Notebookcheck

ZTE Blade A510 Smartphone Review

Marcus Herbrich, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Liala Stieglitz), 03/21/2017

Photo expert in the low-cost sector? The Chinese manufacturer ZTE advertises its latest entry-level smartphone Blade A510 as the absolutely best choice for price-conscious buyers wanting first-rate photos and videos. Find out just how good the rear-facing, 13-MP camera in the low-cost handset really is in our in-depth review.

For the original German review, see here.

The smartphone label ZTE aims to score with potential buyers, especially in one aspect of its affordable Blade A510 model: the price. The entry-level smartphone has a current street price of approximately 100 Euros (~$108), and was even available for 80 Euros (~$86) during test time.

The installed hardware components correspond to the price category and only minor differences are found compared with the competition. The Blade A510 has a 5-inch IPS HD panel, a 2200-mAh battery that cannot be replaced despite the removable back cover and a quad-core processor by MediaTek. ZTE relies on only 8 GB of ROM for the internal storage and 1 GB of working memory, which is now rather undersized in this price range (RRP: 130 Euros/~$140). The rear-facing camera has a resolution of 13 MP, while the front-facing camera has 5 MP. According to the manufacturer, they are capable of  shooting brilliant photos.

The rivals in this price sector that we will also use as comparison devices are Blackview's A8 MaxArchos' 50 Platinum 4GTP-Link's Neffos C5Huawei's Y5 II, and Ulefone's Metal. However, the Blade V7 Lite sister model is a possible alternative since it costs only 30 to 40 Euros (~$32 to ~$43) more than the Blade A510 and their technical specifications are similar

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

ZTE Blade A510 (Blade Series)
Processor
Graphics adapter
Memory
1024 MB 
Display
5 inch 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, multi-touch, capacitive, LCD, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
8 GB eMMC Flash, 8 GB 
, 3 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm jack, Card Reader: micro-SD card (max. 32GB), Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity sensor, ambient light sensor, Hall sensor, WiFi Direkt, status LED
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4), Bluetooth 4.1, 2G 850/900/1800/1900 3G 900/2100 4G B1/B3/7/8/20, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 143 x 70 ( = 0.31 x 5.63 x 2.76 in)
Battery
2200 mAh Lithium-Ion, Talk time 2G (according to manufacturer): 25 h, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 12 h, Standby 2G (according to manufacturer): 395 h, Standby 3G (according to manufacturer): 620 h
Operating System
Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix phase detection autofocus, capture mode: EV/scene mode/color effect continuous shot/face detection/anti-flicker picture size setting/white balance
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: mono, Keyboard: onscreen, Keyboard Light: yes, handset (incl. battery), stereo headphone, power supply, USB cable, quick start guide, ZTE UI, 24 Months Warranty, head SAR: 0.416 W/Kg, fanless
Weight
130 g ( = 4.59 oz / 0.29 pounds), Power Supply: 38 g ( = 1.34 oz / 0.08 pounds)
Price
129 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

In Germany, ZTE's smartphone is available in white, light-silver and dark-gray. The casing of the Blade A510 is plastic and glass on the front, and is well manufactured. The entry-level's display bezel is quite large, which is also reflected in the relatively poor screen-surface ratio of 66%. The power button and volume control have good pressure points.

The back cover that can be dented slightly can be removed in order to expand the storage with a microSD card, or accessing the two SIM card slots. The 2200 mAh battery cannot be removed. High pressure on the casing's back produces a slightly visible wave formation on the screen. Nevertheless, the casing's stability does not give much cause for complaint.

Size Comparison

154.3 mm / 6.07 inch 78 mm / 3.07 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 177 g0.3902 lbs145 mm / 5.71 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 9.4 mm / 0.3701 inch 152 g0.3351 lbs144 mm / 5.67 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 141 g0.3109 lbs143.8 mm / 5.66 inch 72 mm / 2.83 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 135 g0.2976 lbs143 mm / 5.63 inch 71 mm / 2.8 inch 9.35 mm / 0.3681 inch 155 g0.3417 lbs143.8 mm / 5.66 inch 70.2 mm / 2.76 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 135 g0.2976 lbs143 mm / 5.63 inch 70 mm / 2.76 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 130 g0.2866 lbs

Connectivity

The Blade A510's internal eMMC storage has a capacity of just 8 GB, and the user has just under 4 GB for personal use in the state of delivery. At least, the dual SIM smartphone's storage can be expanded by up to 32 GB via a microSD. It can also be formatted as internal storage.

The micro USB 2.0 port on the lower edge can only be used for recharging the smartphone. It does not support OTG functionality (on-the-go). In addition to Wi-Fi Direct, a status LED for missed notifications is also included.

Software

As with the Blade V7 lineup, ZTE relies on Google's Android operating system version 6.0 Marshmallow and covers it with a proprietary user interface, MiFavor 3.5. However, it is very similar to the standard Android in the setting menus and notification bar. An app drawer is not installed.

An update to the new Android 7.0 Nougat  has not been announced yet and it is questionable whether the smartphone will receive an update to the manufacturer's MiFavor 4.0 user interface. At the time of testing, the system had  the latest software version with the security patch level from July 2016.

Communication and GPS

The integrated Wi-Fi module supports the IEEE 802.11 b/g/n standard and thus transmits only in the 2.4 GHz frequency range. The transmission speed of 50 Mbit/s between the smartphone and our Linksys EA 8500 reference router is on par with other entry-level devices. The attenuation of almost -34 dBm in the direct vicinity of the router (Telekom Speedport, W921V) is comparatively low.

The dual SIM smartphone accesses the mobile Internet with a nano SIM and a micro SIM card in LTE speed. Unlike many other comparable devices with a hybrid slot, the second card is not restricted to the GSM network. Quad band GSM, dual band UMTS, and LTE in the 1, 3, 7, 8, and 20 frequency bands are supported.

The Blade A510 is equipped with Bluetooth version 4.1 for wireless communication between end devices. Unfortunately, an NFC chip is not installed.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
515 MBit/s ∼100% +957%
ZTE Blade A510
Mali-T720, MT6735P, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.7 MBit/s ∼9%
Blackview A8 Max
Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash
34.3 MBit/s ∼7% -30%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
435 MBit/s ∼100% +808%
ZTE Blade A510
Mali-T720, MT6735P, 8 GB eMMC Flash
47.9 MBit/s ∼11%
Blackview A8 Max
Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash
47.5 MBit/s ∼11% -1%
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
Ulefone Metal
Mali-T720, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
88.3 MBit/s ∼100%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
Mali-T720, MT6735, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.7 MBit/s ∼55%
Huawei Y5 II
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.3 MBit/s ∼55%
TP-Link Neffos C5
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
44.9 MBit/s ∼51%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
Ulefone Metal
Mali-T720, MT6753, 16 GB eMMC Flash
73.1 MBit/s ∼100%
Huawei Y5 II
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 8 GB eMMC Flash
52.9 MBit/s ∼72%
TP-Link Neffos C5
Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash
49.3 MBit/s ∼67%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
Mali-T720, MT6735, 8 GB eMMC Flash
48.5 MBit/s ∼66%
GPS test outdoors
GPS test indoors

ZTE's smartphone is tracked via a GPS module. Finding our position outdoors was performed quickly and with an accuracy of approximately 3 meters (~10 ft). The signal was too weak to find our position indoors. We also took the entry-level smartphone on a roughly 12-kilometer (~7.5 mi) test drive to check the GPS accuracy and compared its results with that of Garmin's Edge 500 professional navigation system. The difference between the two devices is 410 meters (~448 yd). Overall, the smartphone's performance is satisfactory for the price range, but it is not on a good level.

GPS ZTE Blade A510
GPS ZTE Blade A510
GPS ZTE Blade A510
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500

Telephone and Call Quality

Phone app
Keypad

We quite liked the call quality of the Blade A510 in the mobile (D) network in the test. We understood our contact clearly and our contact also understood us well. ZTE relies on Google's standard phone app. The user interface design is basic and offers the usual phone features, such as favorites, quick dial, and contacts.

Cameras

5-MP camera
13-MP camera

The Chinese manufacturer does not reveal much about the camera modules installed in the Blade A510. A 13-MP camera (4160x3120 pixels) with phase detection autofocus and a single-colored LED flash is installed on the rear. Videos can be recorded at a maximum resolution of 1280x720 pixels and a refresh rate of 30 frames per second.

The rear-facing camera's quality is quite impressive for this price category. The photos taken with the Blade A510 in bright light conditions convince with a good, high-contrast color reproduction. Furthermore, focusing on close objects in macro-photography is very good. The dynamic range in the photos and the sharpness achieved with the autofocus is good, even though it decreases visibly toward the edges. However, only a few image details can be recognized in zoomed photos. The autofocus finds its limits in low-light conditions, and the pictures display visible blurriness and image noise. Overall, we think the shutter speed as rather slow, which reduces the overall impression slightly.

The lens on the handset's front has a resolution of only 5 MP (2592x1944 pixels) and a fixed focus. The 5-MP camera's quality is sufficient for selfies, but photos often present weaknesses in sharpness due to insufficient focusing.

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

Accessories and Warranty

In addition to ZTE's smartphone, the box contained a stereo headset, a modular power supply, a USB cable, and a quick start.

According to the included warranty card, the manufacturer offers a 24-month warranty from the date of purchase. Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices and Handling

The Blade A510 is controlled via three capacitive buttons that are located below the screen. Unlike the Blade V7 Lite, they are not backlit. Apart from the home button, the capacitive keys can be mapped with Android-typical commands (back, multitasking). The multi-touchscreen responds accurately to inputs made with up to 5 fingers, but sometimes with noticeable delay.

The scratch-resistant glass surface offers pleasant typing and gliding qualities. The virtual on screen keyboard by SwiftKey is preloaded as an input option.

Onscreen keyboard, landscape mode
Onscreen keyboard, portrait mode
Onscreen keyboard, portrait mode
Onscreen keyboard, portrait mode

Display

Subpixel grid

The IPS LCD screen has a diagonal of 12.7 centimeters (5 inches). This, together with a resolution of 1280x720 pixels results in a pixel density of 294 PPI. Pixels are barely visible during normal use and viewing distances. Subjectively, texts with small fonts look slightly blurred. However, the competitors in this price range do not offer a higher pixel count per inch.

The maximum brightness of 537 cd/m² that we measured from the Blade A510 is very good for an entry-level smartphone, and its illumination of 94% is very homogeneous. The screen achieves a brightness of 529 cd/m² when the ambient light sensor for controlling screen brightness is enabled. The realistic APL50 test (average picture level) with evenly distributed bright and dark areas results in a virtually equal maximum brightness of 530 cd/m² in the screen's center at a black level of 0.64 cd/m².

523
cd/m²
538
cd/m²
534
cd/m²
516
cd/m²
528
cd/m²
521
cd/m²
517
cd/m²
505
cd/m²
537
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
LCD
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 538 cd/m² Average: 524.3 cd/m² Minimum: 14.85 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 528 cd/m²
Contrast: 852:1 (Black: 0.62 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.2 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 5.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
Gamma: 1.99
ZTE Blade A510
IPS, 1280x720, 5
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
IPS, 1280x720, 5
TP-Link Neffos C5
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Ulefone Metal
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Blackview A8 Max
IPS, 1280x720, 5.5
Huawei Y5 II
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Google Pixel XL 2016
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5
Screen
-11%
-14%
-29%
-19%
-29%
-35%
-1%
Brightness middle
528
312
-41%
508
-4%
312
-41%
344
-35%
435
-18%
465
-12%
402
-24%
Brightness
524
302
-42%
491
-6%
315
-40%
349
-33%
407
-22%
443
-15%
408
-22%
Brightness Distribution
94
79
-16%
89
-5%
87
-7%
89
-5%
86
-9%
90
-4%
85
-10%
Black Level *
0.62
0.15
76%
0.58
6%
0.56
10%
0.65
-5%
1.08
-74%
0.84
-35%
Contrast
852
2080
144%
876
3%
557
-35%
529
-38%
403
-53%
554
-35%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.2
8.2
-58%
7
-35%
6.8
-31%
5.8
-12%
5.7
-10%
7.8
-50%
4
23%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.7
16.5
-90%
14.1
-62%
14
-61%
10.7
-23%
12.3
-41%
15.7
-80%
10.1
-16%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.7
9.2
-61%
6.1
-7%
7.1
-25%
5.7
-0%
5.9
-4%
8.4
-47%
3.2
44%
Gamma
1.99 111%
2.29 96%
2.15 102%
2.77 79%
2.1 105%
2.18 101%
2.07 106%
2.19 100%
CCT
6631 98%
9017 72%
8068 81%
7402 88%
7792 83%
8164 80%
8438 77%
7037 92%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9276 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The colors on the IPS panel look vivid and intense in everyday use, and the measured contrast of 852:1 (black level: 0.62 cd/m²) is also high enough and appealing for an entry-level handset. Furthermore, the screen in our review sample achieved an almost complete coverage in the sRGB color space measurement. The average DeltaE deviation in colors and grayscale levels of 5.2 and 5.7 compared with the sRGB color space are also on a good level for the price category, even though the ideal value is <3. The measured color temperature of 6631 K is perfect compared with the ideal rate of 6500 K.

CalMAN ColorChecker (target color space: sRGB)
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps (target color space: sRGB)
CalMAN Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
CalMAN Colorspace (target color space: sRGB)

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
48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 18 ms rise
↘ 30 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 99 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
636 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 476 ms rise
↘ 160 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. » 100 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

Thanks to the underlying IPS technology, the liquid crystal display in the Blade A510 presents very stable viewing angles. Colors do not distort even in flat viewing angles, but the screen darkens slightly. The entry-level smartphone also looks good in bright light conditions thanks to the LED backlight's high maximum brightness, and always remains sufficiently legible.

Outdoors
Outdoors
Outdoors
Viewing angles

Performance

MediaTek's processor installed into the Blade A510 is an ARM based mid-range SoC from 2014, which is now only found in low-cost entry-level smartphones. The manufacturer's SoC (system-on-a-chip) has four Cortex A53 cores with a 64-bit architecture and clock at a maximum of 1.5 GHz. However, ZTE has reduced the MT6735(p) clock speed to 1 GHz in the Blade A510. The quad-core SoC's performance is able to ensure a mostly smooth system performance in everyday use, same as in Coolpad's Porto S. However, the Blade A510's work speed convinces us only conditionally - breaks, stutters and long delays occurred even during low load. The system often needed a few seconds during multitasking, and browsing via the preloaded Chrome browser needed longer to open websites. The synthetic benchmarks confirm the subjective impressions. The performance of ZTE's handset is the lowest in the comparison and not really on par with the MT6735 competitors - only Archos 50 Platinum 4G presents similar scores.

The installed 8 GB of flash memory also reveals very weak access rates, and accessing the micro SD card (reference memory card: Toshiba Exceria Pro M401, max. read: 95 MB/s; write: 80 MB/s) is also relatively slow. The Androbench 5 benchmark test reveals the poorest performance in the comparison field, particularly when reading large and small data blocks.

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
16.5 MB/s ∼19%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
12.62 MB/s ∼14% -24%
TP-Link Neffos C5
18.89 MB/s ∼22% +14%
Ulefone Metal
27.6 MB/s ∼32% +67%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
15.58 MB/s ∼18% -6%
Blackview A8 Max
18.5 MB/s ∼21% +12%
Huawei Y5 II
18.03 MB/s ∼21% +9%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
25.55 MB/s ∼26%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
22.77 MB/s ∼24% -11%
TP-Link Neffos C5
39.11 MB/s ∼41% +53%
Ulefone Metal
49.6 MB/s ∼51% +94%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
31.85 MB/s ∼33% +25%
Blackview A8 Max
35.94 MB/s ∼37% +41%
Huawei Y5 II
29.47 MB/s ∼31% +15%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
4.69 MB/s ∼2%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
8.26 MB/s ∼3% +76%
TP-Link Neffos C5
6.85 MB/s ∼3% +46%
Ulefone Metal
7.87 MB/s ∼3% +68%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
4.35 MB/s ∼2% -7%
Blackview A8 Max
5.65 MB/s ∼2% +20%
Huawei Y5 II
6 MB/s ∼2% +28%
Google Pixel XL 2016
14.56 MB/s ∼6% +210%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
14.03 MB/s ∼7%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
18.24 MB/s ∼9% +30%
TP-Link Neffos C5
17.16 MB/s ∼9% +22%
Ulefone Metal
22.18 MB/s ∼11% +58%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
14.31 MB/s ∼7% +2%
Blackview A8 Max
16.15 MB/s ∼8% +15%
Huawei Y5 II
27.3 MB/s ∼14% +95%
Google Pixel XL 2016
87.67 MB/s ∼45% +525%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
9.94 MB/s ∼2%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
70.33 MB/s ∼12% +608%
TP-Link Neffos C5
52.43 MB/s ∼9% +427%
Ulefone Metal
39.91 MB/s ∼7% +302%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
7.56 MB/s ∼1% -24%
Blackview A8 Max
47.25 MB/s ∼8% +375%
Huawei Y5 II
21.6 MB/s ∼4% +117%
Google Pixel XL 2016
83.38 MB/s ∼14% +739%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
111.91 MB/s ∼7%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
187.34 MB/s ∼12% +67%
TP-Link Neffos C5
145.77 MB/s ∼10% +30%
Ulefone Metal
228.84 MB/s ∼15% +104%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
125.37 MB/s ∼8% +12%
Blackview A8 Max
141.83 MB/s ∼9% +27%
Huawei Y5 II
173.3 MB/s ∼12% +55%
Google Pixel XL 2016
258.23 MB/s ∼17% +131%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
24338 Points ∼8%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
23822 Points ∼8% -2%
TP-Link Neffos C5
32681 Points ∼11% +34%
Ulefone Metal
37103 Points ∼13% +52%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
23657 Points ∼8% -3%
Blackview A8 Max
30916 Points ∼11% +27%
Huawei Y5 II
23795 Points ∼8% -2%
Google Pixel XL 2016
138641 Points ∼47% +470%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
1195 Points ∼4%
Ulefone Metal
2458 Points ∼8% +106%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
1206 Points ∼4% +1%
Blackview A8 Max
1525 Points ∼5% +28%
Huawei Y5 II
1573 Points ∼5% +32%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4167 Points ∼14% +249%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
429 Points ∼7%
Ulefone Metal
609 Points ∼10% +42%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
428 Points ∼7% 0%
Blackview A8 Max
589 Points ∼10% +37%
Huawei Y5 II
561 Points ∼9% +31%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1513 Points ∼25% +253%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
609 Points ∼13%
TP-Link Neffos C5
796 Points ∼18%
Ulefone Metal
1084 Points ∼24%
Blackview A8 Max
728 Points ∼16%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1935 Points ∼43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
65 Points ∼1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
101 Points ∼1%
Ulefone Metal
158 Points ∼2%
Blackview A8 Max
82 Points ∼1%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2820 Points ∼39%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
81 Points ∼1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
125 Points ∼2%
Ulefone Metal
195 Points ∼3%
Blackview A8 Max
102 Points ∼2%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2560 Points ∼41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
618 Points ∼14%
TP-Link Neffos C5
810 Points ∼18%
Ulefone Metal
1057 Points ∼23%
Blackview A8 Max
727 Points ∼16%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1902 Points ∼42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
101 Points ∼1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
167 Points ∼1%
Ulefone Metal
243 Points ∼2%
Blackview A8 Max
129 Points ∼1%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3935 Points ∼35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
124 Points ∼2%
TP-Link Neffos C5
203 Points ∼2%
Ulefone Metal
293 Points ∼4%
Blackview A8 Max
158 Points ∼2%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3180 Points ∼39%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
7025 Points ∼8%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
7026 Points ∼8% 0%
TP-Link Neffos C5
9291 Points ∼11% +32%
Ulefone Metal
10371 Points ∼12% +48%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
6902 Points ∼8% -2%
Blackview A8 Max
8646 Points ∼10% +23%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel XL 2016
18222 Points ∼21% +159%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
2682 Points ∼1%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
2645 Points ∼0% -1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
4223 Points ∼1% +57%
Ulefone Metal
6469 Points ∼1% +141%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2681 Points ∼1% 0%
Blackview A8 Max
3284 Points ∼1% +22%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel XL 2016
32652 Points ∼6% +1117%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
3109 Points ∼1%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
3070 Points ∼1% -1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
4906 Points ∼2% +58%
Ulefone Metal
7059 Points ∼3% +127%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
3103 Points ∼1% 0%
Blackview A8 Max
3809 Points ∼2% +23%
Huawei Y5 II
Points ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel XL 2016
27766 Points ∼12% +793%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
4.9 fps ∼0%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
4.9 fps ∼0% 0%
TP-Link Neffos C5
14 fps ∼0% +186%
Ulefone Metal
19 fps ∼0% +288%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
8.7 fps ∼0% +78%
Blackview A8 Max
6 fps ∼0% +22%
Huawei Y5 II
8.4 fps ∼0% +71%
Google Pixel XL 2016
91 fps ∼1% +1757%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
8.5 fps ∼0%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
8.2 fps ∼0% -4%
TP-Link Neffos C5
8.3 fps ∼0% -2%
Ulefone Metal
12 fps ∼0% +41%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
4.9 fps ∼0% -42%
Blackview A8 Max
10 fps ∼0% +18%
Huawei Y5 II
15 fps ∼0% +76%
Google Pixel XL 2016
55 fps ∼2% +547%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
3.4 fps ∼1%
TP-Link Neffos C5
6.1 fps ∼1%
Ulefone Metal
2.9 fps ∼1%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
3.6 fps ∼1%
Blackview A8 Max
2.2 fps ∼0%
Huawei Y5 II
fps ∼0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
48 fps ∼9%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
3.5 fps ∼1%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
1.8 fps ∼0% -49%
TP-Link Neffos C5
2.8 fps ∼1% -20%
Ulefone Metal
6.4 fps ∼2% +83%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
1.2 fps ∼0% -66%
Blackview A8 Max
4.5 fps ∼1% +29%
Huawei Y5 II
6.1 fps ∼2% +74%
Google Pixel XL 2016
30 fps ∼8% +757%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
1.1 fps ∼0%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
2.5 fps ∼0% +127%
Ulefone Metal
8.9 fps ∼0% +709%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2.7 fps ∼0% +145%
Blackview A8 Max
1.4 fps ∼0% +27%
Huawei Y5 II
fps ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel XL 2016
32 fps ∼1% +2809%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
2.5 fps ∼0%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
1.2 fps ∼0% -52%
Ulefone Metal
4.5 fps ∼0% +80%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
1.2 fps ∼0% -52%
Blackview A8 Max
3.2 fps ∼0% +28%
Huawei Y5 II
fps ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel XL 2016
17 fps ∼0% +580%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
2675 Points ∼14%
TP-Link Neffos C5
3443 Points ∼18% +29%
Ulefone Metal
4079 Points ∼21% +52%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2807 Points ∼14% +5%
Blackview A8 Max
3427 Points ∼17% +28%
Huawei Y5 II
3237 Points ∼17% +21%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4739 Points ∼24% +77%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
10 Points ∼0%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
592 Points ∼29% +5820%
TP-Link Neffos C5
638 Points ∼31% +6280%
Ulefone Metal
10 Points ∼0% 0%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
9 Points ∼0% -10%
Blackview A8 Max
9 Points ∼0% -10%
Huawei Y5 II
10 Points ∼0% 0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
977 Points ∼48% +9670%
Graphics (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
174 Points ∼1%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
174 Points ∼1% 0%
TP-Link Neffos C5
281 Points ∼1% +61%
Ulefone Metal
433 Points ∼2% +149%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
175 Points ∼1% +1%
Blackview A8 Max
211 Points ∼1% +21%
Huawei Y5 II
283 Points ∼1% +63%
Google Pixel XL 2016
5017 Points ∼17% +2783%
Memory (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
285 Points ∼4%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
487 Points ∼6% +71%
TP-Link Neffos C5
991 Points ∼13% +248%
Ulefone Metal
802 Points ∼11% +181%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
354 Points ∼5% +24%
Blackview A8 Max
733 Points ∼10% +157%
Huawei Y5 II
375 Points ∼5% +32%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1677 Points ∼22% +488%
System (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
829 Points ∼5%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
801 Points ∼5% -3%
TP-Link Neffos C5
1199 Points ∼7% +45%
Ulefone Metal
1691 Points ∼10% +104%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
838 Points ∼5% +1%
Blackview A8 Max
1125 Points ∼7% +36%
Huawei Y5 II
1094 Points ∼7% +32%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3889 Points ∼24% +369%
Overall (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
141 Points ∼2%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
448 Points ∼5% +218%
TP-Link Neffos C5
683 Points ∼8% +384%
Ulefone Metal
273 Points ∼3% +94%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
148 Points ∼2% +5%
Blackview A8 Max
201 Points ∼2% +43%
Huawei Y5 II
183 Points ∼2% +30%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2378 Points ∼28% +1587%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
17364.1 ms * ∼29%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
19234.4 ms * ∼32% -11%
TP-Link Neffos C5
12783.4 ms * ∼21% +26%
Ulefone Metal
13397.3 ms * ∼23% +23%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
19092.2 ms * ∼32% -10%
Blackview A8 Max
13642.6 ms * ∼23% +21%
Huawei Y5 II
12505 ms * ∼21% +28%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2653.6 ms * ∼4% +85%
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
2102 Points ∼4%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
1910 Points ∼4% -9%
TP-Link Neffos C5
2738 Points ∼5% +30%
Ulefone Metal
2738 Points ∼5% +30%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2122 Points ∼4% +1%
Blackview A8 Max
2607 Points ∼5% +24%
Huawei Y5 II
2707 Points ∼5% +29%
Google Pixel XL 2016
8690 Points ∼17% +313%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
ZTE Blade A510
12.784 Points ∼4%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
12.729 Points ∼4% 0%
TP-Link Neffos C5
18.209 Points ∼5% +42%
Ulefone Metal
17.831 Points ∼5% +39%
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
12.755 Points ∼4% 0%
Blackview A8 Max
17.188 Points ∼5% +34%
Huawei Y5 II
18.47 Points ∼5% +44%
Google Pixel XL 2016
55.4 Points ∼16% +333%

Legend

 
ZTE Blade A510 Mediatek MT6735P, ARM Mali-T720, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
ZTE Blade V7 Lite Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
TP-Link Neffos C5 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Ulefone Metal Mediatek MT6753, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Archos 50 Platinum 4G Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Blackview A8 Max Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Y5 II Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Google Pixel XL 2016 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

* ... smaller is better

Games

The Mali T720 graphics unit integrated into MediaTek's MT6735  has only one cluster that clocks at up to 600 MHz. Thus, it was not surprising that the Mali GPU only managed up-to-date games from the Android Play Store with stutters and lags while gaming.

"Dead Trigger 2"
"Asphalt Xtreme"

Emissions

Temperature

The temperature development of the entry-level smartphone is no problem in everyday use. The Blade A510 is pleasantly cool, even during heavy duty calculations. ZTE's handset heats up to a maximum of 36.1 °C (~97 °F) on its upper side during system load (CPU and GPU) in the one hour stress test via the Stability test application. Large areas on the rear remain below 34 °C (~93 °F).

Max. Load
 35.3 °C
96 F
36 °C
97 F
35 °C
95 F
 
 35.6 °C
96 F
35.3 °C
96 F
37.4 °C
99 F
 
 34.7 °C
94 F
35 °C
95 F
35.4 °C
96 F
 
Maximum: 37.4 °C = 99 F
Average: 35.5 °C = 96 F
33.3 °C
92 F
33.3 °C
92 F
35.5 °C
96 F
33.3 °C
92 F
33.1 °C
92 F
36.1 °C
97 F
32.7 °C
91 F
33.4 °C
92 F
35.3 °C
96 F
Maximum: 36.1 °C = 97 F
Average: 34 °C = 93 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.5 °C = 89 F | Room Temperature 21.4 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.5 °C / 96 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 37.4 °C / 99 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 36.1 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.5 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.

Speaker

Pink Noise speaker test

The mono speaker on the handset's rear is loud enough with a volume of approximately 80 dB(A). The direct competition achieves very similar rates of over 80 dB(A) in our tests. However, the sound quality is only midfield for this price range.

The sound impression is not very linear in the medium and high-frequency range of 500 Hz to 7 kHz - as expected, basses are inaudible, but even ultra-high tones from 8 kHz are clearly understated.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.636.72525.435.43125.3394032.935.25033.633.76331.635.48028.434.9100272712520.823.8160222420021.322.825020.824.631521.222.240019.425.450019.533.463017.746.680017.960.6100017.868.2125017.369.3160017.472200016.773.7250017.268.4315018.268.3400017.969.4500017.667.5630017.756.2800017.852.91000017.9581250018.156.71600018.240SPL3080.3N1.338.2median 17.9median 56.2Delta1.319.432.441.331.337.831.735.42634.939.440.336.232.928.632.525.424.321.323.723.322.422.525.822.426.221.336.518.444.417.55617.560.817.269.516.870.117.372.817.472.316.672.217.368.717.665.417.667.117.76717.467.817.769.217.968.618.162.718.151.329.881.21.346.6median 17.7median 65.41.614.236.331.432.436.334.429.331.334.431.632.231.731.635.134.12635.138.134.939.438.13132.536.23126.427.228.626.427.527.725.427.527.531.121.327.526.827.523.326.830.627.122.530.638.429.922.438.446.432.921.346.45240.318.45260.847.817.560.865.85517.565.870.661.817.270.67463.816.87473.96317.373.968.957.917.468.968.857.416.668.868.857.717.368.868.65717.668.668.255.217.668.268.453.817.768.469.85517.469.874.359.417.774.375.160.417.975.169.954.818.169.966.35118.166.382.670.729.882.653.425.61.353.4median 68.4median 55median 17.7median 68.410.98.91.610.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseZTE Blade A510Archos 50 Platinum 4GZTE Blade V7 Lite
ZTE Blade A510 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.26 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 32.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | very high mids - on average 15.8% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (16.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (44.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 100% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Archos 50 Platinum 4G audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.17 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 8.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 83% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 88% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

ZTE Blade V7 Lite audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.62 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 35.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency diagram in comparison (checkboxes above can be turned on/off!)

Energy Management

Power Consumption

The power consumption of ZTE's Blade A510 is inconspicuous and on par with that of the comparison devices. The load power consumption could be slightly lower compared with the power consumption of the Blade V7 Lite sister model.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.05 / 0.11 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.61 / 1.75 / 1.83 Watt
Load midlight 4.49 / 5.14 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
ZTE Blade A510
2200 mAh
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
2500 mAh
TP-Link Neffos C5
2200 mAh
Ulefone Metal
3050 mAh
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2200 mAh
Blackview A8 Max
3000 mAh
Huawei Y5 II
2200 mAh
Power Consumption
20%
-18%
-56%
6%
-11%
13%
Idle Minimum *
0.61
0.63
-3%
0.72
-18%
1.41
-131%
0.59
3%
0.74
-21%
0.54
11%
Idle Average *
1.75
1.37
22%
1.87
-7%
2.46
-41%
1.68
4%
1.97
-13%
1.58
10%
Idle Maximum *
1.83
1.71
7%
2
-9%
2.83
-55%
1.79
2%
2.09
-14%
1.7
7%
Load Average *
4.49
2.82
37%
5.99
-33%
5.15
-15%
4.22
6%
4.89
-9%
2.98
34%
Load Maximum *
5.14
3.36
35%
6.45
-25%
7.05
-37%
4.26
17%
5.09
1%
4.98
3%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

The battery life of the Blade A510 and the 2200 mAh battery is in the midfield of the comparison devices with 6 hours and 56 minutes in our Wi-Fi test with a brightness set to 150 cd/m².

It takes about 2.5 hours to fully recharge a depleted battery with the included 5-watt power supply (1 A, 5 V). Roughly half the capacity is reached in one hour.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 56min
ZTE Blade A510
2200 mAh
ZTE Blade V7 Lite
2500 mAh
TP-Link Neffos C5
2200 mAh
Ulefone Metal
3050 mAh
Archos 50 Platinum 4G
2200 mAh
Blackview A8 Max
3000 mAh
Huawei Y5 II
2200 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
416
517
24%
453
9%
403
-3%
384
-8%
506
22%
503
21%

Pros

+ IPS panel
+ screen's high brightness
+ relatively low color shifts
+ street price
+ low temperatures
+ very good call quality

Cons

- performance
- 1 GB of RAM
- slow 8 GB flash memory
- speaker

Verdict

In review: ZTE Blade A510. Review sample courtesy of notebookbilliger.de.

The Blade A510 by the Chinese manufacturer ZTE definitely has what it takes to be a good to very good entry-level smartphone. The IPS panel is very bright, homogeneous, and high-contrast for this price category. The color reproduction was also convincing in the test. Furthermore, ZTE's smartphone presents a superb call quality and good quality camera modules for a low-cost device. The battery life is also satisfactory.

The performance issues could vilify the otherwise decent entry-level Blade A510 smartphone to a potential shelf warmer.

The biggest shortcoming of the Blade A510 and also the reason why we can only give it a conditional purchase recommendation is its really poor system performance. The low-performance MediaTek SoC with 1 GB of RAM together with the slow eMMC storage cause system dropouts and prolonged loading times.

ZTE Blade A510 - 03/06/2017 v6(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
82%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
84%
Connectivity
37 / 60 → 62%
Weight
94%
Battery
89%
Display
83%
Games Performance
5 / 63 → 7%
Application Performance
19 / 70 → 28%
Temperature
90%
Noise
100%
Audio
59 / 91 → 65%
Camera
60%
Average
67%
78%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > ZTE Blade A510 Smartphone Review
Marcus Herbrich, 2017-03-21 (Update: 2019-04-13)