Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Mi A3 Smartphone Review – The price-performance king again!

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Mark Riege), 09/09/2019

Slimmed-down or improved? The Xiaomi Mi A3 again aims to offer a lot of mid-range features for little money. However, actually we are not only seeing improvements compared to the predecessor. Find out in our test whether the 2019 model is still worth it.

Xiaomi Mi A3

We were excited by last year's Xiaomi Mi A2: The smartphone offered a high-quality aluminum case and a lot of performance for only slightly more than 200 Euros (~$221). This test will show whether the successor can also bring the same excitement. 

Surely the Xiaomi Mi A3 does many things differently than the predecessor? Instead of aluminum, there is now glass in both the front and back, which increases the signal strength. At the same time, the fingerprint sensor has wandered below the display and the fairly thick bezels have transformed into a small waterdrop notch. A larger battery is also part of the changes, along with a lower-resolution display.

So it will be interesting to see how the Xiaomi smartphone fares in our test. As comparison devices, we include the Honor 20 Lite, the Motorola Moto G7, the Huawei P Smart Plus 2019, and the Nokia 4.2. For your own comparison, you can also add more devices underneath each of the comparison charts.

Xiaomi Mi A3 (Mi Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.09 inch 19.5:9, 1560 x 720 pixel 282 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 53 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD up to 256GB, shared, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, USB-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B38/​B40), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.5 x 153.5 x 71.9 ( = 0.33 x 6.04 x 2.83 in)
Battery
4030 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Quick Charge 3.0, 18 W fast charge
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/​1.79, phase-comparison AF, LED flash, videos at 2160p/​30fps (camera 1); 8.0MP, f/​2.2, wide angle lens (camera 2); 2.0MP, depth sharpness (camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix 1.6μm, f/​2.0, videos at 1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker at the bottom edge, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, charger, USB cable, Silicone case, SIM tool, Android One, Mi Community, Mi Store, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat 12/Cat 13: 600 Mbps (download), 150 Mbps (upload); SAR value: 0.301 W/​kg (head), 1.097 W/​kg (body); FM radio; notification LED; A-GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, fanless
Weight
173.8 g ( = 6.13 oz / 0.38 pounds), Power Supply: 70 g ( = 2.47 oz / 0.15 pounds)
Price
200 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! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case – A modern design for the Mi A3

As already mentioned, this time the case is made from trendy glass with a metal frame. As color options, blue, pearl white, and dark gray are available. In front are small bezels and a waterdrop notch that holds the front camera. At 84%, the screen-to-body ratio is good. There is still some space above the display for a small notification LED and the ear piece, and there is a slightly wider chin below the display.

In all the color variants, the back reflects the light. This effect is the most spectacular in the white color version, and it is slightly more subdued with the other colors. The impression of the quality is solid, and the workmanship of the material transitions is clean. The smartphone is able to resist pressure well and can hardly be warped, and then it only produces some very quiet creaking at most.

Xiaomi Mi A3
Xiaomi Mi A3
Xiaomi Mi A3
Xiaomi Mi A3
Xiaomi Mi A3
Xiaomi Mi A3

Size Comparison

158.6 mm / 6.24 inch 75.4 mm / 2.97 inch 7.3 mm / 0.2874 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs157 mm / 6.18 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs155.2 mm / 6.11 inch 73.4 mm / 2.89 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 160 g0.3527 lbs154.8 mm / 6.09 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 164 g0.3616 lbs153.5 mm / 6.04 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 173.8 g0.3832 lbs148.95 mm / 5.86 inch 71.3 mm / 2.81 inch 8.39 mm / 0.3303 inch 161 g0.3549 lbs

Equipment – microSD and a 3.5-mm audio port

In terms of storage equipment, the Xiaomi Mi A3 chooses a path in the middle: Compared to the predecessor, the RAM was reduced to 4 GB and the storage of 64 GB was kept, which corresponds to the class standard. At this point, the Honor 20 Lite costs hardly any more than the Mi A3 and offers twice the amount of data storage.

You can either insert two SIM cards into the smartphone or one SIM card and a microSD, allowing you to expand the storage. However, you cannot use any cards that are formatted as exFAT, since the system does not recognize them. You also cannot move apps onto the storage cards.

Thanks to the 3.5-mm audio port, friends of analog sound output can look forward to the Mi A3. While the USB-C port looks modern, it only supports USB-2.0 speed. On the other hand, there is an infrared blaster on the top edge, which you can use to control your TV, for example. With Bluetooth 5.0, a current version of this standard is included.

The Mi A3 also offers FM radio and a notification LED above the display.

Right: standby button, volume rocker
Right: standby button, volume rocker
Left: SIM tray
Left: SIM tray
Top: IR blaster, 3.5-mm audio port, microphone
Top: IR blaster, 3.5-mm audio port, microphone
Bottom: microphone, USB-C, speaker
Bottom: microphone, USB-C, speaker

Software – Android One and HD streaming

Xiaomi does not use MIUI in the Mi A3 but opts for pure Android, like in the predecessor. The smartphone is even part of the Android-One program, which guarantees software updates for the next few years. Android 9 is preinstalled, and at the time of our testing, the security patches are on the level of August 2019 and thus current.

Besides the Mi Community app and the Mi Store app, Xiaomi did not install any additional apps, which should please the purists. On the other hand, you also have to make do without some features compared to MIUI, such as the Game Speed Booster or Dark Mode, which is finally supposed to also come to vanilla Android in Android 10.

The Xiaomi Mi A3 possesses DRM-L1 certification, so it is able to reproduce HD content from streaming platforms.

Software Xiaomi Mi A3
Software Xiaomi Mi A3
Software Xiaomi Mi A3

Communication and GPS – The Mi A3 has some WLAN problems

The Xiaomi Mi A3 supports Wi-Fi 5, which means that you have to make do without the more current and faster 802.11ax standard. But this is normal in this price range and even above. The Honor 20 Lite, which was originally more expensive, only offers Wi-Fi 4. So these are good prerequisites for the Mi A3, and it uses them well in terms of speed: The smartphone reaches up to 280 Mb/s when transferring data in the test with our Linksys EA8500 reference router. However, the transfer speeds vary strongly, so that we only get values between 158 and 172 Mb/s on average. The WLAN signal is not as stable as we would have hoped for. This problem is also mentioned on the Internet, where people recommend switching from WPA2 to the less secure WPA encryption method.

As in the predecessor, the Mi A3 also supports 10 LTE frequencies that are sufficient for central Europe and other European countries. However, the European model lacks some frequencies that are necessary in the USA, so depending on your location and the provider, you could encounter some difficulties with your reception there. Within the city and its surroundings, the reception is also decent indoors, but it is noticeably better outdoors.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
246 MBit/s ∼100% +56%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=434)
226 MBit/s ∼92% +43%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
167 (min: 108, max: 214) MBit/s ∼68% +6%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
158 (min: 18, max: 227) MBit/s ∼64%
Motorola Moto G7
Adreno 506, 632, 64 GB eMMC Flash
112 (min: 94, max: 118) MBit/s ∼46% -29%
Honor 20 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
53.6 (min: 44, max: 57) MBit/s ∼22% -66%
Nokia 4.2
Adreno 505, 439, 32 GB eMMC Flash
52.6 (min: 35, max: 52) MBit/s ∼21% -67%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Adreno 512, 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
333 MBit/s ∼100% +94%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 64 GB eMMC Flash
221 (min: 157, max: 243) MBit/s ∼66% +28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=434)
216 MBit/s ∼65% +26%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
172 (min: 2, max: 282) MBit/s ∼52%
Motorola Moto G7
Adreno 506, 632, 64 GB eMMC Flash
112 (min: 107, max: 117) MBit/s ∼34% -35%
Honor 20 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
53.2 (min: 47, max: 58) MBit/s ∼16% -69%
Nokia 4.2
Adreno 505, 439, 32 GB eMMC Flash
35.2 (min: 24, max: 40) MBit/s ∼11% -80%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø158 (18-227)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø172 (2-282)
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test near the window
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

The Mi A3 supports A-GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou for navigation. Indoors, it takes quite a long time until we can finally get a GPS signal near the window, where the device can determine our location with an accuracy of up to 21 meters. Outdoors, the accuracy of the locating quickly increases up to four meters. In Google Maps, the smartphone is also able to locate us with reasonable accuracy. The compass also works well, showing our viewing direction fairly accurately.

For our practical test, we are also taking the Garmin Edge 520 professional navigation device for bikes with us for comparison. The Xiaomi Mi A3 does not fare badly here. While it cuts some corners from time to time, most of the time it handles even the narrow roads in the old city fairly accurately. There are some small deviations, but those who don't depend on absolute precision for every second of their trip will be served well by the Xiaomi Mi A3 in everyday navigation.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – traffic circle
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – traffic circle
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – overview
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – overview
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – traffic circle
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – traffic circle
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – bridge
GPS Xiaomi Mi A3 – bridge

Phone Functions and Voice Quality – Hollow, but understandable

Following the purist paradigm of Android One, the standard app from Google is used as the Telephone app. It is clearly arranged and offers the option to view favorites when opening the app. In addition, this area also shows frequently contacted numbers automatically. Tabs allow you to access the recent calls or contacts lists.

VoLTE and VoWiFi work on the device.

The voice quality is acceptable. While your conversation partner can be understood easily, the voice is not completely clear and also slightly distorted at high volumes. Our voice is also transferred not completely clearly but is still understandable. Using the speaker and hands-free microphone, we can also hear our conversation partner well, but the voice is not as present as when using a really good telephone, and our voice is transferred sounding slightly hollow here.

Note: When we try to make another call using Skype, the drop-outs in the WLAN become noticeable. Again and again, the voice of our conversation partner is interrupted or our own voice isn't transferred to the conversation partner. Xiaomi should deliver an update patch for this quickly. We did not have any trouble making regular phone calls using the mobile network.

Cameras – A 48-MP main camera with good quality

Picture taken with the front camera
Picture taken with the front camera

There are quite significant changes in the cameras. While it had been two lenses in the back of the predecessor, there are now three, with the third lens not taking separate recordings but offering additional information on the depth sharpness. With 48 megapixels, the main camera has a fairly high resolution. However, four pixels are combined into one by default, in order to increase the captured brightness. This results in 12-megapixel recordings, which is completely sufficient for everyday pictures in most cases. But if you need them, you can also record 48-megapixel images.

An additional wide-angle lens offers a larger viewing angle and smooth zooming up to the 0.6 factor. There is also a digital zoom that offers up to eight times the enlargement compared to the standard lens. Generally, the main camera takes fairly good pictures that are rich in detail. The white balance tends strongly towards blue. The brightness could be better, for example in the scene of the surroundings. The same problem can be seen when looking at the low-light recording: You can hardly recognize any detail in the teddy bear or the figure on the right. So the camera is rather badly equipped for dark situations.

With the video function, you can record movies with a resolution of up to 4K and at 30 FPS. Darker areas can quickly result in some visible graininess, and the adjustment of the exposure is not smooth but occurs in some slight steps. However, the color reproduction and sharpness are okay here, so that you can record your own videos with the MI A3. The sound recording also works without any problems.

At 32 megapixels, the resolution of the front camera is ample, but the brightness could also be better here. If you slightly enlarge the picture, you can see some clear graininess, and the sharpness is rather mediocre in the detail. For snapshots and the occasional selfies, the camera is sufficient, but it does not come near the quality of a really good front camera.

By the way, the camera app really comes from Xiaomi, so the manufacturer slightly deviates from pure Android here. It is easy to operate and the necessary adjustments are presented fairly clearly. Those who do not like the app can install numerous camera apps from the Google Store.

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 also evaluate the camera in controlled light conditions in our test lab. At 1 Lux, the test chart can hardly be recognized and the ColorChecker cannot really be recognized at all anymore. On the other hand, with perfect lighting, we see a quite decent result in terms of the color accuracy. Particularly yellow and black tones are reproduced quite accurately, but dark color tones create more problems.

Under bright light, the reproduction of the test chart is very sharp and without any visible artifacts in the color areas.

ColorChecker Photo
12.9 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
8 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
5 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi A3: 7.51 ∆E min: 1.86 - max: 14.15 ∆E
Image taken of the test chart
Image taken of the test chart
Test chart - 1 Lux
ColorChecker - 1 Lux

Accessories and Warranty – Bumper case included

In addition to the regular accessories, Xiaomi also adds a silicone bumper case into the box, so that you don't have to buy this separately anymore. Since it is a clear case, you can still see the color reflections in the back of the smartphone.

Officially, Xiaomi still does not offer warranty processing for its customers in all countries. However, you can get a warranty from the vendor (24 months according to warranty laws in Germany, for example).

Input Devices and Operation – A decent in-screen fingerprint sensor

The standard keyboard included with Android is called Google G Board, and it is also used on the Xiaomi Mi A3. It is easy to operate, offers many setting adjustments, and it can also be displayed with various designs. From time to time, we had some problems with inputs on the right edge of the display not being recognized immediately, but otherwise you can type easily and reliably on the Mi A3. Overall, the touchscreen responds reliably to our gestures and can be operated without any problems.

The fingerprint sensor is below the glass of the display. When you pick up the smartphone, the position of the sensor is displayed in standby. Since the sensor is positioned fairly close to the bottom edge of the display, we had to shift our thumb slightly when picking up the smartphone. Samsung has found a more intuitive position in the Galaxy Note 10, for example. The sensor works fairly reliably, but sometimes the fingerprint is not recognized the first time. It also takes a moment longer until the smartphone is unlocked than with a good, dedicated sensor in the case or the very good in-screen sensor of the Galaxy Note10.

You can also unlock it via face recognition, but this only uses the standard method of a picture comparison. Although the software has improved here in the last few months, refusing to unlock the smartphone when we use a picture or mask of the owner, some risk still remains. In addition, face recognition is only activated after you have turned on the smartphone, while you can use the fingerprint sensor directly from standby.

Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - portrait
Keyboard - portrait

Display – A dark OLED in the Mi A3

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

In contrast to the Mi A2, this time an AMOLED display is used. However, it offers a lower display resolution of 1560x720 pixels and also a lower brightness than the predecessor. We measure 355 cd/m² on average, which is almost 100 cd/m² lower than in all the other comparison devices. When using the brightness sensor, the brightness is also not increased above this level. The brightness distribution is fairly even at 91%.

349
cd/m²
357
cd/m²
376
cd/m²
343
cd/m²
348
cd/m²
357
cd/m²
345
cd/m²
352
cd/m²
366
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 376 cd/m² Average: 354.8 cd/m² Minimum: 3.4 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 348 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.86 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 3.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
99.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.232
Xiaomi Mi A3
AMOLED, 1560x720, 6.09
Honor 20 Lite
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.21
Motorola Moto G7
IPS, 2270x1080, 6.2
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.21
Xiaomi Mi 6X
LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
Nokia 4.2
IPS, 1520x720, 5.71
Screen
15%
14%
34%
-3%
-1%
Brightness middle
348
455
31%
471
35%
427
23%
459
32%
445
28%
Brightness
355
456
28%
453
28%
415
17%
441
24%
424
19%
Brightness Distribution
91
94
3%
94
3%
84
-8%
91
0%
91
0%
Black Level *
0.58
0.5
0.2
0.47
0.26
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.86
4.43
24%
5.5
6%
1.95
67%
5.8
1%
5.9
-1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
15.6
6.81
56%
7.95
49%
4.47
71%
10.7
31%
9.3
40%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.6
5.4
-50%
5
-39%
2.3
36%
7.3
-103%
6.8
-89%
Gamma
2.232 99%
2.248 98%
2.326 95%
2.07 106%
2.28 96%
2.2 100%
CCT
7051 92%
7336 89%
7654 85%
6414 101%
7984 81%
8443 77%
Contrast
784
942
2135
977
1712

* ... 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 219 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 219 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 219 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9370 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The perfect black of the OLED display results in an unlimited amount of contrast in the Mi A3 by theory. Unfortunately, something else is also typical for OLED displays: Since there is no background illumination that could be dimmed here, the manufacturers use pulse width modulation, which is a quick turning on and off, to make the display appear darker. At 219 Hz, the frequency is typical for OLED displays, so sensitive people should take a look at the display before buying it. The fairly low response times of the display should be interesting for gamers.

A slight blue tint is noticeable in the grayscale, and in terms of the color accuracy, it is mainly red colors that deviate. According to our measurements with CalMAN, the sRGB color space is almost completely covered. While these measurements are more of an indication, for a 200-Euro device (~$221), they are quite impressive.

CalMAN Grayscales
CalMAN Grayscales
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Color Space
CalMAN Color Space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

As in most other OLED displays, there are no problems with steep viewing angles. When looking from the sides, for example, there are no noticeable color distortions and no loss in brightness.

Outdoors, using the Mi A3 is only comfortable in shady areas or on cloudy days. While the high contrast helps, it cannot make up for the lack of display brightness.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoor use
Outdoor use

Performance – The processor is hardly any faster

The fairly new Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 is really meant for more-expensive devices, but Xiaomi has created a reputation of offering a lot of performance for the money. So the fairly powerful SoC with eight cores does well, and in many benchmarks it is even slightly faster than the Honor 20 Lite, which was originally much more expensive. The Motorola Moto G7 and the Nokia 4.2 are left even further behind. However, compared to the Mi A2, the difference is not really large. One reason for this might be the fact that compared to the Snapdragon 660 in the Mi A2, not much has changed in the successor SoC.

In the graphics benchmarks, the Mi A3 even falls behind its predecessor, and the Adreno 512 in the Mi A2 probably offers minimally more power overall. 

Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5144 Points ∼94%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2631 Points ∼48% -49%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
4006 Points ∼73% -22%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
3133 Points ∼57% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5486 Points ∼100% +7%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3183 Points ∼58% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
5144 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=320)
4684 Points ∼85% -9%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5663 Points ∼97%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5335 Points ∼91% -6%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
4765 Points ∼82% -16%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
5426 Points ∼93% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5843 Points ∼100% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3267 Points ∼56% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
5663 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=379)
4700 Points ∼80% -17%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1536 Points ∼95%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1537 Points ∼95% 0%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1256 Points ∼78% -18%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1539 Points ∼95% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1620 Points ∼100% +5%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
891 Points ∼55% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1536 Points ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=379)
1419 Points ∼88% -8%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6396 Points ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5829 Points ∼91% -9%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6038 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
5855 Points ∼92% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
5995 Points ∼94% -6%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4623 Points ∼72% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
6396 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=371)
5249 Points ∼82% -18%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7984 Points ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7388 Points ∼93% -7%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
7187 Points ∼90% -10%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
7004 Points ∼88% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
6723 Points ∼84% -16%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6228 Points ∼78% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
7984 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=542)
5678 Points ∼71% -29%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2300 Points ∼85%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2336 Points ∼87% +2%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2272 Points ∼84% -1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
2172 Points ∼81% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2300 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=57)
2697 Points ∼100% +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
908 Points ∼33%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1220 Points ∼44% +34%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1121 Points ∼40% +23%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
401 Points ∼14% -56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
908 Points ∼33% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=57)
2792 Points ∼100% +207%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1049 Points ∼41%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1365 Points ∼54% +30%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1263 Points ∼50% +20%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
490 Points ∼19% -53%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1049 Points ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=57)
2534 Points ∼100% +142%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2387 Points ∼86%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2109 Points ∼76% -12%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2206 Points ∼80% -8%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2006 Points ∼73% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2764 Points ∼100% +16%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1500 Points ∼54% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2387 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4635, n=379)
1957 Points ∼71% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
987 Points ∼56%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
829 Points ∼47% -16%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
467 Points ∼27% -53%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
770 Points ∼44% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1244 Points ∼71% +26%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
413 Points ∼23% -58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
987 Points ∼56% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=379)
1761 Points ∼100% +78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1135 Points ∼69%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
958 Points ∼59% -16%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
566 Points ∼35% -50%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
892 Points ∼55% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1417 Points ∼87% +25%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
492 Points ∼30% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1135 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6875, n=380)
1634 Points ∼100% +44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2343 Points ∼83%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2124 Points ∼75% -9%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2201 Points ∼78% -6%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1887 Points ∼67% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2815 Points ∼100% +20%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1516 Points ∼54% -35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2343 Points ∼83% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=408)
1866 Points ∼66% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1674 Points ∼72%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1233 Points ∼53% -26%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
809 Points ∼35% -52%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1065 Points ∼46% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1981 Points ∼85% +18%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
712 Points ∼30% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1674 Points ∼72% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=408)
2340 Points ∼100% +40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points ∼84%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1360 Points ∼64% -24%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
941 Points ∼44% -47%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1179 Points ∼56% -34%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2121 Points ∼100% +19%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
807 Points ∼38% -55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1787 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=408)
1966 Points ∼93% +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2477 Points ∼90%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2378 Points ∼86% -4%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2251 Points ∼82% -9%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2246 Points ∼81% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2757 Points ∼100% +11%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1575 Points ∼57% -36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2477 Points ∼90% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4492, n=459)
1864 Points ∼68% -25%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
931 Points ∼64%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
710 Points ∼49% -24%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
419 Points ∼29% -55%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
692 Points ∼48% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1164 Points ∼80% +25%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
366 Points ∼25% -61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
931 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=459)
1452 Points ∼100% +56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1081 Points ∼77%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
841 Points ∼60% -22%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
512 Points ∼37% -53%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
818 Points ∼59% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1335 Points ∼95% +23%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
441 Points ∼32% -59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1081 Points ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=460)
1398 Points ∼100% +29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2471 Points ∼92%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2441 Points ∼91% -1%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2273 Points ∼85% -8%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2307 Points ∼86% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2680 Points ∼100% +8%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1568 Points ∼59% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2471 Points ∼92% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=500)
1727 Points ∼64% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1651 Points ∼87%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
667 Points ∼35% -60%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
780 Points ∼41% -53%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
744 Points ∼39% -55%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1891 Points ∼100% +15%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
704 Points ∼37% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1651 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=499)
1891 Points ∼100% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1782 Points ∼88%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
795 Points ∼39% -55%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
913 Points ∼45% -49%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
876 Points ∼43% -51%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2023 Points ∼100% +14%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
802 Points ∼40% -55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1782 Points ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8136, n=502)
1636 Points ∼81% -8%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
19552 Points ∼93%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
16647 Points ∼79% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
21016 Points ∼100% +7%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
12390 Points ∼59% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
19552 Points ∼93% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=661)
14062 Points ∼67% -28%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
25219 Points ∼87%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
14475 Points ∼50% -43%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
28984 Points ∼100% +15%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13440 Points ∼46% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
25219 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=659)
21674 Points ∼75% -14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
23693 Points ∼89%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
14907 Points ∼56% -37%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
26731 Points ∼100% +13%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13192 Points ∼49% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
23693 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=659)
17596 Points ∼66% -26%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
36 fps ∼72%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
39 fps ∼78% +8%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
24 fps ∼48% -33%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
34 fps ∼68% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
50 fps ∼100% +39%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
23 fps ∼46% -36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
36 fps ∼72% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=682)
37.5 fps ∼75% +4%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
52 fps ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
36 fps ∼69% -31%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
23 fps ∼44% -56%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
32 fps ∼62% -38%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
48 fps ∼92% -8%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
34 fps ∼65% -35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
52 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=691)
27.8 fps ∼53% -47%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
20 fps ∼87%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21 fps ∼91% +5%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
10 fps ∼43% -50%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
19 fps ∼83% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
23 fps ∼100% +15%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
9.8 fps ∼43% -51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
20 fps ∼87% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=588)
21.6 fps ∼94% +8%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
34 fps ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19 fps ∼56% -44%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
9.9 fps ∼29% -71%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
17 fps ∼50% -50%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
21 fps ∼62% -38%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
18 fps ∼53% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
34 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=597)
19.2 fps ∼56% -44%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼73%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
14 fps ∼79% +8%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6.9 fps ∼39% -47%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
13 fps ∼73% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
15 fps ∼85% +15%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.4 fps ∼36% -51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
13 fps ∼73% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=454)
17.7 fps ∼100% +36%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
26 fps ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
13 fps ∼50% -50%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
6.5 fps ∼25% -75%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
12 fps ∼46% -54%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
14 fps ∼54% -46%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13 fps ∼50% -50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
26 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=456)
16.6 fps ∼64% -36%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
9.1 fps ∼89%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.2 fps ∼41% -54%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
2 fps ∼20% -78%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
4.1 fps ∼40% -55%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.9 fps ∼38% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
9.1 fps ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=172)
10.2 fps ∼100% +12%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps ∼40%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼37% -7%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1.2 fps ∼17% -57%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2.6 fps ∼37% -7%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1.2 fps ∼17% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2.8 fps ∼40% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=171)
7.05 fps ∼100% +152%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
15 fps ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.4 fps ∼43% -57%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.6 fps ∼24% -76%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
6.9 fps ∼46% -54%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.6 fps ∼44% -56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
15 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=176)
14.9 fps ∼99% -1%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.4 fps ∼51%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼42% -17%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.9 fps ∼23% -54%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
6.4 fps ∼39% -24%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.6 fps ∼22% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
8.4 fps ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=176)
16.6 fps ∼100% +98%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.1 fps ∼59%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.7 fps ∼64% +8%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.9 fps ∼32% -45%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
7.7 fps ∼64% +8%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
9 fps ∼74% +27%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.5 fps ∼29% -51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
7.1 fps ∼59% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=379)
12.1 fps ∼100% +70%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.8 fps ∼52% -48%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
3.6 fps ∼28% -72%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
6.8 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
8.6 fps ∼66% -34%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
7 fps ∼54% -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
13 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=383)
10.8 fps ∼83% -17%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
11.99 fps ∼71%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
10.11 fps ∼59% -16%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4.41 fps ∼26% -63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
12 fps ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.24 - 37.4, n=59)
17 fps ∼100% +42%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
10.74 fps ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
8.96 fps ∼63% -17%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.62 fps ∼47% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
10.7 fps ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 37.3, n=53)
14.2 fps ∼100% +32%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4.16 fps ∼24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 39.7, n=50)
17.5 fps ∼100%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
140633 Points ∼99%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
131614 Points ∼93% -6%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
108408 Points ∼77% -23%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
124870 Points ∼88% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
140714 Points ∼99% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
77652 Points ∼55% -45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
140633 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=290)
141701 Points ∼100% +1%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1092 Score ∼51%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
999 Score ∼47% -9%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
552 Score ∼26% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1092 Score ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 5025, n=57)
2139 Score ∼100% +96%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1400 Points ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1024 Points ∼73% -27%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1008 Points ∼72% -28%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1051 Points ∼75% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
1108 Points ∼79% -21%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
834 Points ∼60% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1400 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=626)
754 Points ∼54% -46%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1886 Points ∼82%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1462 Points ∼64% -22%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1075 Points ∼47% -43%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
1465 Points ∼64% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2295 Points ∼100% +22%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1000 Points ∼44% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
1886 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=626)
2035 Points ∼89% +8%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
3174 Points ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3096 Points ∼98% -2%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1963 Points ∼62% -38%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2823 Points ∼89% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2470 Points ∼78% -22%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1316 Points ∼41% -59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
3174 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=626)
1503 Points ∼47% -53%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5089 Points ∼97%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5238 Points ∼100% +3%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
4378 Points ∼84% -14%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
4826 Points ∼92% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
4797 Points ∼92% -6%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
2687 Points ∼51% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
5089 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=626)
2951 Points ∼56% -42%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2556 Points ∼100%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2220 Points ∼87% -13%
Motorola Moto G7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632, Adreno 506, 4096
1747 Points ∼68% -32%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 3072
2140 Points ∼84% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 6X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 6144
2343 Points ∼92% -8%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1310 Points ∼51% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
2556 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=626)
1478 Points ∼58% -42%

In the browser benchmarks as well, the Mi A3 cannot quite reach the performance values of the predecessor. While the difference is not that large and should be hardly noticeable in practice, those who expected even faster surfing in the successor will be disappointed.

Subjectively, websites are loaded quite fast and images also become available quickly.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=100)
35.5 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
30.7 Points ∼86% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
30.692 Points ∼86%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019 (Chrome 74)
30.18 Points ∼85% -2%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
30.008 Points ∼85% -2%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
15.921 Points ∼45% -48%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=89)
39.6 runs/min ∼100% +34%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
33 runs/min ∼83% +12%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019 (Chome 74)
31.16 runs/min ∼79% +6%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chome 76)
29.5 runs/min ∼74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
29.5 runs/min ∼74% 0%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
18.23 runs/min ∼46% -38%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=157)
66.9 Points ∼100% +15%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019 (Chrome 74)
63 Points ∼94% +9%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
62 Points ∼93% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
61 Points ∼91% +5%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
58 Points ∼87% 0%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
58 Points ∼87%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
58 Points ∼87% 0%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
38 Points ∼57% -34%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
9995 Points ∼100% +8%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019 (Chrome 74)
9695 Points ∼97% +5%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
9591 Points ∼96% +4%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
9260 Points ∼93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
9260 Points ∼93% 0%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
8351 Points ∼84% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=684)
6701 Points ∼67% -28%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
4810 Points ∼48% -48%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=709)
10602 ms * ∼100% -131%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
9768.3 ms * ∼92% -113%
Motorola Moto G7 (Chrome 71)
4900 ms * ∼46% -7%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
4852.6 ms * ∼46% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67)
4768.9 ms * ∼45% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
4584 ms * ∼43% -0%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
4583.8 ms * ∼43%
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019 (Chrome 74)
4250.7 ms * ∼40% +7%

* ... smaller is better

An advantage compared to the Mi A2 is that the Mi A3 supports microSD cards. The speed of the reader is okay using our reference microSD card, but other smartphones achieve even higher access rates.

On the other hand, Xiaomi again sets an example with the internal storage: We would not expect UFS-2.1 storage in this price range, and we are not getting it in the comparison devices either. In this way, our test unit is able to achieve a speed advantage in most of the tests, which is reflected in shorter load times and faster data transfers in practice.

Xiaomi Mi A3Honor 20 LiteMotorola Moto G7Huawei P Smart Plus 2019Xiaomi Mi 6XNokia 4.2Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-16%
-7%
-19%
-43%
-45%
1%
-40%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
50.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
66.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
34%
66.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
33%
66.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
33%
65.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
31%
50.8 (17.1 - 71.9, n=27)
1%
49.1 (1.7 - 87.1, n=417)
-2%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
67.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
75.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
12%
86.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
28%
76.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
86.74 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
28%
67.2 (18 - 86.6, n=27)
-1%
67.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=417)
-1%
Random Write 4KB
117.4
73.1
-38%
75.6
-36%
77.3
-34%
6.89
-94%
4.31
-96%
55.6 (8.77 - 165, n=36)
-53%
21.5 (0.14 - 250, n=734)
-82%
Random Read 4KB
126.9
38.7
-70%
69.3
-45%
40.3
-68%
72.98
-42%
17.51
-86%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=36)
6%
46.5 (1.59 - 196, n=734)
-63%
Sequential Write 256KB
184
200.9
9%
216
17%
152.8
-17%
203.7
11%
18.17
-90%
198 (133 - 388, n=36)
8%
95.4 (2.99 - 590, n=734)
-48%
Sequential Read 256KB
502.2
288.1
-43%
297
-41%
295.4
-41%
271.98
-46%
220.39
-56%
719 (502 - 895, n=36)
43%
269 (12.1 - 1504, n=734)
-46%

Gaming – Only for medium demands

Gaming at 60 Hz is possible with the Xiaomi Mi A3, but of course the game has to support the higher frame rate. This is the case for Arena of Valor, and a fairly stable 60 FPS is achieved, but interestingly, the higher graphics settings are more stable here than the low ones.

Asphalt 9 is generally more demanding and is hardly able to run at a smooth 30 FPS on the smartphone. In order to be able to play fairly smoothly, you should at least select the lowest settings.

With Temple Run 2, we also test the control via position sensor and touchscreen. Both work without any problems in the Mi A3 and the game can be controlled reliably using these options.

Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9
Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Temple Run 2
Temple Run 2
0102030405060Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.30.2.4: Ø58.7 (49-60)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.30.2.4: Ø59.9 (55-60)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 1.7.3a: Ø17.3 (7-31)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 1.7.3a: Ø25.4 (16-31)

Emissions – Hardly any warming

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

Under full load, some significant warming can be felt in the top area of the smartphone. However, this is not critical and can at most become uncomfortable in your pants pocket in summer. The warming decreases considerably towards the bottom of the phone. In idle operation, there is no noticeable warming in the hand. 

In our performance endurance test using the GFXBench battery test, we determine that the smartphone only throttles minimally even after numerous runs of a demanding benchmark. So there should not be any reductions in performance.

Max. Load
 43 °C
109 F
37.9 °C
100 F
35.5 °C
96 F
 
 42.7 °C
109 F
38.2 °C
101 F
35.7 °C
96 F
 
 42 °C
108 F
38.5 °C
101 F
35.5 °C
96 F
 
Maximum: 43 °C = 109 F
Average: 38.8 °C = 102 F
34.8 °C
95 F
37.6 °C
100 F
41.8 °C
107 F
34.9 °C
95 F
38.3 °C
101 F
42.6 °C
109 F
35 °C
95 F
38.2 °C
101 F
41.1 °C
106 F
Maximum: 42.6 °C = 109 F
Average: 38.3 °C = 101 F
Power Supply (max.)  34.5 °C = 94 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.8 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43 °C / 109 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 42.6 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.6 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speaker

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

The speaker of the Mi A3 is positioned at the bottom of the case. In terms of its volume, it is minimally louder than its predecessor and also offers slightly lower frequencies. For a 200-Euro smartphone (~$221), the sound is absolutely convincing. It neither emphasizes the highs too much, nor does it get boomy. The opposite is the case: The sound is quite clear and balanced, and there are no distortions even at maximum volume.

A positive for audio port enthusiasts is that the 3.5-mm port is present again, after it had been cut in the Mi A2. According to the manufacturer, this is a reaction to user complaints. The audio signals are transferred clearly through the port, as well as when using Bluetooth 5.0, which even supports aptX HD.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.939.22543.842.63136.539.34036.145.25045.141.36335.740.88026.73510028.533.912526.535.416024.843.720024.648.42502452.831522.556.44002060.950020.465.663019.869.180019.369.9100023.875.5125017.875.116001878.2200017.376.9250016.675.5315015.772400015.764.8500015.769.4630015.673.9800015.772.61000015.767.51250015.756.61600015.753.1SPL68.730.785.7N22.21.562.6median 18median 67.5Delta4.39.935.240.932.939.937.234.931.740.339.639.128.334.127.332.326.928.726.731.5243920.946.220.948.319.555.718.562.917.565.817.569.615.769.215.87016.675.215.873.715.474.215.573.51671.615.873.11671.616.367.116.367.716.271.816.475.516.459.928.684.11.158.5median 16.4median 69.22.18.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi A3Xiaomi Mi 6X
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi A3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Mi 6X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life – The Mi A3 runs forever

Power Consumption

Compared to the predecessor, the power consumption has increased slightly, and most of the comparison devices consume at least slightly less power. Particularly during idle operation, the Mi A3 can use more power at times.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 2 / 3.3 Watt
Load midlight 4.1 / 7.7 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi A3
4030 mAh
Honor 20 Lite
3400 mAh
Motorola Moto G7
3000 mAh
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
3400 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Nokia 4.2
3000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-5%
1%
13%
14%
23%
0%
13%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.9
-13%
1.1
-38%
0.8
-0%
0.65
19%
0.74
7%
0.8
-0%
0.877 (0.2 - 3.4, n=769)
-10%
Idle Average *
2
1.6
20%
1.8
10%
1.2
40%
1.94
3%
1.9
5%
2
-0%
1.734 (0.6 - 6.2, n=768)
13%
Idle Maximum *
3.3
2.2
33%
2.6
21%
2.3
30%
1.97
40%
2.21
33%
3.3
-0%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=769)
39%
Load Average *
4.1
6
-46%
4.2
-2%
4.5
-10%
4.65
-13%
3.04
26%
4.1
-0%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=763)
1%
Load Maximum *
7.7
9.1
-18%
6.8
12%
7.3
5%
5.93
23%
4.15
46%
7.7
-0%
5.9 (1.2 - 14.2, n=763)
23%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

However, the higher power consumption of the Xiaomi Mi A3 hardly makes any difference, since Xiaomi has significantly increased the size of the battery. The capacity is about 30% larger than that of the predecessor and also considerably more than in all the comparison devices. It is not surprising that our test unit lasts the longest by far, with 16:25 hours in our WLAN test. While the advantage is slightly smaller during idle operation, the battery life of the Mi A3 turns out very good, overall.

Thanks to the quick-charge function using up to 18 watts, it takes less than 2 hours to completely recharge the battery.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
28h 44min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
16h 25min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
17h 03min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 57min
Xiaomi Mi A3
4030 mAh
Honor 20 Lite
3400 mAh
Motorola Moto G7
3000 mAh
Huawei P Smart Plus 2019
3400 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 6X
3010 mAh
Nokia 4.2
3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
-30%
-19%
-33%
-41%
-29%
Reader / Idle
1724
1548
-10%
1346
-22%
1046
-39%
H.264
1023
819
-20%
536
-48%
608
-41%
WiFi v1.3
985
685
-30%
798
-19%
523
-47%
495
-50%
696
-29%
Load
297
219
-26%
249
-16%
192
-35%

Pros

+ AMOLED screen with good color reproduction
+ good camera equipment
+ a lot of performance and features for the money
+ infrared blaster
+ long battery life
+ good speakers
+ pure and current Android
+ robust, modern case

Cons

- shaky WLAN connections
- hardly any performance increase compared to the Mi A2
- high power consumption in parts
- slightly hollow voice quality
- dark, low-resolution display

Verdict – Mostly more, but sometimes less

In review: Xiaomi Mi A3. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Xiaomi Mi A3. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

The question we asked at the very beginning of our test is not so easy to answer: Compared to its predecessor, was the Mi A3 slimmed-down or improved? There are signs of both. There are factors like the lower display resolution, the slightly decreased 3D performance, and the higher power consumption. On the other hand, there are the more modern design, the significantly longer battery life, the better camera equipment, and a speaker that was again improved.

The Mi A3 also suffers from stuttering WLAN, which Xiaomi must quickly fix with an update, since otherwise the smartphone is almost unusable in WLAN for communication apps such as Skype.

In some areas, the Xiaomi Mi A3 is better than its predecessor. But Xiaomi should quickly fix the stuttering WLAN with an update.

The competitors have to make a continued effort, since for 200 Euros (~$221; ~$185 in the USA), currently almost no-one else offers as much computing power, an OLED display, battery life that lasts forever, and even a modern design. So in the end, the positive aspects count more for us, even if the Mi A2 still offers the better price-performance ratio compared to its successor for currently 50 Euros less (~$55)

Note: The Xiaomi Mi A3 is one of the first smartphones that we evaluated using the new Version 7 of our rating system. Since some criteria became stricter here and some value limits were shifted so that future devices won't blow the scale, the rating according to Version 7 is lower than that of earlier tests. In the next few weeks, we will bring the most important devices into the new version of our rating system, so that you can continue to easily compare them.

Xiaomi Mi A3 - 09/27/2019 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
77%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
40 / 70 → 57%
Weight
90%
Battery
91%
Display
80%
Games Performance
13 / 64 → 20%
Application Performance
59 / 86 → 68%
Temperature
87%
Noise
100%
Audio
76 / 90 → 84%
Camera
62%
Average
72%
78%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 4 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 > Xiaomi Mi A3 Smartphone Review – The price-performance king again!
Florian Schmitt, 2019-09- 9 (Update: 2019-09-10)