Notebookcheck

Ulefone Armor 6E Smartphone Review – Outdoor Phone with Bargain Potential

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Marius S.), 08/17/2019

At home outdoors. The Ulefone Armor 6E is strongly related to the Armor 6 and even the packaging's differences come down to just one sticker. The Armor 6E is cheaper and while it offers less storage space, it also comes with a more modern SoC and better protection against the elements. In this review, we are taking a look at the outdoor smartphone in order to determine if this makes it a bargain.

Ulefone Armor 6E

When we initially reviewed the Ulefone Armor 6, we decided that while it was a good outdoor smartphone, the price was slightly too high. With the Ulefone Armor 6E, the manufacturer now offers a device that addresses this criticism directly: Far cheaper than the Ulefone Armor 6 but with the same case and even a more modern SoC, the MediaTek Helio P70.

It is going to be exciting to see whether the Armor 6E hits a sweet spot with the perfect blend of performance, features, usability and price. The device can be purchased for 260 Euros (~$288) currently, which is a price for which other outdoor devices such as the Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s, RugGear RG655, Cubot King Kong 3 or even a Motorola Moto G7, if outdoor features are not a priority, are available as well.

Ulefone Armor 6E (Armor Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.2 inch 18.7:9, 2246 x 1080 pixel 402 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 57.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: audio output through USB type-C, Card Reader: microSD up to 256GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Sensors: accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, UV sensor, barometer, USB type-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM: B2/3/5/8; UMTS: B1/2/4/5/8; LTE: B1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/17/18/19/20/25/26/28A/28B/34/38/39/40/41/66, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 13.3 x 166 x 83 ( = 0.52 x 6.54 x 3.27 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 25 h, Standby 3G (according to manufacturer): 440 h
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 16 MPix f/​1.8, phase detection AF, dual-LED flash, video @1080p/​30FPS (camera 1); 2.0MP, depth of field (camera 2)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/1.8
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker on the back, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, Charger, USB cable, USB type-C to 3.5 mm adapter, OTG cable, SIM tool, screen protector, trye stick, 12 Months Warranty, IP68/​IP69K certified, MIL STD-810G certified, notification LED, LTE speed: 300 MBit/s download, 150 MBit/s upload, fanless, ruggedized, waterproof
Weight
268 g ( = 9.45 oz / 0.59 pounds), Power Supply: 80 g ( = 2.82 oz / 0.18 pounds)
Price
259 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case – Robust Outdoor Phone

The case is identical to the Armor 6. The used materials match our expectations regarding an outdoor smartphone, at least in this price class: A case made of plastic with a rubberized back, glass on the front and metal reinforcements on the edges for added stability. The case is available in black with either gray or red metal elements.

The smartphone is bulky and the weight, while high at 268 grams (~0.59 lbs), is still lower than that of the smaller Cubot King Kong 3. Since the screen is not very well protected due to being almost level with the outer frame, the included screen protector has its work cut out for itself.

While protection against the elements was already rather impressive on the Ulefone Armor 6, at least on paper, the Armor 6E raises the bar even further, since with the IP-69K norm, it should now withstand a water jet from a pressure washer. Furthermore, there is continued protection against dust and water, and according to the manufacturer the device passed the MIL-STD-810G tests. However, since the exact tests for the certification are chosen by the manufacturer, we have to take a closer look: Ulefone, for example, throws its smartphone in an acid bath with a pH value of 4.17 for two hours, subjects it to direct sunlight for 20 hours with temperatures of up to 50 °C (122 °F) and leaves it on for four hours while under a negative pressure of 57 kPa. According to the manufacturer, the device withstood all of this, making it well-prepared for difficult conditions in day-to-day use.

Ulefone Armor 6E
Ulefone Armor 6E
Ulefone Armor 6E
Ulefone Armor 6E
Ulefone Armor 6E

Size Comparison

166 mm / 6.54 inch 83 mm / 3.27 inch 13.3 mm / 0.524 inch 268 g0.591 lbs166 mm / 6.54 inch 83 mm / 3.27 inch 13.2 mm / 0.52 inch 268 g0.591 lbs162.5 mm / 6.4 inch 78.3 mm / 3.08 inch 13.3 mm / 0.524 inch 280 g0.617 lbs152.5 mm / 6 inch 75.4 mm / 2.97 inch 12.5 mm / 0.4921 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs157 mm / 6.18 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs146.2 mm / 5.76 inch 73.3 mm / 2.89 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs

Connectivity – Less Storage Space

With 64 GB of storage space and 4 GB of RAM, our test device is equipped less well than its more expensive relative, although compared to other smartphones in its price category, the specifications are still decent. The device either supports two SIM cards or one SIM and one microSD card.

Similar to most outdoor smartphones, the features have been expanded with sensors that aside from the standard compass and ambient light sensor for the screen also include a UV sensor and a barometer. These sensors can be used directly with the help of various preinstalled tools.

The USB type-C port on the bottom edge is used to transfer data, charge the device and output audio; a 3.5 mm jack is unfortunately not available. For an outdoor smartphone, the decision to include as few ports as possible makes sense, since they are potential entry points for water or dust.

Software – Outdated Security

Ulefone relies on a relatively pure Android 9 with security patches that, at the time of testing, date back to February 5, 2019 and are thus outdated.

The manufacturer includes a lot of its own apps such as the toolbox, which not only offers a level but also apps for measuring UV and determining the altitude through atmospheric pressure. The apps work well and contain some clever ways to, for example, determine the height of an object. Similar to other apps from the manufacturer however, they are not always translated properly: This ranges from hard-to-understand instructions to English terms in the settings (for German-language devices).

Those who like to watch content from Netflix or other streaming services on their smartphone cannot do so in HD, since the Ulefone Armor 6E lacks the required DRM certification.

Software Ulefone Armor 6E
Software Ulefone Armor 6E
Software Ulefone Armor 6E

Communication and GPS – Slow Wi-Fi 5

While our test device does support Wi-Fi 5, it is unable to compete with the speeds of the Ulefone Armor 6. The RugGear RG655 and Galaxy XCover 4s also reach significantly faster data transfer rates through Wi-Fi. When we measured the throughput using our reference router Linksys EA8500, our test device's results were much closer to the Cubot King Kong 3.

The smartphone supports plenty of LTE frequencies and in fact even a few more than the Ulefone Armor 6. Both smartphones are well-suited to frequent travelers: You should be able to connect to LTE networks in the vast majority of countries. Reception in the German D2 network was solid, the signal strength of the LTE network still remained at no less than one quarter indoors and webpages were loaded relatively quickly.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Ulefone Armor 6
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P60, 128 GB eMMC Flash
344 (min: 219, max: 350) MBit/s ∼100% +486%
RugGear RG655
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
299 (min: 186, max: 330) MBit/s ∼87% +409%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
274 (min: 197, max: 295) MBit/s ∼80% +367%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=423)
224 MBit/s ∼65% +282%
Motorola Moto G7
Adreno 506, 632, 64 GB eMMC Flash
112 (min: 94, max: 118) MBit/s ∼33% +91%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mali-G71 MP2, Helio P23 MT6763T, 64 GB eMMC Flash
63 (min: 56, max: 62) MBit/s ∼18% +7%
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P70, 64 GB eMMC Flash
58.7 (min: 57, max: 60) MBit/s ∼17%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Ulefone Armor 6
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P60, 128 GB eMMC Flash
311 (min: 292, max: 329) MBit/s ∼100% +495%
RugGear RG655
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
274 (min: 254, max: 286) MBit/s ∼88% +424%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
263 (min: 227, max: 296) MBit/s ∼85% +403%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=423)
214 MBit/s ∼69% +309%
Motorola Moto G7
Adreno 506, 632, 64 GB eMMC Flash
112 (min: 107, max: 117) MBit/s ∼36% +114%
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P70, 64 GB eMMC Flash
52.3 (min: 48, max: 56) MBit/s ∼17%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mali-G71 MP2, Helio P23 MT6763T, 64 GB eMMC Flash
50.2 (min: 35, max: 54) MBit/s ∼16% -4%
0102030405060Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø57.8 (56-60)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø52.2 (48-56)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

Our real-world test, a bike ride with our test device and the reference navi Garmin Edge 520, reveals the Ulefone's rather good precision when it comes to recording the traversed route. Looking past small deviations, we can definitely recommend the device for navigation purposes.

Note: Since Runtastic has surprisingly discontinued its web services, we are unfortunately unable to produce standardized screenshots in this test.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Crossroads
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Crossroads
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Overview
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Overview
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Bridge
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Bridge
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Crossroads
GPS Ulefone Armor 6E – Crossroads

Telephony and Call Quality – Good Earpiece

Google's stock app is relied upon for telephony. According to the manufacturer, there is VoLTE support.

The call quality with the integrated earpiece is very good, there are no distortions, and our conversational partner even sounds quite present. Our voice is captured fairly well, and only very quiet voices do not make their way to the other party. In contrast, the speaker sounds rather thin and the microphone has a harder time recording our voice if we do not talk loudly in this scenario.

Cameras – Armor 6E with Decent Image Quality

Picture taken with front camera
Picture taken with front camera

Although compared to the Ulefone Armor 6 the manufacturer has cut a few corners in terms of the cameras, the ramifications are far from extreme: The Ulefone Armor 6E keeps the 16-megapixel camera on the back, and only the interpolation to 21 megapixels has been omitted on the cheaper model and the resolution of the secondary camera, which only comes into play for bokeh effects, has been reduced to 2 megapixels. This dramatically reduces the quality of the effect and we suspect the 2-megapixel lens to be an alibi that allows the manufacturer to list dual-camera in the specs.

We were happy with the dynamic range and details of the Armor 6's main camera relative to its price category and the Armor 6E does well here, too. Colors appear very saturated, which is a matter of personal preference, while bright areas are prone to bloom. Although image detail levels of a high-end smartphone camera are out of reach, the representation is still good for a mid-range device. That said, sharpness quickly disappears in low-light situations and the brightening leaves something to be desired as well.

Videos can be recorded with a maximum resolution of 1080p at 30 FPS, the quality is acceptable, and the transitions between areas with varying brightness levels are handled well by the device; however, distinct steps are perceivable. Lower brightness quickly introduces noticeable image noise.

The front camera has a resolution of 8 megapixels and takes decent pictures relative to the price class.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

We take a closer look at the main camera in our test lab and take pictures under controlled lighting conditions. The test model shows good sharpness levels, although larger areas filled with colors are not captured properly. Colors are generally displayed too faintly.

Test chart photographed
Test chart photographed
Test chart detail
ColorChecker: The bottom half shows the reference color.

Accessories and Warranty – Lots of Accessories

Ulefone includes a lot of accessories. Apart from a quick charger, a USB cable and a SIM needle for opening the SIM tray, there is a screen protector for the display and two adapters: The first one allows for connecting external USB devices via USB-OTG and the second one enables users to connect 3.5 mm audio devices to the USB type-C port. Although Ulefone offers a wireless charging dock separately, it is currently not available.

As for warranty, Ulefone offers a 12-month warranty, although you should make sure to choose a reliable reseller in order to avoid having to go directly through China for warranty claims.

Input Devices & Handling – Snappy Fingerprint Sensor

Ulefone has included numerous possibilities when it comes to input: There are gestures, a one-handed mode and the option to control the camera exclusively with the hardware side buttons for underwater use. However, we did miss an increased touchscreen sensitivity, which would have allowed users to use the touchscreen with gloves, for example.

Using the touchscreen is very reliable, but the tiniest amount of lag can be noticed. Google's Gboard serves as the keyboard app.

The fingerprint sensor on the back is very reliable and unlocks the screen after a short delay. Unlocking the phone with facial data is possible as well.

Keyboard portrait mode
Keyboard portrait mode
Keyboard landscape mode
Keyboard landscape mode

Display – Way too Dim

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

On the Ulefone Armor 6, we already complained about the display, which was way too dim for an outdoor phone - the Armor 6E shows that it is possible to go even lower. Although the Armor 6E does contain an ambient light sensor, unlike, for example, on many Samsung smartphones it does not increase the display's brightness further even in very bright environments. Thus, the maximum brightness is only 366 cd/m², which is insufficient for bright environments.

At 91%, illumination is at least fairly even.

333
cd/m²
352
cd/m²
343
cd/m²
353
cd/m²
357
cd/m²
342
cd/m²
362
cd/m²
364
cd/m²
366
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 366 cd/m² Average: 352.4 cd/m² Minimum: 14.4 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 357 cd/m²
Contrast: 1488:1 (Black: 0.24 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.08 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
135% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.292
Ulefone Armor 6E
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2
RugGear RG655
IPS, 1440x720, 5.5
Motorola Moto G7
IPS, 2270x1080, 6.2
Cubot King Kong 3
IPS, 1440x720, 5.5
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
IPS (PLS), 1280x720, 5
Ulefone Armor 6
IPS LCD, 2246x1080, 6.2
Screen
-19%
-3%
-4%
-10%
25%
Brightness middle
357
593
66%
471
32%
365
2%
525
47%
418
17%
Brightness
352
579
64%
453
29%
379
8%
513
46%
413
17%
Brightness Distribution
91
88
-3%
94
3%
82
-10%
90
-1%
91
0%
Black Level *
0.24
0.46
-92%
0.5
-108%
0.14
42%
0.52
-117%
0.2
17%
Contrast
1488
1289
-13%
942
-37%
2607
75%
1010
-32%
2090
40%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.08
8.9
-46%
5.5
10%
8.03
-32%
6
1%
4.5
26%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.46
19.5
-106%
7.95
16%
16.34
-73%
10.9
-15%
6.8
28%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7
8.5
-21%
5
29%
10.3
-47%
7.8
-11%
3.3
53%
Gamma
2.292 96%
2.89 76%
2.326 95%
2.197 100%
2.53 87%
2.24 98%
CCT
7695 84%
7488 87%
7654 85%
9941 65%
8605 76%
7205 90%

* ... 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 100 Hz ≤ 15 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 100 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 15 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 100 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9394 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The black value, on the other hand, is excellent: Black areas shine with just 0.24 cd/m² and thus indeed appear very dark. While this also boosts the contrast ratio to a decent 1,488:1, the Cubot King Kong 3, which also does not come with the brightest display, handily beats our test device in this category.

Furthermore, our spectrophotometer and CalMAN software reveal a distinct blue tint. Deviations in terms of color stay within reason, and we are used to much worse values from devices such as the RugGear RG655. That being said, the Armor 6 fares even better here as well.

At brightness levels of below 15%, the display exhibits significant PWM flickering, which is why users who are sensitive to it should take a look at the phone before a purchase.

CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN color space
CalMAN color space
CalMAN color space AdobeRGB
CalMAN color space AdobeRGB
CalMAN color space DCI P3
CalMAN color space DCI P3

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15 ms rise
↘ 13 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 60 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21 ms rise
↘ 15 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. » 29 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.8 ms).

We would have liked to see more in terms of brightness for outdoor use, but even with the ambient light sensor, it is limited. Due to this, the device is suitable for cloudy days, while truly bright environments render the screen content indiscernible.

When viewing the display from extreme angles from the side, colors skew towards red, but the image remains very visible.

Outdoor use
Outdoor use
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance – Slightly more Power

With the MediaTek Helio P70, the Ulefone Armor 6E implements a more modern SoC than the Armor 6 with its Helio P60. However, the performance difference is marginal and negligible in practice. The smaller RAM likely also contributes to the results, which is why the SoCs themselves should be very even in terms of performance.

At the same time, this is a lot of performance for the Ulefone Armor 6E relative to its price, since other devices in its price class are often slower.

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8142 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4942 Points ∼61% -39%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6038 Points ∼74% -26%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4960 Points ∼61% -39%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5309 Points ∼65% -35%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
6950 Points ∼85% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (7472 - 8142, n=4)
7760 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=367)
5225 Points ∼64% -36%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
11141 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6679 Points ∼60% -40%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
7187 Points ∼65% -35%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6379 Points ∼57% -43%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6316 Points ∼57% -43%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
9513 Points ∼85% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (9589 - 11288, n=4)
10647 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=538)
5652 Points ∼51% -49%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2355 Points ∼88%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
2105 Points ∼79% -11%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2350 - 2437, n=3)
2381 Points ∼89% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=54)
2680 Points ∼100% +14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1030 Points ∼38%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
477 Points ∼18% -54%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (951 - 1030, n=3)
1001 Points ∼37% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=54)
2699 Points ∼100% +162%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1177 Points ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
576 Points ∼23% -51%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1096 - 1177, n=3)
1149 Points ∼47% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=54)
2460 Points ∼100% +109%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2608 Points ∼97%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
996 Points ∼37% -62%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2206 Points ∼82% -15%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1895 Points ∼71% -27%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1554 Points ∼58% -40%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2675 Points ∼100% +3%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2309 - 2862, n=4)
2602 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4535, n=373)
1938 Points ∼72% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1081 Points ∼64%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
431 Points ∼25% -60%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
467 Points ∼27% -57%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
415 Points ∼24% -62%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
498 Points ∼29% -54%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
881 Points ∼52% -19%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (941 - 1081, n=4)
1021 Points ∼60% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8206, n=373)
1701 Points ∼100% +57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1243 Points ∼78%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
493 Points ∼31% -60%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
566 Points ∼36% -54%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
502 Points ∼32% -60%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
588 Points ∼37% -53%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1037 Points ∼65% -17%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1098 - 1243, n=4)
1180 Points ∼74% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6312, n=374)
1589 Points ∼100% +28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2585 Points ∼93%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
993 Points ∼36% -62%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2201 Points ∼80% -15%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1882 Points ∼68% -27%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1768 Points ∼64% -32%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2765 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2295 - 2843, n=4)
2597 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=401)
1848 Points ∼67% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1580 Points ∼71%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
698 Points ∼31% -56%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
809 Points ∼36% -49%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
643 Points ∼29% -59%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
826 Points ∼37% -48%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1441 Points ∼65% -9%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1427 - 1580, n=4)
1529 Points ∼69% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 14951, n=401)
2227 Points ∼100% +41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1729 Points ∼91%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
747 Points ∼39% -57%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
941 Points ∼49% -46%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
753 Points ∼40% -56%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
937 Points ∼49% -46%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1581 Points ∼83% -9%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1591 - 1729, n=4)
1681 Points ∼88% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 8141, n=401)
1905 Points ∼100% +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2511 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
955 Points ∼38% -62%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2251 Points ∼90% -10%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1768 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1747 Points ∼70% -30%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2478 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2272 - 2646, n=4)
2459 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4320, n=452)
1844 Points ∼73% -27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1093 Points ∼78%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
361 Points ∼26% -67%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
419 Points ∼30% -62%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
395 Points ∼28% -64%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
555 Points ∼40% -49%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
628 Points ∼45% -43%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (884 - 1093, n=4)
1021 Points ∼73% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 6362, n=452)
1404 Points ∼100% +28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1250 Points ∼92%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
419 Points ∼31% -66%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
512 Points ∼38% -59%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
477 Points ∼35% -62%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
654 Points ∼48% -48%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
733 Points ∼54% -41%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1029 - 1250, n=4)
1172 Points ∼86% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 5734, n=453)
1357 Points ∼100% +9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2459 Points ∼98%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
951 Points ∼38% -61%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2273 Points ∼91% -8%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1754 Points ∼70% -29%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1756 Points ∼70% -29%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2511 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2306 - 2624, n=4)
2451 Points ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=494)
1714 Points ∼68% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1253 Points ∼68%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
577 Points ∼31% -54%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
780 Points ∼42% -38%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
616 Points ∼33% -51%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
766 Points ∼42% -39%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
861 Points ∼47% -31%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1253 - 1531, n=4)
1388 Points ∼75% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 10008, n=493)
1844 Points ∼100% +47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1406 Points ∼88%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
632 Points ∼39% -55%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
913 Points ∼57% -35%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
720 Points ∼45% -49%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
876 Points ∼55% -38%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1008 Points ∼63% -28%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1406 - 1655, n=4)
1534 Points ∼96% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7820, n=496)
1603 Points ∼100% +14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
13221 Points ∼60%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
16647 Points ∼75%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
12566 Points ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13610 Points ∼61%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
22137 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (20539 - 20711, n=3)
20625 Points ∼93%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=653)
13917 Points ∼63%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10070 Points ∼49%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
14475 Points ∼70%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
11234 Points ∼55%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13711 Points ∼67%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
18998 Points ∼92%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (17412 - 20403, n=3)
18895 Points ∼92%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 162695, n=651)
20570 Points ∼100%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10633 Points ∼54%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
14907 Points ∼76%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
11505 Points ∼59%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13688 Points ∼70%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
19616 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (18037 - 20433, n=3)
19240 Points ∼98%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 83518, n=651)
17077 Points ∼87%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
34 fps ∼94%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
17 fps ∼47% -50%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
24 fps ∼67% -29%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
23 fps ∼64% -32%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
25 fps ∼69% -26%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
34 fps ∼94% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (34 - 37, n=4)
35.5 fps ∼99% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 251, n=675)
36 fps ∼100% +6%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
34 fps ∼83%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
24 fps ∼59% -29%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
23 fps ∼56% -32%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
36 fps ∼88% +6%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
41 fps ∼100% +21%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
32 fps ∼78% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (29 - 46, n=4)
35.3 fps ∼86% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=684)
27.6 fps ∼67% -19%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
18 fps ∼88%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
9.1 fps ∼44% -49%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
10 fps ∼49% -44%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
11 fps ∼54% -39%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
13 fps ∼63% -28%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
18 fps ∼88% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (18 - 22, n=4)
20.3 fps ∼99% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 132, n=581)
20.5 fps ∼100% +14%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
17 fps ∼63%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
15 fps ∼56% -12%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
9.9 fps ∼37% -42%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
22 fps ∼81% +29%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
27 fps ∼100% +59%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
17 fps ∼63% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (17 - 35, n=4)
22.3 fps ∼83% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=590)
18.9 fps ∼70% +11%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
12 fps ∼71%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
5.9 fps ∼35% -51%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6.9 fps ∼41% -42%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
7.2 fps ∼43% -40%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
8.1 fps ∼48% -32%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
12 fps ∼71% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.9 - 13, n=4)
11.2 fps ∼67% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 88, n=447)
16.8 fps ∼100% +40%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
11 fps ∼58%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10 fps ∼53% -9%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6.5 fps ∼34% -41%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
16 fps ∼84% +45%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
19 fps ∼100% +73%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
11 fps ∼58% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (11 - 25, n=4)
14.8 fps ∼78% +35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=449)
16.2 fps ∼85% +47%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4.7 fps ∼50%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4.2 fps ∼45% -11%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2 fps ∼21% -57%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
3.9 fps ∼42% -17%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.4 fps ∼68% +36%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2.6 fps ∼28% -45%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2.6 - 8.2, n=4)
5 fps ∼53% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 59, n=165)
9.37 fps ∼100% +99%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2.9 fps ∼44%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1.3 fps ∼20% -55%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1.2 fps ∼18% -59%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1.5 fps ∼23% -48%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1.8 fps ∼28% -38%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
4.3 fps ∼66% +48%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2.8 - 3.7, n=4)
3.08 fps ∼47% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 31, n=164)
6.54 fps ∼100% +126%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6.9 fps ∼50%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6.7 fps ∼48% -3%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.6 fps ∼26% -48%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
6.9 fps ∼50% 0%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
10 fps ∼72% +45%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
6.9 fps ∼50% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.9 - 14, n=4)
8.98 fps ∼65% +30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 59, n=169)
13.9 fps ∼100% +101%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.5 fps ∼56%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3.6 fps ∼24% -58%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.9 fps ∼25% -54%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.1 fps ∼27% -52%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5 fps ∼33% -41%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
7.6 fps ∼50% -11%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.1 - 8.5, n=4)
7.7 fps ∼50% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 63, n=169)
15.3 fps ∼100% +80%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
7.6 fps ∼66%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
2.8 fps ∼24% -63%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.9 fps ∼34% -49%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
4.1 fps ∼36% -46%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.3 fps ∼37% -43%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
7 fps ∼61% -8%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (7.6 - 7.9, n=4)
7.73 fps ∼67% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 54, n=372)
11.5 fps ∼100% +51%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
7.1 fps ∼59%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4.9 fps ∼41% -31%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.6 fps ∼30% -49%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
8.5 fps ∼71% +20%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
12 fps ∼100% +69%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
7 fps ∼58% -1%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.2 - 13, n=4)
8.4 fps ∼70% +18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 58, n=376)
10.4 fps ∼87% +46%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
136987 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
74180 Points ∼54% -46%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
108408 Points ∼79% -21%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
91026 Points ∼66% -34%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
102121 Points ∼75% -25%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
131861 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (130058 - 137175, n=4)
134730 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 398720, n=283)
136819 Points ∼100% 0%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1244 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
733 Points ∼59% -41%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1008 Points ∼81% -19%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
753 Points ∼61% -39%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
977 Points ∼79% -21%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1128 Points ∼91% -9%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1076 - 1244, n=4)
1146 Points ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=621)
751 Points ∼60% -40%
Graphics (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1716 Points ∼86%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
744 Points ∼37% -57%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1075 Points ∼54% -37%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
952 Points ∼48% -45%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1113 Points ∼56% -35%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
1486 Points ∼75% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1716 - 1759, n=4)
1746 Points ∼88% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=621)
1986 Points ∼100% +16%
Memory (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2598 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1065 Points ∼41% -59%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1963 Points ∼76% -24%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1252 Points ∼48% -52%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1985 Points ∼76% -24%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2276 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1856 - 2598, n=4)
2230 Points ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=621)
1487 Points ∼57% -43%
System (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3722 Points ∼79%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
2434 Points ∼51% -35%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
4378 Points ∼92% +18%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
2952 Points ∼62% -21%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3507 Points ∼74% -6%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
4736 Points ∼100% +27%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (3722 - 4682, n=4)
4093 Points ∼86% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=621)
2910 Points ∼61% -22%
Overall (sort by value)
Ulefone Armor 6E
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2132 Points ∼100%
RugGear RG655
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1090 Points ∼51% -49%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1747 Points ∼82% -18%
Cubot King Kong 3
Mediatek Helio P23 MT6763T, Mali-G71 MP2, 4096
1276 Points ∼60% -40%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1658 Points ∼78% -22%
Ulefone Armor 6
Mediatek Helio P60, Mali-G72 MP3, 6144
2062 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1959 - 2132, n=4)
2061 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=621)
1460 Points ∼68% -32%

The test device does very well in our browser benchmarks and barely any device is able to compete. Users who browse the web will find that webpages load very quickly and images appear after only a short delay when scrolling.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 108, n=94)
31.9 Points ∼100% +17%
Ulefone Armor 6E (Chrome 76)
27.378 Points ∼86%
Average Mediatek Helio P70 (21.2 - 27.4, n=4)
24 Points ∼75% -12%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
22.457 Points ∼70% -18%
Cubot King Kong 3
15.994 Points ∼50% -42%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 161, n=150)
64.2 Points ∼100% +17%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
58 Points ∼90% +5%
Ulefone Armor 6E (Chrome 76)
55 Points ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
48 Points ∼75% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P70 (35 - 55, n=4)
46.3 Points ∼72% -16%
RugGear RG655 (Chrome 75)
30 Points ∼47% -45%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Ulefone Armor 6E (Chrome 76)
9455 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek Helio P70 (6269 - 9632, n=4)
8437 Points ∼89% -11%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
8351 Points ∼88% -12%
Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71)
8287 Points ∼88% -12%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
7065 Points ∼75% -25%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 43280, n=677)
6450 Points ∼68% -32%
Cubot King Kong 3 (Chrome 73)
4896 Points ∼52% -48%
RugGear RG655
3312 Points ∼35% -65%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
RugGear RG655
12363.9 ms * ∼100% -187%
Cubot King Kong 3 (Chrome 73)
11353 ms * ∼92% -164%
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=702)
10678 ms * ∼86% -148%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75)
5826.7 ms * ∼47% -35%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
4900 ms * ∼40% -14%
Average Mediatek Helio P70 (4198 - 5608, n=4)
4757 ms * ∼38% -11%
Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71)
4416.2 ms * ∼36% -3%
Ulefone Armor 6E (Chrome 76)
4302.1 ms * ∼35%

* ... smaller is better

The Ulefone Armor 6E does not recognize our reference card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501, which is why we had to use another micoSD card from Kingston that, coupled with our test device, only achieved rather slow data transfer speeds.

The internal storage is read from and written to at normal speeds for the phone's price range.

Ulefone Armor 6ERugGear RG655Motorola Moto G7Cubot King Kong 3Samsung Galaxy XCover 4sUlefone Armor 6Average 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
76%
192%
97%
93%
119%
106%
71%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
11.2 (Kingston 32GB)
61.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
450%
66.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
496%
74.31
563%
64.25 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
474%
60.13 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
437%
57.6 (11.2 - 74.7, n=98)
414%
49 (3.4 - 87.1, n=410)
338%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
41.7 (Kingston 32GB)
82.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
98%
86.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
108%
81.15
95%
79.55 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
91%
75.59 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
81%
76.3 (21.1 - 87.2, n=98)
83%
67.2 (8.1 - 96.5, n=410)
61%
Random Write 4KB
15.8
11.68
-26%
75.6
378%
11.21
-29%
10.38
-34%
19.87
26%
24 (3.4 - 88.2, n=112)
52%
21.3 (0.14 - 250, n=730)
35%
Random Read 4KB
43.4
15.99
-63%
69.3
60%
17.21
-60%
59.56
37%
81.33
87%
54.3 (11.4 - 149, n=112)
25%
46.1 (1.59 - 196, n=730)
6%
Sequential Write 256KB
103.3
121.31
17%
216
109%
134.32
30%
85.4
-17%
188.45
82%
171 (40 - 246, n=112)
66%
94.6 (2.99 - 590, n=730)
-8%
Sequential Read 256KB
287.5
233.33
-19%
297
3%
241.01
-16%
298.6
4%
290.76
1%
273 (95.6 - 704, n=112)
-5%
266 (12.1 - 1504, n=730)
-7%

Games – Well Played

Gaming on the Ulefone Armor 6E is definitely possible, and even some more-demanding games such as Asphalt 9 are playable. A round of Angry Birds is no problem either, of course.

The position sensor and touchscreen inputs also work very well.

Angry Birds: Rio
Angry Birds: Rio
Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9

Emissions – It is Getting Hot

Temperature

While the Ulefone Armor 6 barely reached high temperatures at all, we were able to confirm a dramatic increase in temperature on our test device under prolonged loads: At up to 47.9 °C (118.22 °F) the upper back of the phone becomes very hot. The rise in temperature on the front is significant as well, reaching up to 42.4 °C (108.32 °F).

While the warmth can be noticed under low loads or during idle as well, it is not problematic in any way.

Max. Load
 42.4 °C
108 F
37.6 °C
100 F
35.9 °C
97 F
 
 42.3 °C
108 F
37.6 °C
100 F
36.1 °C
97 F
 
 40.6 °C
105 F
37.1 °C
99 F
35.7 °C
96 F
 
Maximum: 42.4 °C = 108 F
Average: 38.4 °C = 101 F
34.7 °C
94 F
38.3 °C
101 F
47.9 °C
118 F
34.7 °C
94 F
38.2 °C
101 F
44.3 °C
112 F
34.8 °C
95 F
38 °C
100 F
43 °C
109 F
Maximum: 47.9 °C = 118 F
Average: 39.3 °C = 103 F
Power Supply (max.)  42.3 °C = 108 F | Room Temperature 21.6 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.4 °C / 101 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 42.4 °C / 108 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 47.9 °C / 118 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speaker

Speaker test pink noise
Speaker test pink noise

As with the Armor 6, the mono speaker has been placed on the back. While it is able to reach a decent volume level if necessary, high tones are exaggerated, creating an unbalanced sound experience that may sound uncomfortable at higher volume levels.

Sound output to external speakers or headphones is possible via Bluetooth or the USB-C port. The included adapter also allows for connecting headphones with a 3.5 mm plug. We experienced no issues with audio output using any of the aforementioned methods and the connection was upheld without issues as well.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2045.3472540.343.83135.635.54040.338.25042.740.66334.332.98027.227.110028.529.712526.329.416024.440.320023.445.425021.451.531520.556.44002060.850019.865.863018.769.180018.469.3100023.567.5125017.467.5160017.470.8200017.576.7250017.578.5315016.972.1400016.969.2500016.974.863001781.780001779.31000017.2691250017.1601600017.154.7SPL70.766.466.430.687.2N24.517.920.51.567.1median 17.5median 67.5Delta2.98.44038.928.132.924.627.523.42135.733.726.127.825.932.5254321.128.41737.216.140.413.546.516.253.714.954.714.759.314.263.914.364.913.366.114.166.513.971.413.679.914.479.914.278.814.776.114.174.814.380.114.578.214.868.115.358.915.452.226.488.30.867.5median 14.5median 64.90.812.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseUlefone Armor 6EUlefone Armor 6
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Ulefone Armor 6E audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 52% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Ulefone Armor 6 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.4% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 11.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% 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
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life – Long-lasting Smartphone

Energy Consumption

The Helio P70 indeed appears to be slightly more energy-efficient than the Helio P60 inside the Armor 6. Additionally, the Armor 6E's consumption values are lower than those of the more expensive Ulefone model by a small margin. All in all, while there are even more economical phones, consumption is reasonable in light of the fairly high performance values.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.6 / 2.5 Watt
Load midlight 3.8 / 6.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Ulefone Armor 6E
5000 mAh
RugGear RG655
4200 mAh
Motorola Moto G7
3000 mAh
Cubot King Kong 3
6000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
2800 mAh
Ulefone Armor 6
5000 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio P70
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
15%
-14%
-14%
21%
-5%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.81
-1%
1.1
-38%
0.9
-13%
0.65
19%
0.9
-13%
Idle Average *
1.6
1.85
-16%
1.8
-13%
1.9
-19%
1.62
-1%
2.04
-28%
Idle Maximum *
2.5
1.87
25%
2.6
-4%
2.4
4%
1.66
34%
2.09
16%
Load Average *
3.8
2.58
32%
4.2
-11%
5.2
-37%
3.03
20%
3.4
11%
Load Maximum *
6.5
4.23
35%
6.8
-5%
6.8
-5%
4.34
33%
7.31
-12%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Armor 6E extracts a few more minutes of battery life from its 5,000 mAh battery, likely due to the more efficient SoC. That said, it is still far behind in comparison with the runtimes of the Cubot King Kong 3, and compared to the significantly lighter Motorola Moto G7, the difference of only 2:20 hours is smaller than expected.

15:42 hours in our Wi-Fi test is an incredibly long time and should give users at least two workdays of intensive use without having to charge the Armor 6E. Speaking of which: It takes the quick charger just over two hours to fully charge the Armor 6E and wireless charging as per Qi standard is possible as well.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 42min
Ulefone Armor 6E
5000 mAh
RugGear RG655
4200 mAh
Motorola Moto G7
3000 mAh
Cubot King Kong 3
6000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
2800 mAh
Ulefone Armor 6
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
0%
-15%
35%
-34%
-7%
Reader / Idle
1548
1199
WiFi v1.3
942
945
0%
798
-15%
1267
35%
619
-34%
874
-7%
Load
219
200
H.264
1019
819
598

Pros

+ lots of performance for the price
+ robust case
+ long battery life
+ plenty of tools and sensors for outdoor use
+ fairly precise GPS

Cons

- heavy
- outdated security patches
- slow Wi-Fi
- dim screen
- becomes very warm under load

Verdict – Cheaper Model may be Worth it

In review: Ulefone Armor 6E.
In review: Ulefone Armor 6E.

If you are considering purchasing the Ulefone Armor 6, it is also worth taking a look at the less expensive Armor 6E: They share the same case, battery capacity and software. The cheaper model even comes with some advantages: It supports a few more LTE bands and the consumption is lower by a small margin for an additional, small edge for the cheaper model in terms of battery life.

On the other hand, users will have to compromise when it comes to storage, and microSD card support appears to be less reliable than on the Armor 6 as well. The significantly slower Wi-Fi is also an annoyance that becomes apparent during daily use. The high emissions constitute another drawback. The differences in terms of performance and camera are negligible, however.

If you are looking for an inexpensive outdoor phone, the Ulefone Armor 6E has a lot of strong sides, but where there is light, there is also dark.

Even setting aside the comparison with its more expensive counterpart, the Ulefone Armor 6E offers a lot of performance relative to its price class and special advantages for outdoor fans with its additional sensors. While in terms of ruggedness, it checks all the boxes on paper, the actual sturdiness of the screen remains in question, since it is not protected by a protruding frame. Those who are also not turned off by the dim screen will be presented with a solid outdoor smartphone.

Ulefone Armor 6E - 08/17/2019 v6(old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
85%
Connectivity
41 / 60 → 69%
Weight
87%
Battery
99%
Display
84%
Games Performance
49 / 63 → 77%
Application Performance
68 / 70 → 97%
Temperature
85%
Noise
100%
Audio
64 / 91 → 70%
Camera
66%
Average
75%
84%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Ulefone Armor 6E Smartphone Review – Outdoor Phone with Bargain Potential
Florian Schmitt, 2019-08-17 (Update: 2019-08-19)