7
1232 Points ∼15% -1%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1131 Points ∼14% -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
ZTE Axon 7
3244 Points ∼39% +809%
Sony Xperia XZ
3144 Points ∼38% +781%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2863 Points ∼34% +702%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
426 Points ∼5% +19%
UMI Super Euro Edition
357 Points ∼4% 0%
UMI Plus
357 Points ∼4%
Honor 5C
303 Points ∼4% -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Google Pixel XL 2016
2629 Points ∼38% +520%
Sony Xperia XZ
2596 Points ∼38% +512%
ZTE Axon 7
2380 Points ∼34% +461%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
518 Points ∼7% +22%
UMI Plus
424 Points ∼6%
UMI Super Euro Edition
421 Points ∼6% -1%
Honor 5C
367 Points ∼5% -13%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2091 Points ∼41%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2009 Points ∼39%
Sony Xperia XZ
1516 Points ∼30%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1177 Points ∼23%
ZTE Axon 7
1151 Points ∼22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
ZTE Axon 7
4901 Points ∼17%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4406 Points ∼15%
Sony Xperia XZ
4333 Points ∼15%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
739 Points ∼3%
UMI Super Euro Edition
511 Points ∼2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Google Pixel XL 2016
3483 Points ∼26%
Sony Xperia XZ
3152 Points ∼23%
ZTE Axon 7
2843 Points ∼21%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
863 Points ∼6%
UMI Super Euro Edition
587 Points ∼4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2109 Points ∼43% +66%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1935 Points ∼39% +52%
ZTE Axon 7
1783 Points ∼36% +40%
Sony Xperia XZ
1667 Points ∼34% +31%
Honor 5C
1418 Points ∼29% +11%
UMI Plus
1272 Points ∼26%
UMI Max
1247 Points ∼25% -2%
Acer Liquid Z630S
1126 Points ∼23% -11%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1117 Points ∼23% -12%
Leagoo Shark 1
828 Points ∼17% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Sony Xperia XZ
2853 Points ∼40% +711%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2820 Points ∼39% +701%
ZTE Axon 7
2528 Points ∼35% +618%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
380 Points ∼5% +8%
UMI Max
354 Points ∼5% +1%
UMI Plus
352 Points ∼5%
UMI Super Euro Edition
350 Points ∼5% -1%
Honor 5C
317 Points ∼4% -10%
Acer Liquid Z630S
148 Points ∼2% -58%
Leagoo Shark 1
140 Points ∼2% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2560 Points ∼41% +511%
Sony Xperia XZ
2548 Points ∼40% +508%
ZTE Axon 7
2500 Points ∼40% +497%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
465 Points ∼7% +11%
UMI Max
421 Points ∼7% 0%
UMI Plus
419 Points ∼7%
UMI Super Euro Edition
413 Points ∼7% -1%
Honor 5C
383 Points ∼6% -9%
Acer Liquid Z630S
183 Points ∼3% -56%
Leagoo Shark 1
172 Points ∼3% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2112 Points ∼43%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1902 Points ∼39%
Sony Xperia XZ
1667 Points ∼34%
Honor 5C
1418 Points ∼29%
UMI Max
1239 Points ∼25%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1144 Points ∼23%
Acer Liquid Z630S
1113 Points ∼23%
ZTE Axon 7
1099 Points ∼22%
Leagoo Shark 1
890 Points ∼18%
Coolpad Modena 2
621 Points ∼13%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
ZTE Axon 7
4619 Points ∼41%
Sony Xperia XZ
4522 Points ∼40%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3935 Points ∼35%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
719 Points ∼6%
UMI Super Euro Edition
523 Points ∼5%
UMI Max
521 Points ∼5%
Honor 5C
480 Points ∼4%
Leagoo Shark 1
232 Points ∼2%
Acer Liquid Z630S
229 Points ∼2%
Coolpad Modena 2
106 Points ∼1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Sony Xperia XZ
3275 Points ∼39%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3180 Points ∼38%
ZTE Axon 7
2698 Points ∼32%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
842 Points ∼10%
UMI Max
598 Points ∼7%
UMI Super Euro Edition
595 Points ∼7%
Honor 5C
563 Points ∼7%
Acer Liquid Z630S
278 Points ∼3%
Leagoo Shark 1
278 Points ∼3%
Coolpad Modena 2
130 Points ∼2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Sony Xperia XZ
20772 Points ∼24% +72%
ZTE Axon 7
20408 Points ∼24% +69%
Google Pixel XL 2016
18222 Points ∼21% +51%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
15984 Points ∼18% +32%
Honor 5C
13588 Points ∼16% +13%
UMI Max
12239 Points ∼14% +1%
UMI Plus
12078 Points ∼14%
UMI Super Euro Edition
11654 Points ∼13% -4%
Acer Liquid Z630S
10508 Points ∼12% -13%
Leagoo Shark 1
10325 Points ∼12% -15%
Coolpad Modena 2
7061 Points ∼8% -42%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Google Pixel XL 2016
32652 Points ∼6% +210%
Sony Xperia XZ
32056 Points ∼6% +204%
ZTE Axon 7
24310 Points ∼5% +131%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
13466 Points ∼3% +28%
Honor 5C
11319 Points ∼2% +7%
UMI Max
10612 Points ∼2% +1%
UMI Super Euro Edition
10567 Points ∼2% 0%
UMI Plus
10532 Points ∼2%
Acer Liquid Z630S
6250 Points ∼1% -41%
Leagoo Shark 1
4920 Points ∼1% -53%
Coolpad Modena 2
2789 Points ∼1% -74%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Sony Xperia XZ
28603 Points ∼12% +164%
Google Pixel XL 2016
27766 Points ∼12% +156%
ZTE Axon 7
23319 Points ∼10% +115%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
13955 Points ∼6% +29%
Honor 5C
11755 Points ∼5% +8%
UMI Max
10942 Points ∼5% +1%
UMI Plus
10840 Points ∼5%
UMI Super Euro Edition
10791 Points ∼5% 0%
Acer Liquid Z630S
6868 Points ∼3% -37%
Leagoo Shark 1
5568 Points ∼2% -49%
Coolpad Modena 2
3222 Points ∼1% -70%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 battery life
Sony Xperia XZ
482 min ∼9%
Work 2.0 performance score
Sony Xperia XZ
5616 Points ∼47%
Work performance score
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
6785 Points ∼35% +121%
Honor 5C
5120 Points ∼26% +67%
Sony Xperia XZ
5058 Points ∼26% +65%
ZTE Axon 7
4970 Points ∼25% +62%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4739 Points ∼24% +54%
UMI Super Euro Edition
4596 Points ∼23% +50%
UMI Max
4485 Points ∼23% +46%
Acer Liquid Z630S
3814 Points ∼19% +24%
Leagoo Shark 1
3398 Points ∼17% +11%
Coolpad Modena 2
3119 Points ∼16% +2%
UMI Plus
3069 Points ∼16%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Sony Xperia XZ
1066 Points ∼52% +10560%
Google Pixel XL 2016
977 Points ∼48% +9670%
ZTE Axon 7
963 Points ∼47% +9530%
UMI Super Euro Edition
771 Points ∼38% +7610%
Honor 5C
707 Points ∼35% +6970%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
702 Points ∼35% +6920%
Acer Liquid Z630S
627 Points ∼31% +6170%
Leagoo Shark 1
611 Points ∼30% +6010%
Coolpad Modena 2
565 Points ∼28% +5550%
UMI Max
10 Points ∼0% 0%
UMI Plus
10 Points ∼0%
Graphics
Google Pixel XL 2016
5017 Points ∼17% +653%
Sony Xperia XZ
4716 Points ∼16% +608%
ZTE Axon 7
4631 Points ∼16% +595%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
1019 Points ∼4% +53%
Honor 5C
814 Points ∼3% +22%
UMI Super Euro Edition
666 Points ∼2% 0%
UMI Max
666 Points ∼2% 0%
UMI Plus
666 Points ∼2%
Leagoo Shark 1
418 Points ∼1% -37%
Acer Liquid Z630S
416 Points ∼1% -38%
Coolpad Modena 2
178 Points ∼1% -73%
Memory
Google Pixel XL 2016
1677 Points ∼22% +69%
Honor 5C
1504 Points ∼20% +52%
ZTE Axon 7
1489 Points ∼20% +50%
Sony Xperia XZ
1434 Points ∼19% +45%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1052 Points ∼14% +6%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
1042 Points ∼14% +5%
UMI Max
998 Points ∼13% +1%
UMI Plus
992 Points ∼13%
Coolpad Modena 2
598 Points ∼8% -40%
Acer Liquid Z630S
540 Points ∼7% -46%
Leagoo Shark 1
515 Points ∼7% -48%
System
Google Pixel XL 2016
3889 Points ∼24% +83%
ZTE Axon 7
3307 Points ∼20% +56%
Sony Xperia XZ
3047 Points ∼19% +44%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
2923 Points ∼18% +38%
Honor 5C
2600 Points ∼16% +23%
UMI Super Euro Edition
2187 Points ∼13% +3%
UMI Max
2123 Points ∼13% 0%
UMI Plus
2120 Points ∼13%
Acer Liquid Z630S
1614 Points ∼10% -24%
Leagoo Shark 1
1195 Points ∼7% -44%
Coolpad Modena 2
909 Points ∼6% -57%
Overall
Google Pixel XL 2016
2378 Points ∼28% +597%
ZTE Axon 7
2165 Points ∼26% +535%
Sony Xperia XZ
2165 Points ∼26% +535%
Honor 5C
1225 Points ∼14% +259%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
1215 Points ∼14% +256%
UMI Super Euro Edition
1043 Points ∼12% +206%
Acer Liquid Z630S
691 Points ∼8% +103%
Leagoo Shark 1
597 Points ∼7% +75%
Coolpad Modena 2
483 Points ∼6% +42%
UMI Max
341 Points ∼4% 0%
UMI Plus
341 Points ∼4%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Google Pixel XL 2016
55.4 Points ∼16% +113%
Sony Xperia XZ
54.201 Points ∼15% +108%
ZTE Axon 7
44.754 Points ∼13% +72%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
31.118 Points ∼9% +19%
Honor 5C
27.934 Points ∼8% +7%
UMI Super Euro Edition
26.211 Points ∼7% +1%
UMI Plus
26.054 Points ∼7%
UMI Max
25.502 Points ∼7% -2%
Acer Liquid Z630S
19.028 Points ∼5% -27%
Leagoo Shark 1
17.242 Points ∼5% -34%
Coolpad Modena 2
13.15 Points ∼4% -50%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Coolpad Modena 2
19647.2 ms * ∼33% -90%
Leagoo Shark 1
14787.9 ms * ∼25% -43%
Acer Liquid Z630S
12876 ms * ∼22% -24%
UMI Plus
10342.7 ms * ∼17%
UMI Max
9795.6 ms * ∼16% +5%
UMI Super Euro Edition
9410.2 ms * ∼16% +9%
Honor 5C
9111.2 ms * ∼15% +12%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
8041.4 ms * ∼14% +22%
ZTE Axon 7
3096.5 ms * ∼5% +70%
Sony Xperia XZ
2768 ms * ∼5% +73%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2653.6 ms * ∼4% +74%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Sony Xperia XZ
9069 Points ∼17% +133%
Google Pixel XL 2016
8690 Points ∼17% +124%
ZTE Axon 7
8062 Points ∼15% +107%
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
4905 Points ∼9% +26%
UMI Max
4231 Points ∼8% +9%
Honor 5C
4188 Points ∼8% +8%
UMI Super Euro Edition
4117 Points ∼8% +6%
UMI Plus
3887 Points ∼7%
Leagoo Shark 1
2992 Points ∼6% -23%
Acer Liquid Z630S
2855 Points ∼5% -27%
Coolpad Modena 2
1975 Points ∼4% -49%

Legend

 
UMI Plus Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2,
 
UMI Max Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
ZTE Axon 7 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL Qualcomm Snapdragon 625, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Coolpad Modena 2 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Acer Liquid Z630S Mediatek MT6753, ARM Mali-T720 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Leagoo Shark 1 Mediatek MT6753, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
UMI Super Euro Edition Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Honor 5C HiSilicon Kirin 650, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Google Pixel XL 2016 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

* ... smaller is better

Games

3D titles including Asphalt 8 and N.O.V.A. 3 play without any major issues on the UMI Plus. Raw graphics performance from the integrated Mali-T860 MP2 is about 6x to 7x slower than the new Qualcomm Adreno 530 as found on the Google Pixel XL and the ZTE Axon 7 according to 3DMark Sling Shot. This puts the UMI Plus in the same ballpark as the mainstream Adreno 506 as found on the ZenFone 3 ZE552KL and ZTE Axon 7 Max.

Asphalt 8
Asphalt 8
N.O.V.A. 3
N.O.V.A. 3

Emissions

Temperature

Surface temperatures are warmer on the top half compared to the bottom as is common on many smartphones due to the positioning of the internal battery. As a result, the phone will feel very warm when held up to the ear after a gaming or browsing session. We were able to record a surface temperature of over 46 C at its worst when under extreme loads with the front of the device being noticeably warmer than the back. Our UMI Plus also runs warmer than our UMI Max, which correlates to our higher power demands of the Plus as shown in our Power Consumption section below.

Maximum load (front)
Maximum load (front)
Maximum load (back)
Maximum load (back)
Max. Load
 44.8 °C
113 F
36.6 °C
98 F
34.8 °C
95 F
 
 46.4 °C
116 F
36.6 °C
98 F
34.6 °C
94 F
 
 42.8 °C
109 F
36.8 °C
98 F
34.6 °C
94 F
 
Maximum: 46.4 °C = 116 F
Average: 38.7 °C = 102 F
33.2 °C
92 F
34.4 °C
94 F
36.8 °C
98 F
33.6 °C
92 F
34.8 °C
95 F
35.4 °C
96 F
33.2 °C
92 F
34.2 °C
94 F
35.4 °C
96 F
Maximum: 36.8 °C = 98 F
Average: 34.6 °C = 94 F
Room Temperature 23 °C = 73 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.7 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46.4 °C / 116 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 36.8 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speakers

UMI advertises "clean and powerful" Hi-Fi audio from the integrated speakerphone. In reality, however, sound quality is poor and extremely narrow in range as shown by our microphone measurements below. Music playback is very high-pitched and unnatural since bass frequencies are poorly reproduced and is almost non-existent. The pricier Phab 2 Pro, for example, outputs a wider frequency range down to the 250 Hz range in a direct comparison.

UMI Plus (Red: Background, Pink: Pink noise)
UMI Plus (Red: Background, Pink: Pink noise)
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro (Red: Background, Pink: Pink noise)
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro (Red: Background, Pink: Pink noise)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.634.32534.834.83133.731.24033.931.95033.3326331.333.28032.234.410029.729.712530.629.716027.431.520026.829.92502629.631524.833.240023.940.550023.446.763022.752.880022.459.4100022.664.212502267.9160021.766.5200021.567.1250021.272.9315021.173.9400020.977.3500020.978.863002172.680002162.61000021.2581250021521600021.243.3SPL3484.4N2.249.2median 22median 58Delta1.813.935.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseUMI PlusApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
UMI Plus audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.35 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.4% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (12.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (41.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 99% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency Comparison (Checkbox selectable!)
Graph 1: Pink Noise 100% Vol.; Graph 2: Audio off

Energy Management

Power Consumption

The UMI Plus appears to be more demanding than the UMI Max even after double-checking our measurements. Idling on the Home screen will draw about 2 to 3 Watts while running StabilityTest Classic will demand almost 8 Watts. Running the more demanding StabilityTest CPU+GPU benchmark will throttle the performance of the Plus down to almost 5 Watts.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.36 / 0.64 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 2.6 / 3.2 / 3.3 Watt
Load midlight 7.7 / 4.8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
UMI Plus
Helio P10 MT6755, Mali-T860 MP2, , LTPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
UMI Max
Helio P10 MT6755, Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Sony Xperia XZ
820 MSM8996, Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
ZTE Axon 7
820 MSM8996, Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash, AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
625, Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Power Consumption
53%
-19%
25%
36%
Idle Minimum *
2.6
1.02
61%
1.76
32%
0.64
75%
0.83
68%
Idle Average *
3.2
1.53
52%
3.6
-13%
0.84
74%
2.11
34%
Idle Maximum *
3.3
1.62
51%
4.06
-23%
0.87
74%
2.12
36%
Load Average *
7.7
2.91
62%
7
9%
6.02
22%
3.41
56%
Load Maximum *
4.8
2.93
39%
9.52
-98%
10.45
-118%
5.46
-14%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Like on the UMI Max, users can expect over 9 hours of constant WLAN use on a brightness level setting of about 40 percent (150 nits). High loads on maximum display brightness will last for just under 5 hours.

The supplied wall charger outputs at up to 1.67 A whereas off-the-shelf fast-charging chargers can output higher at 2 A or 3 A.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
21h 59min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 21min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 52min
UMI Plus
Helio P10 MT6755, Mali-T860 MP2,  Wh
UMI Max
Helio P10 MT6755, Mali-T860 MP2,  Wh
Sony Xperia XZ
820 MSM8996, Adreno 530, 11 Wh
ZTE Axon 7
820 MSM8996, Adreno 530,  Wh
Asus Zenfone 3 ZE552KL
625, Adreno 506,  Wh
Battery Runtime
5%
-24%
-4%
26%
Reader / Idle
1319
1125
-15%
1735
32%
1502
14%
WiFi v1.3
561
588
5%
438
-22%
411
-27%
797
42%
Load
292
187
-36%
245
-16%
352
21%

Pros

+ dual SIM 4G LTE w/ MicroSD support
+ aluminum chassis w/ Gorilla Glass
+ decent hardware performance
+ relatively accurate colors
+ loud speakerphone
+ USB Type-C port
+ inexpensive

Cons

- poor Home button; no button lighting
- GPS could have been more accurate
- relatively thick for its screen size
- average screen brightness
- average camera quality
- poor quality speakers
- no 802.11ac wireless
- no USB 3.0 speeds
- no NFC

Verdict

In review: UMI Plus. Test model provided by Coolicool.com
In review: UMI Plus. Test model provided by Coolicool.com

UMI has created a solid smartphone with impressive specifications for under $200 USD. It performs as smoothly as one would expect from a costlier mainstream smartphone without cutting popular features like the fingerprint reader, MicroSD card, or even the USB Type-C port. Wrap everything into a relatively sturdy design and you have a smartphone that's hard to beat for the price.

Like most budget devices, however, the devil is in the details. Its dimensions are large even for a 5.5-inch smartphone and its rear camera quality is more representative of the budget category. Speakerphone quality is poor and all of its buttons could have benefited from stronger feedback when pressed. Call reception is also a mixed bag in our particular test area and 4G may not be available for North American users. The vibrate setting is weak and its GPS is only average in terms of accuracy.

If the list of drawbacks aren't a concern for day-to-day use, then owners should be satisfied with the core hardware performance and general quality of the UMI Plus.

UMI Plus - 11/27/2016 v5.1(old)
Allen Ngo

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
66 / 75 → 88%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
44 / 60 → 74%
Weight
88%
Battery
92%
Display
82%
Games Performance
28 / 63 → 44%
Application Performance
38 / 70 → 55%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
54 / 91 → 59%
Camera
58%
Average
70%
81%
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 > UMI Plus Smartphone Review
Allen Ngo, 2016-11-27 (Update: 2019-04-13)
Allen Ngo
Allen Ngo - US Editor in Chief
After graduating with a B.S. in environmental hydrodynamics from the University of California, I studied reactor physics to become licensed by the U.S. NRC to operate nuclear reactors. There's a striking level of appreciation you gain for everyday consumer electronics after working with modern nuclear reactivity systems astonishingly powered by computers from the 80s. When I'm not managing day-to-day activities and US review articles on Notebookcheck, you can catch me following the eSports scene and the latest gaming news.