Notebookcheck

Wiko WIM Smartphone Review

Marcus Herbrich, Tanja Hinum (translated by Pascal Kilian), 08/18/2017

French premium class. The time has come for the French manufacturer Wiko to go one step further. Formerly known for producing only rather low-priced handsets, now with the WIM, they are daring to compete on a premium level. We reviewed the smartphone to find out whether they delivered a true competitor.

For the original German review, see here.
During MWC 2017 the French smartphone manufacturer Wiko unveiled their model WIM, a premium smartphone that soon starts shipping to several countries worldwide (including Germany). Unfortunately, word about availability in the US remains scarce as of mid-August.
Wiko decided to expand their smartphone business from entry-level-only into the premium segment. The mid-range handset is furnished with a 5.5-inch 1080p AMOLED display, and a dual-camera setup with 13 MP in a shiny glass case and motorized it with an octa-core SoC by Qualcomm which is backed by 4 GB of RAM. The 64 GB of internal storage can be expanded via microSD card by 128 GB.
With an RRP of 400 Euros (~ $470), the dual-sim smartphone competes against the BQ Aquaris X Pro, Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017), OnePlus 3T, LG G6, and the HTC U Ultra. Xiaomi´s high-end Mi 6 (imported) falls into this price range, as well.


Wiko WIM (WIM Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
5.5 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 401 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, On-Cell, Corning Gorilla Glass 3, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 51.4 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 128 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, USB-OTG, Miracast, Status-LED
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, 4G LTE B1 (2100)/ B2 (1900)/ B3 (1800)/ B5 (850)/ B7 (2600)/ B8 (900)/ B12 (700)/ B17 (700)/ B20 (800)/ B28A (700)/ B38 (2600)/ B40 (2300) H+/3G+/3G WCDMA 850/ 900/ 1900/ 2100 MHz GSM/GPRS/EDGE 850/ 900/ 1800/ 1900 MHz, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 156.2 x 75.3 ( = 0.31 x 6.15 x 2.96 in)
Battery
3200 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 309 h
Operating System
Android 7.1 Nougat
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix Dual-camera, f/2.0 Dual LED flash, 4x digital zoom
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix selfie flash
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Virtual, Keyboard Light: yes, Power adaptor, headset, micro USB cable, short instruction manual, Wiko OS, 24 Months Warranty, SAR-Value: 1.49W/​kg (head), 1.25W/​kg (body), fanless
Weight
160 g ( = 5.64 oz / 0.35 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
400 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The customer can choose whether they want this device of 160 g (~ 5.64 oz) in the colors black, gold, or green (‘deep bleen’). The front is fully protected with scratch-resistant 2.5-D Corning Gorilla Glass 3 that seamlessly transitions into the rounded metal frame. The AMOLED display has very thin bezels to the left and right sides, however the bottom and top appear rather thick resulting in a screen-to-body ratio of 70.8 %.

The case has a good surface feel to it, lies well-balanced in your hands and its rigid built does not creak or submit to bending. Only the metal frame and the camera ring on the back might feel a little to sharp-edged.

Given its price tag, the power and volume control buttons are unconvincing. They are fit too loosely into the case and wobble slightly during usage. The pressure points are well-defined, though.

Size comparison

162.4 mm / 6.39 inch 79.9 mm / 3.15 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 170 g0.3748 lbs156.2 mm / 6.15 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 160 g0.3527 lbs152.7 mm / 6.01 inch 74.7 mm / 2.94 inch 7.35 mm / 0.2894 inch 158 g0.3483 lbs148.9 mm / 5.86 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs146.5 mm / 5.77 inch 72.7 mm / 2.86 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 158 g0.3483 lbs146.1 mm / 5.75 inch 71.4 mm / 2.81 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 159 g0.3505 lbs145.2 mm / 5.72 inch 70.5 mm / 2.78 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs

Equipment

The Wiko WIM is equipped with 64 GB of internal eMMC storage out of which 51.4 GB can be used. The difference is occupied by the OS and pre-installed apps. If this isn´t already enough for some users, the storage capacity can be expanded by another 128 GB via a microSD card. After the card is inserted and formatted, it can be used as internal storage.

The 3,200 mAh-sized battery of the Wiko WIM is charged through the microUSB port on the bottom of the device. Wiko does not yet utilize the convenient new Type-C standard for the microUSB port, which would make life for their users a tiny bit easier as they wouldn´t have to fiddle with the right orientation of the plug. It does, however, support Qualcomm´s Quickcharge 3.0 and external peripherals (e.g. USB flash drives) via USB-OTG.

The device is further equipped with a fingerprint reader, dual-sim capability, Wifi Direct, VHF radio, a compass, and a status LED. Wireless transfer of media content via Miracast is supported, which performed very well in our test setup with a Sony Android TV.

Software

The smartphone comes with Android 7.1 Nougat with the latest security patch as of August 2017. The UI strongly resembles stock Android, but has a few changes here and there.

Alongside some visual changes, Wiko pre-installed several helpful software features. With the screen-off gestures, users can start applications simply by drawing basic commands on the turned-off screen in stand-by mode. Drawing an ‘M’ on the screen would e.g. open the music app. The ‘double-tap-to-wake’-feature as well as muting the device by turning the phone around can be activated by the user in the settings.

Communication and GPS

The integrated Wi-Fi module of the Wiko WIM is capable of IEEE-802.11 a/b/g/n/ac at 2.4 and 5 GHz. Wi-Fi reception is strong and stable. We measured an attenuation of -35 dBm in immediate proximity to our Telekom Speedport W921V router.

Our measured Wi-Fi transfer speeds of 351 Mbit/s (iperf server) and 276 Mbit/s (iperf client) between the WIM and our Linksys EA8500 reference router are very good for its price segment.

On-the-go, the Wiko WIM´s LTE module reaches download speeds of up to 300 Mbit/s (LTE-Cat.6 speed) for both nanoSIM slots simultaneously. For wireless communication between two mobile devices, the WIM offers Bluetooth 4.2. and NFC.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 6
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
574 MBit/s ∼100% +64%
Wiko WIM
Adreno 506, 626, 64 GB eMMC Flash
351 MBit/s ∼61%
LG G6
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
325 MBit/s ∼57% -7%
OnePlus 3T
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
257 MBit/s ∼45% -27%
HTC U Ultra
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB eMMC Flash
247 MBit/s ∼43% -30%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
Adreno 506, 626, 64 GB eMMC Flash
242 MBit/s ∼42% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Mali-T830 MP3, 7880, 32 GB eMMC Flash
214 MBit/s ∼37% -39%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 6
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
500 MBit/s ∼100% +81%
OnePlus 3T
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
313 MBit/s ∼63% +13%
Wiko WIM
Adreno 506, 626, 64 GB eMMC Flash
276 MBit/s ∼55%
HTC U Ultra
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB eMMC Flash
259 MBit/s ∼52% -6%
LG G6
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
220 MBit/s ∼44% -20%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Mali-T830 MP3, 7880, 32 GB eMMC Flash
167 MBit/s ∼33% -39%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
Adreno 506, 626, 64 GB eMMC Flash
148 MBit/s ∼30% -46%
GPS test outdoors
GPS test indoors

Global positioning is achieved by GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou and Galileo. Outdoors, the phone gets rapid fixes on the satellites with a precision of 5 meters (16.4 ft). Indoors, the link is established, but with very low precision.

To determine its geolocation precision in a real-world scenario, we compared the WIM to a Garmin Edge 500 bicycle GPS tracker. A difference of only 60 meters (~65 yards) on a total distance of 6.5 km (~ 4 miles) between the two can be measured – this is very good.

GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Wiko WIM
GPS Wiko WIM
GPS Wiko WIM

Telephony and call quality

Dialer app

Comprehensibility in our test calls (Vodafone cellular network) is very good, although the maximum volume of the ear piece could be louder.

Voice playback is very natural and the quality of the microphone in the WIM was described as good.

Cameras

The rear-facing main shooter in the WIM is a dual-camera setup (RGB, monochromatic) with a resolution of 13 MP and an f/2.0 aperture. The monochromatic sensor supports its RGB buddy by enhancing details and sharpening of the image in bright and dim lighting conditions through its higher light sensitivity. Shooting only monochromatic images is possible. The rear cameras are based on 1/3 inch Sony IMX258 sensors with a pixel size of 1.12 x 1.12 µm. 4K video can be recorded at 30 fps.

Image quality is indeed good, although dynamic range and sharpness could be quite a bit better. The phase detection does not yield perfect sharpness in autofocus mode for subjects in close proximity or for macro images. For enthusiasts, the manual focus in pro mode offers significantly better results.

In bad lighting conditions, the images are very noisy with low maximum brightness as can be expected given the image sensor´s small pixel size and comparably small open aperture. The LG G6 with its IMX258-CMOS sensor performs significantly better.

The 16 MP front-facing secondary camera is a good tool for group photos and selfies for social media, but nothing more. It can record 1080p videos at 30 fps.


13 MP main camera, auto mode
dual-camera mode
monochromatic mode
front-facing camera

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

Accessories and warranty

Optional case: WiView

Alongside the obligatory accessories, such as the modular power adaptor (1.5 A, 12V), a USB cable, a headset, and warranty information, users can opt for a phone case by Wiko called the WiView for their Wiko WIM.

In Germany, the WIM comes with a standard 2-year guarantee, but only a 6-month warranty for accessories. The warranty remains untouched by this policy.

Input devices and handling

Google´s virtual keyboard comes pre-installed. The capacitive touchscreen of the WIM provides great gliding capabilities and executes inputs very quickly.

The active fingerprint sensor on the front of the phone is integrated into the physical home button. It is not among the quickest ones on the market, but using your finger to unlock the phone works reliably.

The phone can either be controlled via virtual on-screen buttons for ‘back’, ‘recent apps’, and ‘home’ or via the physical, capacitive home button. This multi-functional button does not only recognize fingerprints but can also be used to input the ‘back’-command (short touch on the button), the ‘recent apps’-command (long push-through of the button), or the ‘home’-command (short push-through of the button).

virutal ...
... keyboard

Display

Sub pixel layout

The WIKO WIM has a 5.5-inch 1080p AMOLED screen with a 16:9 aspect ratio. The pixel density of 401 ppi may not be as high as it is in the LG G6 with its QHD resolution, but it is sufficient for daily use.

The maximum brightness of the screen of 372 cd/m² can only be achieved in manual mode. With the ambient light sensor turned on, the brightness reached only up to a maximum of 350 cd/m² in the centre of the screen. During the more realistic APL50 test, in which a homogenous distribution of light and dark areas on the screen is simulated, we could measure a brightness of up to 376 cd/m². The low minimum brightness of 65 cd/m² is striking. We could not observe screen flickering (PWM) on the Wiko WIM.

354
cd/m²
341
cd/m²
336
cd/m²
364
cd/m²
344
cd/m²
345
cd/m²
372
cd/m²
363
cd/m²
356
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 372 cd/m² Average: 352.8 cd/m² Minimum: 64.5 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 344 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.7 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 5.1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
99.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.73
Wiko WIM
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
BQ Aquaris X Pro
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
HTC U Ultra
SLCD 5, 2560x1440, 5.7
LG G6
IPS LCD, 2880x1440, 5.7
Xiaomi Mi 6
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.15
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2
OnePlus 3T
Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
Screen
-14%
3%
33%
31%
56%
-8%
Brightness middle
344
458
33%
470
37%
646
88%
620
80%
539
57%
421
22%
Brightness
353
473
34%
445
26%
611
73%
586
66%
542
54%
430
22%
Brightness Distribution
90
88
-2%
88
-2%
89
-1%
89
-1%
93
3%
84
-7%
Black Level *
0.51
0.22
0.23
0.28
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.7
7.1
-25%
5.5
4%
4.5
21%
4.8
16%
1.6
72%
7.1
-25%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
12.2
14.5
-19%
11.9
2%
8.3
32%
8.8
28%
2.6
79%
15.3
-25%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.1
10.5
-106%
7.6
-49%
6
-18%
5.3
-4%
1.5
71%
6.8
-33%
Gamma
2.73 81%
2.28 96%
2.2 100%
2.27 97%
2.25 98%
2.28 96%
2.23 99%
CCT
7407 88%
8951 73%
7454 87%
7996 81%
7473 87%
6422 101%
7866 83%
Contrast
898
2136
2809
2214
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
67.74
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.05

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9705 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

As expected, the OLED screen offers great contrasts due to its ability of displaying absolute black. Consequently, the contrast ratio is theoretically nearing infinity. Small weaknesses become apparent in color reproduction: Delta-E deviations of 5.7 (mixed colors) and 5.1 (grayscale) are a little too high. The Gamma value of 2.73 is too high (desired: > 2.2) and decreases shadowing.

The color temperature of the display with 7407 K is significantly higher than the standard value of 6500 K. This leads to a cooler color reproduction. The visible blue hue when viewing grayscale is not considerably disturbing during everyday use.

CalMan color accuracy (sRGB color space)
CalMan color gamut (sRGB color space)
CalMan color saturation (sRGB color space)
CalMan gray scale (sRGB color space)

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↗ 21 ms rise
↘ 5 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. » 45 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.7 ms).

The OLED display performs well outdoors. It has stable viewing angles and we could not observe color inversions. Reflexions and direct sunlight, however, cannot be compensated for due to its low maximum brightness.

Performance

The Wiko WIM is furnished with a 600-series Qualcomm SoC. The Snapdragon 626 MSM8953 has eight Cortex-A53 cores with clock speeds of up to 2.2 GHz. The SoC comes with an Adreno 506 GPU.

Assisted by 4 GB of RAM, die mid-range smartphone delivers a subjectively good performance. Although, during multi-tasking scenarios, brief performance hiccups and stutters can be experienced.

In our tests, the WIM falls well within the range of other handsets with Snapdragon 626 SoCs. In graphically demanding tests, it expectedly falls behind the high-end Snapdragon 821 or Snapdragon 835 SoCs.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
67000 Points ∼24%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
66226 Points ∼24% -1%
HTC U Ultra
139017 Points ∼51% +107%
LG G6
151751 Points ∼55% +126%
Xiaomi Mi 6
181909 Points ∼66% +172%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
60603 Points ∼22% -10%
OnePlus 3T
159866 Points ∼58% +139%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
4660 Points ∼39%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
4915 Points ∼41% +5%
HTC U Ultra
5217 Points ∼44% +12%
LG G6
5152 Points ∼43% +11%
Xiaomi Mi 6
6686 Points ∼56% +43%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
4060 Points ∼34% -13%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
5621 Points ∼29%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
5886 Points ∼30% +5%
HTC U Ultra
5217 Points ∼27% -7%
LG G6
5703 Points ∼29% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 6
7548 Points ∼39% +34%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
5035 Points ∼26% -10%
OnePlus 3T
5664 Points ∼29% +1%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
933 Points ∼46%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
806 Points ∼40% -14%
HTC U Ultra
907 Points ∼45% -3%
LG G6
1073 Points ∼53% +15%
Xiaomi Mi 6
1263 Points ∼62% +35%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
659 Points ∼32% -29%
OnePlus 3T
891 Points ∼44% -5%
Graphics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
965 Points ∼3%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
1012 Points ∼4% +5%
HTC U Ultra
4591 Points ∼16% +376%
LG G6
5138 Points ∼18% +432%
Xiaomi Mi 6
6206 Points ∼22% +543%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1528 Points ∼5% +58%
OnePlus 3T
4444 Points ∼15% +361%
Memory (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
1007 Points ∼16%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
1046 Points ∼17% +4%
HTC U Ultra
1581 Points ∼25% +57%
LG G6
1930 Points ∼31% +92%
Xiaomi Mi 6
4054 Points ∼65% +303%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1508 Points ∼24% +50%
OnePlus 3T
1954 Points ∼31% +94%
System (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
3549 Points ∼22%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
3492 Points ∼21% -2%
HTC U Ultra
2834 Points ∼17% -20%
LG G6
3646 Points ∼22% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 6
5857 Points ∼36% +65%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
2593 Points ∼16% -27%
OnePlus 3T
3130 Points ∼19% -12%
Overall (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
1339 Points ∼16%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
1314 Points ∼16% -2%
HTC U Ultra
2078 Points ∼25% +55%
LG G6
2496 Points ∼30% +86%
Xiaomi Mi 6
3694 Points ∼44% +176%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1408 Points ∼17% +5%
OnePlus 3T
2218 Points ∼26% +66%
Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
LG G6
7080 Points ∼16%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
4562 Points ∼13%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
4369 Points ∼12% -4%
LG G6
4369 Points ∼12% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 6
6714 Points ∼19% +47%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
939 Points ∼15%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
928 Points ∼15% -1%
LG G6
1831 Points ∼29% +95%
Xiaomi Mi 6
1938 Points ∼31% +106%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
2106 Points ∼50%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
2132 Points ∼51% +1%
HTC U Ultra
1763 Points ∼42% -16%
LG G6
1955 Points ∼46% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 6
3007 Points ∼71% +43%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1713 Points ∼41% -19%
OnePlus 3T
1728 Points ∼41% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
381 Points ∼6%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
379 Points ∼6% -1%
HTC U Ultra
2405 Points ∼38% +531%
LG G6
2980 Points ∼47% +682%
Xiaomi Mi 6
4072 Points ∼64% +969%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
710 Points ∼11% +86%
OnePlus 3T
2418 Points ∼38% +535%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
466 Points ∼8%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
464 Points ∼8% 0%
HTC U Ultra
2225 Points ∼40% +377%
LG G6
2669 Points ∼48% +473%
Xiaomi Mi 6
3775 Points ∼69% +710%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
816 Points ∼15% +75%
OnePlus 3T
2221 Points ∼40% +377%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
2140 Points ∼51%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
2127 Points ∼50% -1%
HTC U Ultra
1646 Points ∼39% -23%
LG G6
1961 Points ∼47% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 6
2921 Points ∼69% +36%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1752 Points ∼42% -18%
OnePlus 3T
1452 Points ∼34% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
742 Points ∼7%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
725 Points ∼7% -2%
HTC U Ultra
3807 Points ∼36% +413%
LG G6
4121 Points ∼39% +455%
Xiaomi Mi 6
6231 Points ∼59% +740%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1053 Points ∼10% +42%
OnePlus 3T
3310 Points ∼31% +346%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
868 Points ∼12%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
849 Points ∼12% -2%
HTC U Ultra
2947 Points ∼41% +240%
LG G6
3282 Points ∼46% +278%
Xiaomi Mi 6
4978 Points ∼69% +474%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1155 Points ∼16% +33%
OnePlus 3T
2577 Points ∼36% +197%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
16939 Points ∼20%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
17044 Points ∼20% +1%
HTC U Ultra
21263 Points ∼25% +26%
LG G6
22335 Points ∼26% +32%
Xiaomi Mi 6
20330 Points ∼24% +20%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13057 Points ∼15% -23%
OnePlus 3T
22426 Points ∼26% +32%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
13241 Points ∼2%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
13277 Points ∼3% 0%
HTC U Ultra
33446 Points ∼6% +153%
LG G6
32128 Points ∼6% +143%
Xiaomi Mi 6
58228 Points ∼11% +340%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13314 Points ∼3% +1%
OnePlus 3T
34494 Points ∼6% +161%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
14074 Points ∼6%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
13963 Points ∼6% -1%
HTC U Ultra
29668 Points ∼13% +111%
LG G6
29276 Points ∼12% +108%
Xiaomi Mi 6
41172 Points ∼18% +193%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13256 Points ∼6% -6%
OnePlus 3T
30810 Points ∼13% +119%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
23 fps ∼0%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
23 fps ∼0% 0%
HTC U Ultra
74 fps ∼1% +222%
LG G6
75 fps ∼1% +226%
Xiaomi Mi 6
119 fps ∼1% +417%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
34 fps ∼0% +48%
OnePlus 3T
91 fps ∼1% +296%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
23 fps ∼1%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
22 fps ∼1% -4%
HTC U Ultra
46 fps ∼1% +100%
LG G6
46 fps ∼1% +100%
Xiaomi Mi 6
60 fps ∼2% +161%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
33 fps ∼1% +43%
OnePlus 3T
59 fps ∼2% +157%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
10 fps ∼2%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
9.8 fps ∼2% -2%
HTC U Ultra
26 fps ∼5% +160%
LG G6
38 fps ∼7% +280%
Xiaomi Mi 6
63 fps ∼11% +530%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
15 fps ∼3% +50%
OnePlus 3T
46 fps ∼8% +360%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
10 fps ∼3%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
9.6 fps ∼3% -4%
HTC U Ultra
23 fps ∼6% +130%
LG G6
27 fps ∼7% +170%
Xiaomi Mi 6
56 fps ∼15% +460%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
15 fps ∼4% +50%
OnePlus 3T
45 fps ∼12% +350%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
6.4 fps ∼0%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
6.4 fps ∼0% 0%
HTC U Ultra
12 fps ∼0% +88%
LG G6
29 fps ∼1% +353%
Xiaomi Mi 6
43 fps ∼1% +572%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
9.1 fps ∼0% +42%
OnePlus 3T
32 fps ∼1% +400%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
6.4 fps ∼0%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
6.3 fps ∼0% -2%
HTC U Ultra
12 fps ∼0% +88%
LG G6
16 fps ∼0% +150%
Xiaomi Mi 6
42 fps ∼1% +556%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
9 fps ∼0% +41%
OnePlus 3T
32 fps ∼1% +400%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
3.8 fps ∼1%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
3.5 fps ∼1% -8%
HTC U Ultra
15 fps ∼4% +295%
LG G6
20 fps ∼5% +426%
Xiaomi Mi 6
26 fps ∼7% +584%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
5.2 fps ∼1% +37%
OnePlus 3T
20 fps ∼5% +426%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Wiko WIM
3.5 fps ∼2%
BQ Aquaris X Pro
3.5 fps ∼2% 0%
HTC U Ultra
8.4 fps ∼6% +140%
LG G6
11 fps ∼8% +214%
Xiaomi Mi 6
26 fps ∼18% +643%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
5.2 fps ∼4% +49%
OnePlus 3T
20 fps ∼14% +471%

Legend

 
Wiko WIM Qualcomm Snapdragon 626, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
BQ Aquaris X Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 626, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
HTC U Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG G6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 Samsung Exynos 7880, ARM Mali-T830 MP3, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
OnePlus 3T Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Internet browsing performance on Google Chrome is only satisfying. Web content can be loaded quickly, as long as we scrolled slowy. In our browser benchmarks, the WIM and the BQ Aquaris X Pro hold hands and fall behind their competition.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58)
70.453 Points ∼100% +161%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
56.628 Points ∼80% +110%
OnePlus 3T (Chrome 54.0.2840.85)
54.526 Points ∼77% +102%
HTC U Ultra (Chrome 56)
45.084 Points ∼64% +67%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (Samsung Browser (Chrome 44))
32.222 Points ∼46% +19%
Wiko WIM (Chrome Version 59)
26.965 Points ∼38%
BQ Aquaris X Pro (Chrome 59.0.3071.125)
26.837 Points ∼38% 0%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58)
11909 Points ∼100% +157%
OnePlus 3T (Chrome 54.0.2840.85)
9798 Points ∼82% +112%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
9113 Points ∼77% +97%
HTC U Ultra (Chrome 56)
5511 Points ∼46% +19%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (Samsung Browser (Chrome 44))
5256 Points ∼44% +14%
Wiko WIM (Chrome Version 59)
4625 Points ∼39%
BQ Aquaris X Pro (Chrome 59.0.3071.125)
4424 Points ∼37% -4%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Wiko WIM (Chrome Version 59)
8781.2 ms * ∼100%
BQ Aquaris X Pro (Chrome 59.0.3071.125)
8741.5 ms * ∼100% -0%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (Samsung Browser (Chrome 44))
6442.4 ms * ∼73% +27%
HTC U Ultra (Chrome 56)
4141 ms * ∼47% +53%
OnePlus 3T (Chrome 54.0.2840.85)
2719.3 ms * ∼31% +69%
Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58)
2667.5 ms * ∼30% +70%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
2464.2 ms * ∼28% +72%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
OnePlus 3T (Chrome 54.0.2840.85)
135 Points ∼100%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
122 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (Samsung Browser (Chrome 44))
89 Points ∼66%
BQ Aquaris X Pro (Chrome 59.0.3071.125)
86 Points ∼64%

* ... smaller is better

The generously sized eMMC internal storage (64 GB) is not state-of-the-art in regard of read/write-speeds. Wiko would have been better advised to install a UFS storage for the WIM´s recommeded retail price.

The microSD card slot was tested with a Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 (max. read 270 MB/s, write 150 MB/s) reference card. It is on par with the HTC U Ultra. However, neither one of these handsets are able to fully exploit the cards full potential.

Wiko WIMBQ Aquaris X ProHTC U UltraLG G6Xiaomi Mi 6Samsung Galaxy A5 2017OnePlus 3T
AndroBench 3-5
-6%
35%
34%
145%
-25%
191%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
61.4
49.77 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-19%
67.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
10%
53.33 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-13%
55.98 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-9%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.8
78.69 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-6%
82.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-1%
77.61 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-7%
73.71 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-12%
Random Write 4KB
13.34
12.07
-10%
13.7
3%
16.58
24%
25.19
89%
12.13
-9%
74.39
458%
Random Read 4KB
38.1
37.97
0%
84.2
121%
95.19
150%
143.49
277%
22.41
-41%
123.57
224%
Sequential Write 256KB
136.67
139.63
2%
164.7
21%
122.85
-10%
196.7
44%
77.1
-44%
165.3
21%
Sequential Read 256KB
272.08
270.46
-1%
423.9
56%
428.67
58%
728.2
168%
182.03
-33%
436.43
60%

Games

The Qualcomm Adreno 506 graphics processing unit clocks up to 650 MHz and supports APIs such as Vulkan, OpenGL ES 3.1 or Direct3D 12. Current Android games in the Google PlayStore, e.g. Asphalt Xtreme and Dead Trigger 2, can be displayed smoothly with some minor frame rate stutters here and there.

The touchscreen and position sensor controls work very well.

Asphalt Xtreme
Dead Trigger 2

Emissions

Temperature

The WIM keeps a convenient temperature even during intense workloads. The temperatures never reach critical values. We measured a maximum of 42 °C (108 °F) during a one-hour-long CPU and GPU stress test with the app ‘stability test’.

Max. Load
 30.2 °C
86 F
30.4 °C
87 F
29.9 °C
86 F
 
 31.6 °C
89 F
31.2 °C
88 F
30.4 °C
87 F
 
 31.8 °C
89 F
32 °C
90 F
31 °C
88 F
 
Maximum: 32 °C = 90 F
Average: 30.9 °C = 88 F
29.8 °C
86 F
31 °C
88 F
30.8 °C
87 F
30.8 °C
87 F
31.5 °C
89 F
30.9 °C
88 F
31.1 °C
88 F
32 °C
90 F
31.5 °C
89 F
Maximum: 32 °C = 90 F
Average: 31 °C = 88 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.5 °C = 89 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-350
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.9 °C / 88 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 32 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 32 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °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 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speakers

Speaker test: Pink noise

The mono speaker of the Wiko WIM is located on the bottom edge of the device and can produce very loud sounds of up to 87 dB(A). The mids are comparably linear, the trebles are not very present. Most lower range sounds are inaudible.

For the occasional short movie clip, the speaker delivers sufficient quality. For prolonged media consumption, we advise the use of the included pair of earphones. Thanks to the multi-Bluetooth-pairing, users can even connect multiple Bluetooth devices to the WIM, e.g. two headsets.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs202831.128252832.228313429.9344036.83536.85031.629.631.66331.726.131.78027.232.727.210027.532.727.512535.236.535.216039.123.539.120047.922.547.925053.322.953.331558.620.958.640061.619.861.650065.821.865.863069.118.569.180072.618.472.6100074.418.274.4125072.816.972.8160075.116.575.1200076.416.776.4250078.416.378.431507816.178400078.416.278.450007416.174630068.71668.7800067.416.167.41000064.616.164.61250062.915.962.91600052.81652.8SPL873087N65.71.465.7median 67.4median 16.9median 67.4Delta10.23.510.230.929.330.926.229.126.228.627.828.629.832.629.828.826.728.82628.8262424.92424.824.724.830.722.130.729.220.829.236.120.136.141.719.841.748.72148.753.321.753.357.420.557.462.62162.662.118.462.165.71765.767.717.367.766.915.266.970.315.570.371.21571.27314.97378.515.178.581.314.681.373.914.673.973.114.673.17214.6726014.66048.214.648.28628.88657.31.257.3median 62.6median 17median 62.612.2312.231.63725.434.125.333.632.932.533.630.531.631.828.428.42724.920.829.62242.221.352.620.859.721.260.419.459.919.56217.766.617.96717.866.117.368.117.468.816.771.617.271.618.270.417.970.317.667.917.762.217.856.717.953.518.15118.238.13080.41.345.9median 17.9median 621.39hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseWiko WIMHTC U UltraLG G6
Wiko WIM audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 51% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

HTC U Ultra audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 84% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 11% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

LG G6 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.35 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency diagram comparison (Toggle check boxes on or off!)

Energy management

Energy consumption

Considering the 5.5 inch screen size, energy consumption is very efficient, except during idling.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.12 / 0.18 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.93 / 1.28 / 1.37 Watt
Load midlight 2.39 / 4.25 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Wiko WIM
3200 mAh
HTC U Ultra
3000 mAh
LG G6
3300 mAh
BQ Aquaris X Pro
3100 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6
3350 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
3000 mAh
OnePlus 3T
3400 mAh
Power Consumption
-94%
-53%
-34%
-34%
6%
-75%
Idle Minimum *
0.93
1
-8%
0.62
33%
0.67
28%
0.45
52%
0.64
31%
0.61
34%
Idle Average *
1.28
2.41
-88%
1.43
-12%
1.7
-33%
1.67
-30%
1.36
-6%
1.77
-38%
Idle Maximum *
1.37
2.46
-80%
1.48
-8%
1.78
-30%
1.69
-23%
1.4
-2%
1.81
-32%
Load Average *
2.39
6.8
-185%
5.52
-131%
4.42
-85%
4.07
-70%
2.53
-6%
6.67
-179%
Load Maximum *
4.25
8.9
-109%
10.47
-146%
6.3
-48%
8.54
-101%
3.63
15%
10.98
-158%

* ... smaller is better

Battery runtime

The WIM´s good energy management has a positive impact on its battery runtimes. In our Wi-Fi test, with the screen brightness set to 150 cd/m², the 3200 mAh battery lasts 8 hours and 12 minutes. In face off its competition, the battery life is below average.

Using the included 18W power adapter with Quick Charge 3.0, the WIM fully charges from 0 % to 100 % in 1.5 hours.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
8h 12min
Wiko WIM
3200 mAh
BQ Aquaris X Pro
3100 mAh
HTC U Ultra
3000 mAh
LG G6
3300 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6
3350 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
3000 mAh
OnePlus 3T
3400 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
492
730
48%
546
11%
692
41%
739
50%
843
71%
494
0%

Pros

+ contrasty AMOLED display
+ surface feel & design
+ Wi-Fi & GPS
+ dual-SIM + expandable storage
+ no PWM flicker

Cons

- wobbly buttons
- high SAR value
- low maximum screen brightness
- eMMC storage
- web performance
- pciture quality

Verdict

Tested: Wiko WIM, supplied by Wiko Germany.

The Wiko WIM leaves us with a good impression. Considering the price tag of around $470, potential customers can look forward to a solid mid-range smartphone with dual-SIM and internal storage expansion capabilities and good battery life.

Competitors in this price range often offer a better overall package. Especially with regard to the camera quality, browsing performance, and speed of the internal storage, the Wiko WIM is not too convincing. The brightness range and color accuracy of the otherwise very good AMOLED display add to the missed potential of the device.

Buying the Wiko WIM won´t do any harm. In light of the competition and due to its RRP, however, we wouldn´t recommend this handset as it is.

Wiko WIM - 08/15/2017 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
90%
Connectivity
50 / 60 → 84%
Weight
91%
Battery
91%
Display
81%
Games Performance
29 / 63 → 45%
Application Performance
52 / 70 → 74%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
63 / 91 → 69%
Camera
70%
Average
74%
83%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Wiko WIM Smartphone Review
Marcus Herbrich, 2017-08-18 (Update: 2017-08-18)
Sergey Tarasov
Sergey Tarasov - Senior Editor
I love reading stuff. I also love dealing with different electronic devices, be that a remotely controlled toy or a new MacBook. When I am not at work, you can try searching for me somewhere in the mountains of Altai Republic, Russia.