Ulefone Armor 6 Smartphone Review
The Ulefone Armor series is designed to withstand the stresses and knocks associated with being used in challenging conditions, like construction sites, where other smartphones would fail. Therefore, it is unsurprising that the Chinese manufacturer’s latest outdoor device has a robust-looking case that is IP68, IP69K and MIL-STD-810G certified against drops, dust and water. Ulefone has included numerous outdoor software solutions too and a UV detector, the latter of which can tell you how strong the UV rays around you are.
The Armor 6 has a 6.2-inch IPS screen that operates natively at 1080p, which is powered a MediaTek Helio P60 SoC and 6 GB of RAM. There is also 128 GB of internal storage and support for up to 128-GB microSD cards should you need more space.
We have chosen to compare the Armor 6 against other midrange outdoor smartphones. Our comparison devices include the CAT S31, Oukitel WP2, Poptel P9000 Max, Poptel P60 and the Ulefone Armor X. We will also consider the Armor 6 against the Xiaomi Pocophone F1 and the Honor 8X, which are comparably priced at around 300 Euros (~$342). Please keep in mind that these devices are traditional smartphones and do not have the same level of protection against the elements as the Armor 6.
Case
The Armor 6 is largely made from plastic and glass. The device is comparatively large at 166 x 83 mm, which gives the display a screen-to-body ratio of around 70%. Ulefone has opted to cover the screen in Corning Gorilla Glass 5, which blends nicely into the device’s metal frame.
The Armor 6 is well made, and UleFone’s choice of materials feels appropriate for a midrange smartphone. The plastic back feels high-quality, but its hardware buttons are rather shaky within the frame. The pressure points could be firmer too.
The outdoor smartphone is structurally stable though thanks to its solid metal frame, which helps to make the Armor 6 weigh a hefty 268 g. The device is IP68, IP69K and MIL-STD-810G certified against drops and the ingress of dust or water. The latter certifies the Armor 6 for use in temperatures from -40 °C to 80 °C (-40 °F to 176 °F) and temporary resistance to solar radiation, acidic liquids, high humidity and low pressure. Please keep in mind that MIL-STD-810G certification means that a device has successfully passed 14 environmental and climatic tests. However, no independent organisation or agency certifies MIL-STD-810 compliance, so take the certification with a pinch of salt. The IP69K certification protects the Armor 6 against up to 80 °C (176 °F) water fired against the device using high-pressure jets.
Connectivity
The Armor 6 has 128 GB of internal storage, of which around 116 GB is available upon first booting the device. You can also expand its storage with up to 128-GB microSD cards. Ulefone states that the Armor 6 also supports the SDXC standard so it should support larger cards too. The device does not support the exFAT file system though, so you are limited to only storing files with a maximum file size of 4 GB on the Armor 6.
Ulefone has equipped the Armor 6 with a USB Type-C port that operates at the USB 2.0 standard. The device also supports USB On-The-Go (OTG) for connecting peripherals like keyboards or USB sticks via the Type-C port. The Armor 6 supports Miracast too, which worked well during our tests.
Moreover, the Armor 6 supports dual nano-SIMs and wireless charging. There is an LED notification light too along with a fingerprint sensor, a UV sensor, and an FM radio.
Software
The Armor 6 ships with Android 8.1 Oreo at the time of writing. Ulefone has not declared whether it plans to update the device to Android 9 Pie or beyond though. Our test device had November 2018 Android security patches installed at the time of testing, which were only two months old as of January 2019.
Ulefone keeps the OS relatively unchanged from vanilla Android except for a few custom icons and apps. There is also a toolbox app that includes features that may prove useful when using the Armor 6 outdoors like an altimeter, a compass, a magnifier, and a spirit level.
Communication & GPS
The Armor 6 supports modern Wi-Fi standards up to IEEE 802.11ac and can connect to either 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi networks. Our test unit maintained decent signal range and stability during our tests with an attenuation of around -33 dBm when next to our Telekom Speedport, W921V router. The Armor 6 also scored comparatively well in iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests conducted using our Linksys EA8500 reference router. Our test device averaged above 300 Mb/s in both Wi-Fi tests, which is over 100 Mb/s faster than the Honor 8X and three times more than our fastest outdoor comparison device.
The rugged smartphone also supports Bluetooth 4.2 and NFC for near-field communication. Hence, the device should work with all Bluetooth headphones or speakers and NFC services like Google Pay.
The Armor 6 supports 16 LTE bands and operates at LTE Cat.7 for up to 300 Mb/s download speeds. The device has a hybrid slot for its second nano SIM and its microSD card, which means that you must choose either dual-SIM functionality or microSD card expansion.
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Oukitel WP2 | |
| Poptel P9000 Max | |
| Poptel P60 | |
| CAT S31 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Oukitel WP2 | |
| Poptel P9000 Max | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Poptel P60 | |
The Armor 6 uses BeiDou, GPS and GLONASS for location services. Our test device reliably finds a satellite fix with up to three metres accuracy outdoors, which drops to four metres when we tested it indoors. The Armor 6 typically took a few seconds before finding a sat fix.
We also took our test unit on a bike ride to give you a better overview of its GPS capabilities and compared its results against a Garmin Edge 500. The Armor 6 deviated by 90 metres from the Garmin over our 9.5 km bike ride, which represents a 99% GPS accuracy. Our test device even occasionally plotted a more natural route than the Garmin too, as demonstrated by the screenshots below. Overall, the Armor 6 should be accurate enough for all daily navigation and GPS tasks.
Telephone Features & Call Quality
The Armor 6 supports dual-voice over LTE (VoLTE) and Wi-Fi calls (VoWiFi). Both technologies will only work if your carrier has provisioned the Armor 6 on its network though.
Our test unit has decent call quality, and we noticed no dropouts or reception problems during our tests. Both sides of the call are intelligible, and the microphone does a good job at suppressing background noise.
Cameras
The Armor 6 has dual rear-facing cameras and a single front-facing sensor. The main rear-facing camera is a 16 MP Sony sensor with an f/1.8 aperture that supports phase detection autofocus (PDAF). The Armor 6 interpolates its 16 MP sensor to 21 MP and does the same with its 8 MP secondary rear-facing sensor, to create an effective 13 MP resolution instead.
The main rear-facing camera takes decent pictures in good light conditions with strong dynamics and a convincing level of detail. The colours are too saturated for our liking though, and objects generally look over sharpened.
The secondary lens supports the 16 MP camera in creating bokeh-effect photos, the success of which we have demonstrated below. The blurring effects are not as good as those that flagship smartphones can create, but the Armor 6 at least uses its two rear-facing sensors to create bokeh effects, unlike many other outdoor smartphones. The Poptel P60, for example, does not use its secondary lens at all, and instead uses software to create its portrait mode effects.
Ulefone has also equipped the Armor 6 with a dual-LED flash to improve the quality of photos in low-light conditions. Unfortunately, this and the comparatively wide aperture cannot prevent our test device from taking disappointing photos in low light. Objects are underexposed and lack details, while the whole picture is dominated by image noise as demonstrated in Scene 2 below. The Armor 6 does not blow out the candle though, which is its only saving grace in this regard.
The 8 MP front-facing camera also has an f/1.8 aperture, according to Ulefone. The device also interpolates this sensor to 13 MP. The resulting photos are on par with what we have come to expect from a midrange smartphone, and they capture objects well but with few details. The front-facing sensor can also record videos in up to 720p at 30 FPS. By contrast, the main rear-facing camera can record videos in up to 1080p, but also still at 30 FPS.
Accessories & Warranty
The Armor 6 comes with an 18 W charger, a USB cable and an OTG adapter. Ulefone has omitted a headphone jack on the device, but it has included a Type-C adapter into which you can plug traditional headphones. There is a screen protector in the box too.
Ulefone provides the Armor 6 with 12 months manufacturer’s warranty. However, we suspect that this would require you to return the device to China in the event of a warranty claim. Hence, we would recommend buying the device from a reputable third-party supplier that provides its own warranty. Please see our Guarantees, Return policies and Warranties article for country-specific information.
Input Devices & Operation
Navigating the device is primarily done with the standard three on-screen button array that has become common for Android smartphones. The touchscreen responded accurately and promptly throughout our tests too.
The Armor 6 has a fingerprint sensor on its back case, which rarely recognises our registered fingerprints. Our test unit usually only authenticates our fingerprints around 50% of the time and results in us regularly repositioning our fingers before the device will unlock. Moreover, the device takes a while to wake up once it has recognised our fingers, which adds to the frustration of using the fingerprint sensor. The sensor also supports gestures like hanging up or answering a call, should you find functionality convenient.
Ulefone also markets the Armor 6 as supporting “Face Unlock”, which worked better than the fingerprint sensor during our tests. However, this is merely using a 2D capture of your face like every modern Android smartphone can and is not 3D facial recognition that we have seen with Apple’s Face ID. The unlocking process is also a bit tedious, and you cannot use your face for biometric authentication in apps, so its utility is somewhat limited.
Display
The Armor 6 has a 6.2-inch display that operates natively at 1080p with an 18.7:9 aspect ratio. The IPS panel has a pixel density of around 400 PPI, which is sufficiently sharp for a midrange outdoor smartphone.
Our test unit achieved an average maximum luminosity of 413 cd/m², according to X-Rite i1Pro 2, which puts the Armor 6 towards the bottom of our comparison table. The maximum brightness also drops to just 316 cd/m² in the more practical APL50 test, which is considerably dimmer than what the Armor X and CAT S31 achieved in the same tests. Overall, the Armor 6 has a disappointingly dark display for an outdoor smartphone that costs around 300 Euros (~$342).
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 418 cd/m²
Contrast: 2090:1 (Black: 0.2 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.86
ΔE Greyscale 3.3 | 0.09-98 Ø5.1
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.24
| Ulefone Armor 6 IPS LCD, 2246x1080, 6.2" | Poptel P60 LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 5.7" | Poptel P9000 Max LCD IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5" | Ulefone Armor X IPS, 1440x720, 5.5" | Oukitel WP2 IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | CAT S31 IPS, 1280x720, 4.7" | Honor 8X LCD IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5" | Xiaomi Poco F1 IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -42% | -57% | -21% | -60% | -10% | -56% | -11% | |
| Brightness middle | 418 | 401 -4% | 406 -3% | 564 35% | 472 13% | 784 88% | 484 16% | 489 17% |
| Brightness | 413 | 387 -6% | 397 -4% | 541 31% | 456 10% | 750 82% | 469 14% | 486 18% |
| Brightness Distribution | 91 | 92 1% | 90 -1% | 91 0% | 86 -5% | 92 1% | 93 2% | 93 2% |
| Black Level * | 0.2 | 0.14 30% | 0.38 -90% | 0.37 -85% | 0.32 -60% | 0.45 -125% | 0.55 -175% | 0.34 -70% |
| Contrast | 2090 | 2864 37% | 1068 -49% | 1524 -27% | 1475 -29% | 1742 -17% | 880 -58% | 1438 -31% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.5 | 7.5 -67% | 6.7 -49% | 5.1 -13% | 9.1 -102% | 4.28 5% | 7.3 -62% | 3.8 16% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.8 | 16.1 -137% | 13.8 -103% | 9.6 -41% | 14.8 -118% | 8.75 -29% | 11.1 -63% | 7.1 -4% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.3 | 9.6 -191% | 8.5 -158% | 5.4 -64% | 9.6 -191% | 6.1 -85% | 7.4 -124% | 4.4 -33% |
| Gamma | 2.24 98% | 1.99 111% | 2.21 100% | 2.1 105% | 1.75 126% | 2.49 88% | 2.16 102% | 2.22 99% |
| CCT | 7205 90% | 8242 79% | 8858 73% | 7755 84% | 8713 75% | 7175 91% | 8534 76% | 7213 90% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8439 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
The IPS panel has a comparatively low black value though at 0.2 cd/m², which helps our test unit achieve an impressive 2,090:1 contrast ratio. The APL50 test records the display as having a 0.26 cd/m² black value and a 1219:1 contrast ratio, but the Armor 6 has a vibrant screen regardless of the varying values that benchmarks report.
We also subjected the display to further analysis using a photo spectrometer and CalMAN software. Our test unit achieved comparatively low DeltaE deviations, with its ColorChecker and Grayscale divergence being close to the ideal value of 3. Furthermore, Ulefone has done a good job at calibrating the screen as we recorded it having a colour temperature of 7,205 K, which is marginally above the desired value of 6,500 K. Hence, we did not notice any colour casts on our test device and neither did CalMAN, which is impressive.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 92 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.7 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 53.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 26 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 27.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 90 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.4 ms). | ||
The Armor 6 is generally usable outdoors. Our test device is readable during winter, but you may struggle with its dim display during the summer as it will become overwhelmed by reflections. Hence, we would recommend finding a shady spot where possible if you must use the device outside during the summer months. This limits the Armor 6’s usefulness as an outdoor device though.
The Armor 6 has stable viewing angles thanks to its IPS panel. There are no colour or image distortions even at acute viewing angles, but we did notice a drop in brightness and contrast levels. This should not prevent you from using the device from practically any angle though.
Performance
The Armor 6 is powered by a MediaTek Helio P60 SoC, which the chip maker introduced in early 2018. MediaTek manufactures the Helio P60 on a 12 nm FinFET process and integrates eight CPU cores spread across two clusters, which consist of four Cortex-A73 performance cores and four Cortex-A53 power-saving cores. The Helio P60 also has an AI processing unit onboard that can compute up to 280 Giga-Multiply-Adds per second, according to MediaTek. There is an ARM Mali-G72 MP3 too for graphics processing.
The Ulefone smartphone performed solidly in synthetic benchmarks with the Helio P60 achieving similar scores to the HiSilicon Kirin 710, which powers the Honor 8X. It also markedly outperforms the SoCs in our outdoor comparison devices. However, the Helio P60 cannot compete with the Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 in the Pocophone F1, which is an outlier as to what you can buy for less than 300 Euros or $350.
The Armor 6's Helio P60 combines with 6 GB of RAM to ensure smooth performance with few delays in daily use. We noticed some small jerks and stutters when multitasking, but nothing strikingly so.
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Poptel P60 | |
| Poptel P9000 Max | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Oukitel WP2 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (11 - 20, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (8.9 - 166, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Poptel P60 | |
| Poptel P9000 Max | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (9.6 - 12, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (8.4 - 365, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Poptel P60 | |
| Poptel P9000 Max | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Oukitel WP2 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (119367 - 138589, n=5) | |
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 | |
| Poptel P60 | |
| Ulefone Armor X | |
| Oukitel WP2 | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (91667 - 110668, n=4) | |
Synthetic browser benchmarks confirm our impression that the Armor 6 delivers solid browser performance too. Websites can occasionally take a while to load, but generally content appears quickly, while scrolling remained fluid throughout our tests.
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (41.7 - 48.9, n=6) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71) | |
| Poptel P60 (Chrome 71) | |
| Poptel P9000 Max (Chrome 68) | |
| Ulefone Armor X (Chrome 66) | |
| Oukitel WP2 (Chroome Mobile 70) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=206, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (8287 - 10257, n=7) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71) | |
| Poptel P60 (Chrome 71) | |
| Poptel P9000 Max (Chrome 68) | |
| Ulefone Armor X (Chrome 66) | |
| Oukitel WP2 (Chrome Mobile 70) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Ulefone Armor X (Chrome 66) | |
| Oukitel WP2 (Chrome Mobile 70) | |
| Oukitel WP2 (Chrome Mobile 70) | |
| Poptel P9000 Max (Chrome 68) | |
| Poptel P60 (Chrome 71) | |
| Average Mediatek Helio P60 (4309 - 4773, n=6) | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71) | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=166, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
The speed of the flash memory is average for smartphones priced around 300 Euros or $350. The microSD card is reasonably fast too, averaging 76 MB/s read speeds and 60 MB/s write speeds in our tests with a Toshiba Exceria Pro M401. The microSD card can achieve up to 95 MB/s read speeds and 80 MB/s write speeds, for reference.
| Ulefone Armor 6 | Poptel P60 | Poptel P9000 Max | Ulefone Armor X | Oukitel WP2 | CAT S31 | Honor 8X | Xiaomi Poco F1 | Average 128 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -2% | -26% | -31% | -30% | -41% | 27% | 27% | 33% | 797% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 290.8 | 288.2 -1% | 269.4 -7% | 255.3 -12% | 267.6 -8% | 71.1 -76% | 283.9 -2% | 705 142% | 294 ? 1% | 2054 ? 606% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 188.4 | 188.8 0% | 129.6 -31% | 82.8 -56% | 98.6 -48% | 62.1 -67% | 170 -10% | 155.6 -17% | 195.8 ? 4% | 1667 ? 785% |
| Random Read 4KB | 81.3 | 69.7 -14% | 35.1 -57% | 14.7 -82% | 26.89 -67% | 14.28 -82% | 49.54 -39% | 101 24% | 83.9 ? 3% | 286 ? 252% |
| Random Write 4KB | 19.87 | 15.18 -24% | 11.23 -43% | 10.17 -49% | 13.23 -33% | 14.81 -25% | 59.9 201% | 17.81 -10% | 56.7 ? 185% | 327 ? 1546% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 75.6 ? | 80 ? 6% | 72.9 ? -4% | 81.5 ? 8% | 72.2 ? -4% | 81.8 8% | 75.2 ? -1% | 85.3 ? 13% | 78.1 ? 3% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 60.1 ? | 72.8 ? 21% | 53.2 ? -11% | 62.6 ? 4% | 47.92 ? -20% | 59.5 -1% | 68.1 ? 13% | 65.6 ? 9% | 61.8 ? 3% |
Games
The ARM Mali-G72 MP3 is a midrange GPU that ARM based on the second generation of its Bifrost architecture. The G72 MP3 supports modern graphics APIs like DirectX 12, OpenGL ES 3.2, and Vulkan 1.0, which should futureproof it for at least a few years.
The Armor 6 can handle complex games like PUBG Mobile and Asphalt 9: Legends smoothly if played at the right graphics settings. Our test unit achieved between 25 and 28 FPS at high details, but you will occasionally notice drops in frame rates. Hence, we would recommend dropping graphics to medium or low for a better gaming experience.
We should also stress that both the touchscreen and the sensors worked reliably during our gaming tests and without issue.
Emissions
Temperature
The Armor 6 remains evenly cool at idle and has no hotspots. Predictably, surface temperatures rise when the device is subjected to sustained load, but they only reach 32 °C, which is comparatively cool. In short, the Armor 6 should not get hot even if you push it hard, and it will feel cool in daily use.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 32.5 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.5 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Speakers
The Armor 6 has a mono speaker on its back case that reached a maximum volume of over 88 dB(A) in our tests. The sound is slightly distorted though and tinny, particularly at high volumes. Expectedly, medium and high-pitched tones dominate the speaker’s frequency spectrum. The tonal range is not linearly distributed either, and there are no bass tones. The latter issue is a complaint we have with most smartphones and laptops though.
Ulefone Armor 6 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Poptel P60 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 45.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 9.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 77% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 87% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Battery Life
Power Consumption
The Armor 6 is comparatively energy-efficient and finished in the midfield of our comparison table. The Helio P60 generally consumed more than the Helio P23 that powers the Poptel P60, but it consumed fewer watts on average at idle. No comparison device consumed considerably less than the Armor 6 overall in our power consumption tests either, although our test unit fell around 12% short of the CAT S31, the Poptel P60, and the P9000 Max. The Armor 6 consumed considerably more under load than our outdoor comparison devices too.
| Off / Standby |   0.02 / 0.16 Watt |
| Idle |  0.9 / 2.04 / 2.09 Watt |
| Load |
3.4 / 7.31 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Ulefone Armor 6 5000 mAh | Poptel P60 5000 mAh | Poptel P9000 Max 9000 mAh | Ulefone Armor X 5500 mAh | Oukitel WP2 10214 mAh | CAT S31 4000 mAh | Honor 8X 3750 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | Average Mediatek Helio P60 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 12% | 13% | -12% | -3% | 12% | -8% | -3% | -6% | -18% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.9 | 0.81 10% | 0.92 -2% | 1.22 -36% | 1.14 -27% | 0.73 19% | 0.92 -2% | 0.65 28% | 0.97 ? -8% | 0.872 ? 3% |
| Idle Average * | 2.04 | 2.14 -5% | 1.9 7% | 2.07 -1% | 1.99 2% | 2.21 -8% | 2.3 -13% | 1.97 3% | 2.36 ? -16% | 1.415 ? 31% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.09 | 2.16 -3% | 2.19 -5% | 2.14 -2% | 2.03 3% | 2.25 -8% | 2.32 -11% | 2.01 4% | 2.41 ? -15% | 1.556 ? 26% |
| Load Average * | 3.4 | 3.02 11% | 3.1 9% | 4.92 -45% | 3.72 -9% | 2.99 12% | 4.37 -29% | 4.29 -26% | 3.53 ? -4% | 7.04 ? -107% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.31 | 4.01 45% | 3.12 57% | 5.4 26% | 5.96 18% | 4.12 44% | 6.13 16% | 9.05 -24% | 6.45 ? 12% | 10.6 ? -45% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery Life
The Armor 6 has a 5,000 mAh battery that performed comparatively disappointingly in our Wi-Fi battery life test, during which we set the display to approximately 150 cd/m² and ran a script that simulated the load required to render websites. Our test device lasted for 14:30 hours in this test, which is a good runtime in isolation. However, the CAT S31 and Poptel P60 lasted considerably longer than the Armor 6 despite having the same size or smaller battery capacity.
| Ulefone Armor 6 5000 mAh | Poptel P60 5000 mAh | Poptel P9000 Max 9000 mAh | Ulefone Armor X 5500 mAh | Oukitel WP2 10214 mAh | CAT S31 4000 mAh | Honor 8X 3750 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | ||||||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 874 | 1214 39% | 1346 54% | 845 -3% | 1146 31% | 1074 23% | 852 -3% | 808 -8% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict
The Ulefone Armor 6 is an appealing and well-equipped midrange smartphone. The device offers decent protection against the elements and has long, albeit comparatively unimpressive, battery life. Ulefone has equipped the Armor 6 with a fast Wi-Fi chip too, reasonable cameras, and a high-contrast IPS display. Unfortunately, its low maximum screen brightness somewhat limits its utility as an outdoor smartphone.
The Ulefone Armor 6 is worth considering if you need an outdoor smartphone, but only if the price drops by around 50 Euros (~$57). Until then, there are other rugged devices with brighter displays that will be more suited for regular use outside.
The Helio P60 is largely more powerful than our comparison devices, but it is worth keeping in mind that the Armor 6 is more expensive too. The device also has its drawbacks though. The fingerprint sensor is inaccurate and almost unusable in everyday life.
Overall, the Armor 6 distinguishes itself from its competitors by offering a more powerful and rounded experience. However, the dim display is a misstep, and there are better smartphones for the money if you are not set on buying a rugged device. In short, the Ulefone 6 is one of the best outdoor smartphones on the market, but it is let down by its dark display.
Ulefone Armor 6
- 01/30/2019 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
