Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Redmi 7A Smartphone Review – the cut-price phone

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Katherine Bodner), 08/13/2019

Surprisingly affordable. The Xiaomi Redmi 7A is available for $100. Its predecessor already had quite a lot to offer considering its low price. The Redmi 7A, at first glance, does not seem to offer a lot of changes. Can it keep up its great price-to-performance ratio?

Xiaomi Redmi 7A

As far as Xiaomi is concerned, a smartphone can never be cheap enough. The Redmi 6A already packed a lot of performance into a stable case and offered a decent battery life for $100. Naturally, we are more than curious to see what the Chinese manufacturer has in store for us now. Are there further improvements? How will the phone compare to its predecessor? And, most importantly, can the Redmi 7A still impress us with its price-to-performance ratio?

Naturally, we will be comparing our test unit with its predecessor. Apart from that, there have not been many changes in this affordable segment of the smartphone market and there are hardly any new serious competitors to the Redmi 7A: The Honor 7A has a similar name, and also a similar price point to our test unit. The Nokia 2.1 and Motorola Moto E5 Play are two other possible competitors. If you are willing to spend a little more money, you might get a Huawei Y5.

Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Redmi Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
5.45 inch 18:9, 1440 x 720 pixel 295 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB 
, 9.6 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 256 GB, dedicated, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity sensor, compass
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM, UMTS, LTE (B1/2/3/4/5/7/8/20/38/40), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.6 x 146.3 x 70.4 ( = 0.38 x 5.76 x 2.77 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix f/2.2, 1.12µm, phase detection auto focus, LED flash, videos @1080p/​30fps
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Keyboard: virtual keyboard, AC adapter, USB cable, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, FM radio, LED for notifications (one color), SAR value: 0.557 W/kg (head), 1.166 W/kg (body), LTE Cat 4/5 (150 / 75 Mbps), fanless
Weight
165 g ( = 5.82 oz / 0.36 pounds), Power Supply: 75 g ( = 2.65 oz / 0.17 pounds)
Price
100 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 – solid plastic case

The predecessor was already rather colorful, with the available options being blue and gold. Today's test unit is closer to the current trend on the smartphone market and offers optional blue or red color gradients on its back. Users can also choose a more subtle black or blue case with a matte back. The new color options look good and the matte, slightly roughened surface feels nice, too.

Xiaomi has made some minor design changes compared to the predecessor. The single camera on the back is now positioned vertically rather than horizontally. The front now features Redmi lettering and the speaker is positioned along the bottom rather than on the back of the device.

Pressure on the front of the screen is visible in the liquid crystal layer. Apart from that the Redmi 7A appears to be very robust. According to the manufacturer, it even has a water-repellant coating which protects it from light rain.

Our test unit is relatively heavy and weighs 20 grams (~0.7 oz) more than its predecessor. This is probably due to the larger battery. The smartphone is also slightly larger than its predecessor.

Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Xiaomi Redmi 7A

Size Comparison

153.6 mm / 6.05 inch 77.6 mm / 3.06 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 174 g0.3836 lbs152.4 mm / 6 inch 73 mm / 2.87 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs147 mm / 5.79 inch 71 mm / 2.8 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 150 g0.3307 lbs146.3 mm / 5.76 inch 70.4 mm / 2.77 inch 9.6 mm / 0.378 inch 165 g0.3638 lbs147.5 mm / 5.81 inch 71.5 mm / 2.81 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 145 g0.3197 lbs147.1 mm / 5.79 inch 70.8 mm / 2.79 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 146 g0.3219 lbs

Connectivity – dedicated microSD slot

The Xiaomi Redmi 7A is available with 16 or 32 GB of storage and 2 GB of RAM. If you decide to go with the 16-GB version, you will have to make do with around 10 GB, as the remainder is taken up by the operating system. Both configurations are available for around $100. The fact that there is no fingerprint reader continues to be a weakness of the Redmi 7a. Its competitors such as the Honor 7A and the Motorola Moto E5 Play get a few extra points for this.

The storage can be expanded via microSD - the device even has a separate slot for memory cards, which means that users can use two SIM cards and a microSD card simultaneously. The reader supports cards that are formatted to exFAT. The memory card cannot be formatted as internal storage and apps cannot be stored on it either. 

There is a micro-USB port along the bottom of the phone that supports USB 2.0 speeds.

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

Software – up-to-date MIUI

The Redmi 7A runs on MIUI 10, which is based on the current Android 9.0. The user interface (and the settings menu in particular) looks very different to standard Android. If you have been using Android for a long time, you should be able to adjust to this UI quickly nonetheless. Xiaomi published an update for the Redmi 7A during our test, which updated the security patches to 01.06.2019, which was still quite recent at the time of testing.  

The device comes with some bloatware, but this can all be deleted completely. Xiaomi has also included some of its own tools, such as a compass app and an FM radio app.

Software Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Software Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Software Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Software Xiaomi Redmi 7A

Communication and GPS – more LTE frequencies

Although the SoC supports modern communication protocols, Xiaomi has limited the Wi-Fi speed to Wi-Fi 4 (802.11 n). This makes the Redmi 7A just as fast as its predecessor in our test with our Wi-Fi router Linksys EA8500. The results are good for this price range, as well.

Our test unit now supports a few more LTE networks compared to the Redmi 6A, which means that the Redmi7A is a little more worldly than its predecessor. The bands 2, 4 and 5 are new and are particularly useful in the US. The maximum LTE speeds for sending data are slightly faster than they were on the predecessor. Reception continues to be good.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=435)
226 MBit/s ∼100% +277%
Huawei Y5 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 16 GB eMMC Flash
63 (min: 56, max: 61) MBit/s ∼28% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Adreno 505, 439, 16 GB eMMC Flash
60 (min: 52, max: 64) MBit/s ∼27%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio A22 MT6762M, 32 GB eMMC Flash
59.6 (min: 56, max: 61) MBit/s ∼26% -1%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
55.5 (min: 49, max: 57) MBit/s ∼25% -7%
Nokia 2.1
Adreno 308, 425, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.7 (min: 29, max: 54) MBit/s ∼22% -19%
Honor 7A
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
45 MBit/s ∼20% -25%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=435)
216 MBit/s ∼100% +301%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
56.6 (min: 29, max: 61) MBit/s ∼26% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
PowerVR GE8320, Helio A22 MT6762M, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.7 (min: 52, max: 59) MBit/s ∼26% +4%
Huawei Y5 2019
PowerVR GE8300, Helio A22 MT6761, 16 GB eMMC Flash
55.5 (min: 52, max: 59) MBit/s ∼26% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Adreno 505, 439, 16 GB eMMC Flash
53.8 (min: 25, max: 57) MBit/s ∼25%
Nokia 2.1
Adreno 308, 425, 8 GB eMMC Flash
52.7 (min: 27, max: 58) MBit/s ∼24% -2%
Honor 7A
Adreno 505, 430, 16 GB eMMC Flash
46.7 MBit/s ∼22% -13%
010203040506070Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø58.2 (52-64)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø53 (25-57)
GPS test indoors
GPS test indoors
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors

Localization is not possible indoors. The phone takes some time outdoors, but eventually locates us within 4 meters (~13.1 ft). Google Maps, which uses not only satellite data but also other information for localization, cannot position us quite as precisely and the compass is not very exact either.

We took the Redmi 7A and the professional navigation system Garmin Edge 520 on a test ride on the bicycle. It turned out that the Xiaomi smartphone tracked our movements precisely enough, but did occasionally position us next to the path. If you are only interested in approximative navigation data, the precision of the Redmi 7A should be enough.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – field
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – field
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – overview
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – overview
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – bridge
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – bridge
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – field
GPS Xiaomi Redmi 7A – field

Telephone and Voice Quality – good via speakers

Xiaomi has created its own telephone app, which opens on the dial pad. Once you start dialing a number, the app shows you all suitable stored numbers. A second tab gives you access to the contacts list. According to the manufacturer, both SIM card slots support VoLTE. Xiaomi's operating system usually supports VoWi-Fi as well, although this was not mentioned explicitly for the Redmi 7A.

The voice quality via the earpiece is good but slightly muted. The microphone also mutes our voice a little but still transmits loud and quiet voices quite well. The speaker does a better job at transmitting our call partner's voice, but the microphone quality does not change on speakerphone.

Cameras – still single

Photo taken with front camera
Photo taken with front camera

Xiaomi has not made many changes to the camera. The back is equipped with a 12-MP sensor while the front features a 5-MP sensor. Both have a rather slow aperture of f/2.2. This camera set-up still beats most other devices in this price range.   

Images taken with the main camera are not very well balanced with light areas appearing overexposed and dark areas lacking details. Like with the predecessor, edges and borders are depicted well and there are sufficient details. Photos taken in low lighting could be brighter and sharper. The Redmi 7A is well suited for snapshots. More demanding photographers can use the professional mode, but this smartphone will hardly meet their needs.

Videos can be recorded in Full-HD and at 30 fps with the main camera. The image quality and color display are quite good. Brightness adjusts quickly, but unfortunately the jumps between the various brightness levels are quite noticeable.  

Xiaomi might want to add a couple of MPs to the front camera (currently 5 MP) in future generations. Still, we are quite happy with the photos taken with this lens. They display a fair amount of detail. However, edges tend to look a little frayed.

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

The main camera's qualities are also tested in our lab. Once again, the test chart confirms the low contrast - for example, it is almost impossible to read the black writing on dark blue background. The borders of letters and color gradients are displayed well, while edges are noticeably blurry.

Colors are displayed nicely, although they can occasionally be too bright.

Photo of test chart
Photo of test chart
Detail of test chart
Color Checker Colors. The bottom half of each box displays the reference color.

Accessories and Warranty – quick-charge AC adapter

Apart from the AC adapter and the smartphone itself, the box includes a USB cable and a SIM tool. Please make sure that you are purchasing the global version of the Redmi 7A in order to get a suitable AC adapter and the necessary coverage of LTE bands.

The Redmi 7A has a 24-month warranty.

Input Devices & Handling – no fingerprint reader

The device uses Google's GBoard as the default virtual keyboard. It is clear and easy to use.

The device is not equipped with a fingerprint reader, which is a shame. Some other devices in this price range do feature this technology. Instead, Xiaomi has chosen to focus on face recognition as a tool to unlock the device. This works quite well but isn't as fast and secure as unlocking the smartphone via fingerprint.

The screen has a nice surface with good gliding properties. The touchscreen responds to our inputs quickly and precisely. The volume rocker and standby button are positioned on the right side of the case. They are clearly made of plastic but are solid and have good pressure points. 

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

Display – Redmi with brighter screen

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

Not much has changed in terms of the display: The Redmi 7A is still equipped with a 2:1-panel with a resolution of 1440x720 pixels. However, today's panel is brighter than that of its predecessor and reaches 533 cd/m². The brightness distribution is also more even at 88 percent. The bezels around the display are relatively wide. The only competitor with narrow bezels is the Huawei Y5 2019 with its waterdrop notch. 

482
cd/m²
505
cd/m²
495
cd/m²
481
cd/m²
533
cd/m²
531
cd/m²
469
cd/m²
525
cd/m²
534
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 534 cd/m² Average: 506.1 cd/m² Minimum: 1.5 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 533 cd/m²
Contrast: 888:1 (Black: 0.6 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.6 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 7.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
94.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.212
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.45
Honor 7A
IPS, 1440x720, 5.7
Nokia 2.1
IPS, 1280x720, 5.5
Motorola Moto E5 Play
IPS, 960x480, 5.2
Huawei Y5 2019
IPS, 1520x720, 5.71
Screen
21%
25%
6%
-28%
6%
Brightness middle
533
404
-24%
417
-22%
338
-37%
369
-31%
630
18%
Brightness
506
400
-21%
395
-22%
327
-35%
358
-29%
593
17%
Brightness Distribution
88
82
-7%
88
0%
82
-7%
81
-8%
88
0%
Black Level *
0.6
0.26
57%
0.18
70%
0.27
55%
0.4
33%
0.66
-10%
Contrast
888
1554
75%
2317
161%
1252
41%
923
4%
955
8%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.6
4.28
24%
6.46
-15%
5.36
4%
9.75
-74%
5.79
-3%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.4
9.97
13%
10.72
6%
9.77
14%
18.28
-60%
9.54
16%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7.4
3.5
53%
5.8
22%
6.2
16%
11.8
-59%
7
5%
Gamma
2.212 99%
2.213 99%
2.423 91%
2.345 94%
2.057 107%
2.176 101%
CCT
7974 82%
6899 94%
7839 83%
8460 77%
11971 54%
8420 77%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
78.6

* ... 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 384.6 Hz ≤ 10 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 384.6 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 10 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 384.6 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9368 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The black value is significantly higher than that of its predecessor and is the worst in our entire comparison field at 0.6 cd/m². Consequently, the contrast is relatively mediocre at 888:1. This causes dark areas on the display to appear gray and content in general to appear rather flat.

We noticed flickering at a frequency of 384.6 Hz at brightness levels below 10 percent. This is probably caused by PWM, which is used to regulate brightness. Usually, this should not be an issue at high frequencies. If you know that you are sensitive in this area, you might want to try out the phone before purchase.

The spectrophotometer and CalMAN software confirmed a slight blue cast. The color deviation is relatively high in general and particularly turquoise and blue tones deviate quite strongly.

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
22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11 ms rise
↘ 11 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 26 % 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
32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15 ms rise
↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 21 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

The viewing angles are good thanks to the IPS screen and content is still easily legible at very wide angles, although the fact that the display's black value isn't great becomes more obvious at high brightness.

Content remains legible in bright surroundings outdoors, but we would recommend avoiding direct sunlight as this does cause strong reflections on the display.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Outdoor use – maximum brightness
Outdoor use – maximum brightness
Outdoor use – brightness sensor
Outdoor use – brightness sensor

Performance – a lot of power for little money

The Xiaomi Redmi 7A is equipped with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, which is also used in the Nokia 4.2 (available for almost double the price at $185). The SoC has eight cores with a maximum clock rate of 2 GHz. The performance increase compared to its predecessor and its similarly priced competitors is quite noticeable: In Geekbench, which only looks at processor performance, the performance of our Redmi 7A is 19 percent higher than that of its predecessor. Our test unit also managed to beat the more expensive Huawei Y5 2019.

The graphics department is taken care of by an Adreno 505, which also proves to be faster than its competitors in most benchmarks. 

Subjectively, the system performance of the Redmi 7A is fast enough, operation is smooth and we only noticed occasional judders when switching between apps or when there were several apps running in the background.

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
3068 Points ∼65%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2471 Points ∼53% -19%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2820 Points ∼60% -8%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
1602 Points ∼34% -48%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
1635 Points ∼35% -47%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2436 Points ∼52% -21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (3068 - 3267, n=3)
3192 Points ∼68% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=380)
4703 Points ∼100% +53%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
863 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
825 Points ∼58% -4%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
675 Points ∼48% -22%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
636 Points ∼45% -26%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
647 Points ∼46% -25%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
839 Points ∼59% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (863 - 903, n=3)
886 Points ∼62% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=380)
1420 Points ∼100% +65%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
4594 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
Points ∼0% -100%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
3892 Points ∼74% -15%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
3146 Points ∼60% -32%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
3209 Points ∼61% -30%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4195 Points ∼80% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (4594 - 4791, n=3)
4669 Points ∼89% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=372)
5257 Points ∼100% +14%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
5880 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6194 Points ∼100% +5%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
5109 Points ∼82% -13%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
4152 Points ∼67% -29%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
5616 Points ∼91% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (5880 - 6228, n=3)
6104 Points ∼99% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=543)
5690 Points ∼92% -3%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
2134 Points ∼79%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1868 Points ∼69% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (2134 - 2172, n=3)
2152 Points ∼80% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=58)
2695 Points ∼100% +26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
408 Points ∼15%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
210 Points ∼8% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (401 - 412, n=3)
407 Points ∼15% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=58)
2763 Points ∼100% +577%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
497 Points ∼20%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
262 Points ∼10% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (490 - 502, n=3)
496 Points ∼20% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=58)
2512 Points ∼100% +405%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1595 Points ∼81%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
763 Points ∼39% -52%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1301 Points ∼66% -18%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
940 Points ∼48% -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1500 - 1657, n=3)
1584 Points ∼81% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4635, n=380)
1959 Points ∼100% +23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
419 Points ∼24%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
260 Points ∼15% -38%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
304 Points ∼17% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
250 Points ∼14% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (413 - 419, n=3)
417 Points ∼24% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=380)
1759 Points ∼100% +320%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
501 Points ∼31%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
305 Points ∼19% -39%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
366 Points ∼22% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
299 Points ∼18% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (492 - 502, n=3)
498 Points ∼30% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6875, n=381)
1633 Points ∼100% +226%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1594 Points ∼85%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
807 Points ∼43% -49%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1285 Points ∼69% -19%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
885 Points ∼47% -44%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
877 Points ∼47% -45%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
924 Points ∼49% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1516 - 1594, n=3)
1567 Points ∼84% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=409)
1869 Points ∼100% +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
730 Points ∼31%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
445 Points ∼19% -39%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
530 Points ∼23% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
250 Points ∼11% -66%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
249 Points ∼11% -66%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
451 Points ∼19% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (712 - 732, n=3)
725 Points ∼31% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=409)
2338 Points ∼100% +220%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
830 Points ∼42%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
494 Points ∼25% -40%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
610 Points ∼31% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
297 Points ∼15% -64%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
296 Points ∼15% -64%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
509 Points ∼26% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (807 - 832, n=3)
823 Points ∼42% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=409)
1966 Points ∼100% +137%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1610 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
828 Points ∼44% -49%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1232 Points ∼66% -23%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
918 Points ∼49% -43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1575 - 1651, n=3)
1612 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4492, n=460)
1866 Points ∼100% +16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
370 Points ∼25%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
225 Points ∼16% -39%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
254 Points ∼18% -31%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
197 Points ∼14% -47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (366 - 370, n=3)
369 Points ∼25% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=460)
1451 Points ∼100% +292%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
446 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
268 Points ∼19% -40%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
308 Points ∼22% -31%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
239 Points ∼17% -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (441 - 447, n=3)
445 Points ∼32% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=461)
1398 Points ∼100% +213%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1579 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
840 Points ∼49% -47%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1259 Points ∼73% -20%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
892 Points ∼52% -44%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
819 Points ∼47% -48%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
911 Points ∼53% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1568 - 1596, n=3)
1581 Points ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=501)
1730 Points ∼100% +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
724 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
403 Points ∼21% -44%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
535 Points ∼28% -26%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
46 Points ∼2% -94%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
199 Points ∼11% -73%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
362 Points ∼19% -50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (704 - 724, n=3)
717 Points ∼38% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=500)
1890 Points ∼100% +161%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
823 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
456 Points ∼28% -45%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
613 Points ∼37% -26%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
58 Points ∼4% -93%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
239 Points ∼15% -71%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
418 Points ∼26% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (802 - 824, n=3)
816 Points ∼50% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8136, n=503)
1635 Points ∼100% +99%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
12673 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
14128 Points ∼94% +11%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9249 Points ∼62% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
10427 Points ∼69% -18%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
10784 Points ∼72% -15%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
15004 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (12096 - 12673, n=3)
12386 Points ∼83% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=662)
14069 Points ∼94% +11%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
13510 Points ∼62%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6785 Points ∼31% -50%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9684 Points ∼45% -28%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
5487 Points ∼25% -59%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
5712 Points ∼26% -58%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7514 Points ∼35% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (13440 - 13615, n=3)
13522 Points ∼62% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=660)
21672 Points ∼100% +60%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
13315 Points ∼76%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7671 Points ∼44% -42%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
9584 Points ∼54% -28%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
6133 Points ∼35% -54%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
6379 Points ∼36% -52%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
8452 Points ∼48% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (13192 - 13315, n=3)
13251 Points ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=660)
17599 Points ∼100% +32%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
23 fps ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
13 fps ∼35% -43%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
16 fps ∼43% -30%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
7.6 fps ∼20% -67%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
7.6 fps ∼20% -67%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
14 fps ∼37% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (23 - 23, n=3)
23 fps ∼61% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=683)
37.5 fps ∼100% +63%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
35 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
19 fps ∼54% -46%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
27 fps ∼77% -23%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
14 fps ∼40% -60%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
20 fps ∼57% -43%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
21 fps ∼60% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (34 - 35, n=3)
34.3 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=692)
27.9 fps ∼80% -20%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
19 fps ∼88%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
6.3 fps ∼29% -67%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
7.1 fps ∼33% -63%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
2.7 fps ∼13% -86%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
2.7 fps ∼13% -86%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
6.5 fps ∼30% -66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (9.8 - 19, n=3)
12.9 fps ∼60% -32%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=589)
21.6 fps ∼100% +14%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
9.9 fps ∼52%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
12 fps ∼63% +21%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
14 fps ∼73% +41%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
6.1 fps ∼32% -38%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
11 fps ∼57% +11%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
12 fps ∼63% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (9.9 - 18, n=3)
15.3 fps ∼80% +55%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=598)
19.2 fps ∼100% +94%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
6.4 fps ∼36%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4 fps ∼23% -37%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
4.6 fps ∼26% -28%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.3 fps ∼24% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (6.4 - 6.4, n=3)
6.4 fps ∼36% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=455)
17.7 fps ∼100% +177%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
14 fps ∼84%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
7.5 fps ∼45% -46%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
10 fps ∼60% -29%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
7.8 fps ∼47% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (13 - 14, n=3)
13.3 fps ∼80% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=457)
16.6 fps ∼100% +19%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
4.1 fps ∼40%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2.7 fps ∼26% -34%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.8 fps ∼27% -32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (3.9 - 4.1, n=3)
3.97 fps ∼39% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=173)
10.2 fps ∼100% +149%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1.2 fps ∼17%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
0.85 fps ∼12% -29%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
0.8 fps ∼11% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1.2 - 1.2, n=3)
1.2 fps ∼17% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=172)
7.03 fps ∼100% +486%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
4.3 fps ∼29%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
4.3 fps ∼29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (6.4 - 6.6, n=2)
6.5 fps ∼44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=177)
14.8 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
3.7 fps ∼22%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
2.3 (min: 4.3) fps ∼14% -38%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2.3 fps ∼14% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (3.6 - 3.7, n=3)
3.67 fps ∼22% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=177)
16.5 fps ∼100% +346%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
3.5 fps ∼29%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1.9 fps ∼16% -46%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
2.6 fps ∼21% -26%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
2 fps ∼17% -43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (3.5 - 3.6, n=3)
3.53 fps ∼29% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=380)
12.1 fps ∼100% +246%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
7.3 fps ∼68%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
3.2 fps ∼30% -56%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
5.4 fps ∼50% -26%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
fps ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
3.2 fps ∼30% -56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (7 - 7.3, n=3)
7.1 fps ∼66% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=384)
10.8 fps ∼100% +48%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
75175 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
61753 Points ∼44% -18%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
59990 Points ∼42% -20%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
63421 Points ∼45% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (75175 - 79792, n=3)
77540 Points ∼55% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=291)
141726 Points ∼100% +89%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1083 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
733 Points ∼68% -32%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
705 Points ∼65% -35%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
649 Points ∼60% -40%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
720 Points ∼66% -34%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
775 Points ∼72% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (834 - 1083, n=3)
918 Points ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=627)
755 Points ∼70% -30%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1007 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
482 Points ∼24% -52%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
739 Points ∼36% -27%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
428 Points ∼21% -57%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
418 Points ∼21% -58%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
471 Points ∼23% -53%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1000 - 1009, n=3)
1005 Points ∼49% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=627)
2034 Points ∼100% +102%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
655 Points ∼44%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
607 Points ∼40% -7%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1209 Points ∼80% +85%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
502 Points ∼33% -23%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
490 Points ∼33% -25%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1421 Points ∼94% +117%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (655 - 1335, n=3)
1102 Points ∼73% +68%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=627)
1505 Points ∼100% +130%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
2238 Points ∼76%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
1434 Points ∼49% -36%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1962 Points ∼66% -12%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
1228 Points ∼42% -45%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
1241 Points ∼42% -45%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
1798 Points ∼61% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (2238 - 2687, n=3)
2516 Points ∼85% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=627)
2953 Points ∼100% +32%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 2048
1124 Points ∼76%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320, 2048
745 Points ∼50% -34%
Honor 7A
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 (MSM8937), Adreno 505, 3072
1055 Points ∼71% -6%
Nokia 2.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
643 Points ∼43% -43%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Adreno 308, 1024
654 Points ∼44% -42%
Huawei Y5 2019
Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300, 2048
983 Points ∼66% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
  (1124 - 1312, n=3)
1249 Points ∼84% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=627)
1479 Points ∼100% +32%

The Redmi smartphone is one of the fastest of its price range in terms of browsing the web. We got the impression that websites loaded images and other content quickly.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=100)
35.5 Points ∼100% +110%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76)
16.911 Points ∼48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (15.9 - 16.9, n=2)
16.4 Points ∼46% -3%
Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74)
15.682 Points ∼44% -7%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=89)
39.6 runs/min ∼100% +115%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chome 76)
18.45 runs/min ∼47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (18.2 - 18.5, n=2)
18.3 runs/min ∼46% -1%
Huawei Y5 2019 (Chome 74)
14.7 runs/min ∼37% -20%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=158)
66.8 Points ∼100% +96%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (34 - 38, n=3)
36.3 Points ∼54% +7%
Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74)
35 Points ∼52% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76)
34 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70)
30 Points ∼45% -12%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=685)
6706 Points ∼100% +43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (4701 - 4958, n=3)
4823 Points ∼72% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76)
4701 Points ∼70%
Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74)
4603 Points ∼69% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70)
4332 Points ∼65% -8%
Honor 7A (Chrome 67)
3389 Points ∼51% -28%
Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70)
2503 Points ∼37% -47%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
2412 Points ∼36% -49%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Honor 7A (Chrome 67)
14709 ms * ∼100% -45%
Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70)
13821 ms * ∼94% -36%
Motorola Moto E5 Play
13477 ms * ∼92% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70)
10739.7 ms * ∼73% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=710)
10594 ms * ∼72% -4%
Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74)
10364 ms * ∼70% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76)
10142.7 ms * ∼69%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (9768 - 10143, n=3)
9914 ms * ∼67% +2%

* ... smaller is better

Our test unit reached class average transfer rates with our external memory card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501. The internal storage, however, is not particularly fast. Xiaomi had equipped the predecessor, Redmi 6A, with a faster eMMC flash storage. 

Xiaomi Redmi 7AXiaomi Redmi 6AHonor 7A Nokia 2.1Motorola Moto E5 PlayHuawei Y5 2019Average 16 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
84%
-5%
0%
43%
1%
-38%
17%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
64.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
65.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
65.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
61.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
28.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-55%
63.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
39.2 (6.38 - 65.7, n=128)
-39%
49.1 (1.7 - 87.1, n=418)
-24%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
85.24 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
82.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-3%
84.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
79.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
83.74 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-2%
81.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
58.5 (8.1 - 87.7, n=128)
-31%
67.4 (8.1 - 96.5, n=418)
-21%
Random Write 4KB
9.6
52.23
444%
9.4
-2%
13.45
40%
43.16
350%
13.1
36%
7.9 (0.49 - 44.9, n=246)
-18%
21.5 (0.14 - 250, n=735)
124%
Random Read 4KB
57.8
33.94
-41%
39.2
-32%
50.46
-13%
46.31
-20%
62.1
7%
21.3 (2.49 - 62.1, n=246)
-63%
46.6 (1.59 - 196, n=735)
-19%
Sequential Write 256KB
68.7
131.67
92%
72.5
6%
51.18
-26%
52.2
-24%
45.2
-34%
42.6 (8.74 - 106, n=246)
-38%
95.5 (2.99 - 590, n=735)
39%
Sequential Read 256KB
258
277.54
8%
254.8
-1%
288.26
12%
279
8%
272.1
5%
165 (9.66 - 294, n=246)
-36%
269 (12.1 - 1504, n=735)
4%

Games – the Redmi is suitable for games

The Adreno 505 in our Redmi 7A is definitely suitable for gaming and supports a lot of gaming APIs, which means it should also be future-proof for the next few years. Its performance is good enough to play Arena of Valor smoothly at 30 fps and at high details. (However, the HD mode cannot be activated in the game.) The settings do not seem to have a noticeable impact on frame rates in Asphalt 9. They remain at around 30 fps throughout with only minor judders. The frame rates are determined using the app GameBench.  

The Redmi 7A is not made for hardcore gamers, but if you are interested in simpler games, you should be perfectly happy with this phone. The touchscreen and gyroscope work well and let you control games precisely.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9
Asphalt 9
Temple Run 2
Temple Run 2
010203040Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min; 1.30.2.4: Ø29.9 (26-31)
; Arena of Valor; high HD; 1.30.2.4: Ø29.9 (28-31)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; High Quality; 1.6.3a: Ø23.6 (15-30)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; Standard / low; 1.6.3a: Ø25.7 (3-30)

Emissions – great speakers

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

The Xiaomi phone heats up to 40.5 °C (104.9 °F) max under high load. This is still acceptable, although the smartphone might become a little uncomfortable to touch after long gaming sessions on hot days. The bottom of the Redmi 7A remains slightly cooler. We did not notice any particular heat development while idling.

The performance of the SoC remains stable under continuous load, which we measured with the GFXBench battery test 

Max. Load
 40.5 °C
105 F
38.3 °C
101 F
37.5 °C
100 F
 
 40.5 °C
105 F
38.5 °C
101 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
 40 °C
104 F
38.9 °C
102 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
Maximum: 40.5 °C = 105 F
Average: 39 °C = 102 F
36.5 °C
98 F
38.7 °C
102 F
39.9 °C
104 F
36 °C
97 F
38.5 °C
101 F
39.9 °C
104 F
36.3 °C
97 F
39.2 °C
103 F
39.5 °C
103 F
Maximum: 39.9 °C = 104 F
Average: 38.3 °C = 101 F
Power Supply (max.)  35.5 °C = 96 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39 °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 40.5 °C / 105 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 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
Heat map front
Heat map front
Heat map back
Heat map back

Speaker

Speaker test Pink Noise
Speaker test Pink Noise

The speaker is positioned on the bottom of the device, which is a better placement than last time. Our test with the ARTA software shows that the speaker is also a little louder than that of its predecessor, which is good news. Bass frequencies are still not audible, but at least the low mids are more present on this phone. 

Subjectively, the sound of the Redmi 7A is really good for this price range. It is quite warm and there are no noticeable distortions even at maximum volume. Audio is not quite as clear as on more expensive smartphones, but for $100, it is impressive. You can connect external speakers or headphones via the 3.5-mm audio jack or Bluetooth. This works well; the phone transmits a nice, clean sound.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2046.938.22538.336.43131.8304034.135.1504439.76331.729.880252610026.729.512523.922.916021.832.620020.343.525019.65031518.855.340017.560.750020.16663019.771.280017.372.5100017.473.8125015.471.4160016.471.8200016.472.1250015.568.5315015.665.4400015.765500016.169.963001669.3800016.568.61000016.368.41250015.968.61600015.859SPL702969.782N25.31.223.752.9median 16.5median 68.4Delta28.936.945.536.544.937.239.137.641.231.73523.823.724.425.123.625.119.922.723.32418.430.718.238.215.845.114.653.415.557.21361.512.364.712.166.111.965.810.768.210.768.110.566.610.366.810.767.210.565.510.56510.663.210.662.510.553.710.641.461.552.561.424.177.814.68.214.50.639.8median 11.9median 62.53.412.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Redmi 7AXiaomi Redmi 6A
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Redmi 7A audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 37% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Redmi 6A audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery Life – the Xiaomi phone just keeps on going

Power Consumption

The Xiaomi Redmi 7A is not really efficient in terms of power consumption but manages to position itself in the midrange of its class. The maximum consumption of 5.4 watts under maximum load is quite high while the minimum of 0.8 watts while idling is rather low. 

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.5 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.6 / 2.2 Watt
Load midlight 3.9 / 5.4 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
3000 mAh
Honor 7A
3000 mAh
Nokia 2.1
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto E5 Play
2120 mAh
Huawei Y5 2019
3020 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
17%
-22%
16%
-3%
-10%
7%
-5%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.7
12%
1.3
-63%
0.7
12%
1.2
-50%
1.2
-50%
0.723 (0.63 - 0.8, n=3)
10%
0.876 (0.2 - 3.4, n=770)
-10%
Idle Average *
1.6
1.2
25%
1.6
-0%
1.2
25%
1.6
-0%
1.9
-19%
1.72 (1.6 - 1.9, n=3)
-8%
1.733 (0.6 - 6.2, n=769)
-8%
Idle Maximum *
2.2
2
9%
2.9
-32%
1.9
14%
2
9%
2.4
-9%
2.05 (1.73 - 2.21, n=3)
7%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=770)
8%
Load Average *
3.9
3.4
13%
3.7
5%
3.2
18%
3.6
8%
3.3
15%
3.37 (3.04 - 3.9, n=3)
14%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=764)
-4%
Load Maximum *
5.4
4
26%
6.4
-19%
4.8
11%
4.5
17%
4.6
15%
4.77 (4.15 - 5.4, n=3)
12%
5.9 (1.2 - 14.2, n=764)
-9%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The battery can be considered one of the centerpieces of the Redmi 7A with its capacity of 4000 mAh. That's hard to find for $100. The Xiaomi Redmi 7A reaches a runtime of 14:13 hours in our Wi-Fi test and easily manages to outpace all of its competitors. It lasts about 1.5 hours longer than its predecessor and even the Nokia 2.1, which is also equipped with a 4000-mAh battery, cannot keep up.

On top of that, the device comes with a quick-charge AC adapter, which recharges the smartphone in less than two hours. That's impressive for such an affordable smartphone.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
25h 43min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
14h 13min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15h 02min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 46min
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi 6A
3000 mAh
Honor 7A
3000 mAh
Nokia 2.1
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto E5 Play
2120 mAh
Huawei Y5 2019
3020 mAh
Battery Runtime
-11%
-23%
-5%
-55%
-17%
Reader / Idle
1543
1256
-19%
H.264
902
732
-19%
WiFi v1.3
853
761
-11%
657
-23%
809
-5%
382.9
-55%
709
-17%
Load
286
249
-13%

Pros

+ great price-to-performance ratio
+ long battery life
+ ergonomic case design
+ bright display
+ good speakers
+ up-to-date software

Cons

- GPS is rather imprecise
- muted voice quality
- no fingerprint sensor
- display has bad contrast ratio

Verdict – So affordable and so strong

Review: Xiaomi Redmi 7A
Review: Xiaomi Redmi 7A

Xiaomi's Redmi phones are price cutters - they continually set new standards in their price range: The Remi 7A is available for around $100 (depending on the configuration) and offers features that we usually only see in smartphones that are double the price. For example, the phone runs on a Snapdragon 439, a powerful SoC that offers a lot of bang for your buck. The very long battery life, the great speakers and gaming suitability round off the set of great features. The camera takes decent pictures, the display is bright and heat development is tolerable under load. The new color options give the Xiaomi phone a fresh, modern look that also feels very comfortable to hold. Thanks to the quick-charge function, the smartphone also recharges quickly.  

That's quite a collection of strengths for such an affordable device and hardly any competitor in this price range can match it. The phone even beats its predecessor with a longer battery life and increased performance. The fact that the Redmi A models are not equipped with a fingerprint reader is a shame, however, as is the imprecise GPS and the slightly muted earpiece.

If you are looking for an affordable smartphone and still want good performance and a long battery life, the Redmi 7A might be the right phone for you.

We can definitely recommend the Xiaomi Redmi 7A. Just make sure to purchase the global version from a reliable reseller, as you might otherwise have issues with the AC adapter and warranty.

Xiaomi Redmi 7A - 08/08/2019 v6(old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
74%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
93%
Connectivity
39 / 60 → 65%
Weight
91%
Battery
96%
Display
83%
Games Performance
32 / 63 → 50%
Application Performance
50 / 70 → 71%
Temperature
87%
Noise
100%
Audio
66 / 91 → 72%
Camera
63%
Average
72%
83%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Xiaomi Redmi 7A Smartphone Review – the cut-price phone
Florian Schmitt, 2019-08-13 (Update: 2019-08-13)