DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens and wireless speaker since 2008. Mon, 11 Sep 2023 15:15:06 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.8 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com 32 32 Asus Zenfone 10 Audio test https://www.dxomark.com/asus-zenfone-10-audio-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/asus-zenfone-10-audio-test/#respond Mon, 11 Sep 2023 15:15:06 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=155459 We put the Asus Zenfone 10 through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key [...]

The post Asus Zenfone 10 Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Asus Zenfone 10 through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers.
In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview


Key audio specifications include:

  • Two speakers (Top center, bottom right)
  • 3.5mm audio output
  • Dirac HD Sound technology

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Asus Zenfone 10
Asus Zenfone 10
131
audio
128
Playback
121

158

127

149

145

162

131

162

119

157

138
Recording
124

147

143

146

127

159

130

170

137

145

137

166

Playback

Pros

  • Warm tonal balance with nice bass presence
  • Very good punch, nice depth rendition
  • Relatively free of artifacts

Cons

  • Severe lack of treble, upper spectrum sounds muffled
  • Inconsistent dynamics in the low-end of the spectrum

Recording

Pros

  • Good timbre performance
  • Good dynamics performance
  • Relatively free of artifacts

Cons

  • Quite sensitive to wind noise, especially with the selfie camera and the memo app
  • Compression when recording at high sound pressure levels, slow volume adaptation

The Asus Zenfone 10 delivered a balanced performance in the DXOMARK Audio tests, doing quite well in both playback and recording. The device’s main drawbacks in terms of audio quality were a lack of treble in playback, which resulted in a slightly muffled and dark sound, as well as a high sensitivity to wind noise in recording, despite a dedicated wind-noise reduction function.

Playback performance through the built-in speakers was consistent across use cases, whether listening to music, watching movies or playing games. As a recording device, the Zenfone 10 delivered the best results with vocal memos, but performance was also great with the main camera app.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions.
(For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Playback[/glossary_exclude]

128

Asus Zenfone 10

163

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Playback score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test playback through the smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

In our tests, the Asus Zenfone 10 delivered a decent performance in the timbre category. The tonal balance was overall good but left some room for improvement, most notably the insufficient treble. Treble was more present at maximum volume but also introduced some unwanted harshness. Dynamics performance was slightly inconsistent, with good punch across all use cases, but attack lacked detail and wasn’t as impactful as our testers would have liked. Envelope was spotless on some tracks but could be inconsistent on others, with shorter-than-expected sustain of some bass notes.

In terms of spatial attributes, the Asus offered quite good depth rendition. Distance rendition was decent, too, but voices could sound a little distant at times. Both wideness of the sound scene and localizability of individual sound sources were fairly average. While the distribution of volume steps was very consistent, loudness at the maximum setting was only average. Minimum volume was tuned properly but slightly too quiet for listening to low volume passages in highly dynamic content, such as classical music. The Zenfone 10 did well in terms of unwanted audio artifacts, with only some slight distortion at maximum volume. Our testers also noted that the right speaker could be occluded when holding the device in portrait orientation. The effects on sound quality were fairly minor, however.

Listen to the tested smartphone’s playback performance in this comparison with some of its competitors:

Asus Zenfone 10
Samsung Galaxy S23
Google Pixel 7
Recordings of the smartphones playing some of our music tracks at 60 LAeq in an anechoic environment by 2 microphones in A-B configuration, at 30 cm
Here is how the Asus Zenfone 10 performs in playback use cases compared to its competitors:
[glossary_exclude]Playback use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

121

Asus Zenfone 10

158

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency. It is the most important attribute for playback.

[glossary_exclude]Music playback frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency emitted by the smartphone when playing a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

127

Asus Zenfone 10

149

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a bass note is reproduced or the impact sound from drums.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

145

Asus Zenfone 10

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness.


[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

131

Asus Zenfone 10

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents the overall loudness of a smartphone and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
Hip-Hop Classical
Asus Zenfone 10 71.6 dBA 69.5 dBA
Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon) 73.9 dBA 69.1 dBA
Google Pixel 7 71.8 dBA 72.9 dBA
The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume steps correspond to users’ expectations:
[glossary_exclude]Music volume consistency[/glossary_exclude]
This line graph shows the relative loudness of playback relative to the user selected volume step, measured at different volume steps with a correlated pink noise in an anechoic box recorded in axis at 0.20 meter.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

119

Asus Zenfone 10

157

[glossary_exclude]Asus ROG Phone 5[/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortion can occur because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

[glossary_exclude]Playback Total Harmonic Distortion (Maximum Volume)[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the Total Harmonic Distortion and Noise over the hearable frequency range.
It represents the distortion and noise of the device playing our test signal (0 dB Fs, Sweep Sine in an anechoic box at 40 cm) at the device's maximum volume.

[glossary_exclude]Recording[/glossary_exclude]

138

Asus Zenfone 10

157

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Recording score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test recording by evaluating the recorded files on reference audio equipment. Those recordings are done in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

When recording, the Asus offered on overall good tonal balance. Treble was satisfactory with the main and selfie cameras. Midrange was good with the main camera, with natural sounding voices, but sounded slightly hollow when recording with the selfie cam. Timbre remained good when recording at high sound pressure levels, for example at concerts. Our testers also noted that both bass and treble were boosted with the Audio HDR feature activated. The tonal balance sounded slightly richer and background rendition in urban environments was noticeably improved. Dynamics performance in recording was good, with an accurate and precise envelope across all use cases and a very good signal-to-noise ratio.

The sound scene was wide when recording with the main camera but noticeably limited with the selfie camera in portrait orientation. Localizability of sound sources was also better with the main camera. In addition, voices could be perceived to be at a distance when recording with the selfie camera. The Audio HDR feature improved both localizability and distance rendition with the main camera, while distance only was improved when capturing selfie video. Recordings were very loud and free of unwanted artifacts. Apart from some slight clipping on loud voices, recorded sound was overall very clean. At high sound pressure levels our experts noticed multi-band compression which became more intrusive with Audio HDR active. Background rendition was very good, thanks to a pleasant tonal balance and hardly any artifacts.

Here is how the Asus Zenfone 10 performs in recording use cases compared to its competitors:

[glossary_exclude]Recording use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

124

Asus Zenfone 10

147

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic3 Pro+[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for recording.

[glossary_exclude]Life video frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency captured by the smartphone when recording a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

143

Asus Zenfone 10

146

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a voice's plosives (the p's, t's and k's, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), for example how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

127

Asus Zenfone 10

159

[glossary_exclude]Vivo X Fold[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness on the recorded audio files.

[glossary_exclude]Recording directivity[/glossary_exclude]
Directivity graph of the smartphone when recording test signals using the camera app, with the main camera. It represents the acoustic energy (in dB) over the angle of incidence of the sound source. (Normalized to the angle 0°, in front of the device.)

[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

130

Asus Zenfone 10

170

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents how loud audio is normalized on the recorded files and the how the device handles loud environments, such as electronic concerts, when recording.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:
Meeting Life Video Selfie Video Memo
Asus Zenfone 10 -29.1 LUFS -19.8 LUFS -18.5 LUFS -20.9 LUFS
Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon) -26.5 LUFS -21.8 LUFS -22.4 LUFS -21.6 LUFS
Google Pixel 7 -29.4 LUFS -19.4 LUFS -17 LUFS -23 LUFS

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

137

Asus Zenfone 10

145

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortions can occur because of sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as how the phone is held.

In this audio comparison, you can listen to the way this smartphone handles wind noise relative to its competitors:

Recordings of a voice sample with light background noise, facing a turbulent wind of 5 m/s

[glossary_exclude]Background[/glossary_exclude]

137

Asus Zenfone 10

166

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Background evaluates how natural the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, yet it should provide some context of the surroundings.

The post Asus Zenfone 10 Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/asus-zenfone-10-audio-test/feed/ 0 Asus Zenfone 10 AUDIO AUDIO
Huawei P60 Pro Battery test https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-p60-pro-battery-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-p60-pro-battery-test/#respond Fri, 08 Sep 2023 09:15:02 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=155519 We put the Huawei P60 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key specifications: Battery capacity: 4815 mAh 88W charger (included) 6.67-inch, 1220 [...]

The post Huawei P60 Pro Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Huawei P60 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

  • Battery capacity: 4815 mAh
  • 88W charger (included)
  • 6.67-inch, 1220 x 2700, 120 Hz, OLED display
  • Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 4G (4 nm)
  • Tested ROM / RAM combination: 256 GB + 8 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Huawei P60 Pro
Huawei P60 Pro
138
battery
134
Autonomy
144

213

119

195

126

198

153
Charging
144

224

163

212

115

205

129

194

Key performances

Charging Time
2 days 10h
Battery life
Charging Time
0h29
80% Charging time
Charging Time
0h47
Full charging time
Quick Boost
8h11 autonomy
after 5-minute charge

Pros

  • Fast wired charging time at 47 minutes
  • Very good wireless charge experience
  • Good autonomy when gaming
  • Good autonomy recovered after a 5-minute charge

Cons

  • Poor autonomy when using the camera
  • Below-average wired charge efficiency

The Huawei P60 Pro’s excellent global battery score places the device among the best devices in our database. The smartphone outperformed its predecessor, the Huawei P50 Pro in autonomy and charging experience, but it had a lower efficiency score.

The autonomy was average with slightly more than 2.5 days when used moderately. The autonomy performances for outdoor and indoor usages were also average overall. Camera use showed poor autonomy, but gaming autonomy was excellent.

The Huawei P60 Pro’s charging experience for both wired and wireless charging was very good. The wired charger took only 47 minutes to replenish the battery, and a 5-minute quick charge provided an excellent 8 hours and 12 minutes of autonomy on average. The wireless 50W charger refilled the battery in slightly more than 1 hour and 15 minutes, which was among the best wireless times we have measured.

The wired charge efficiency was below average with high residual consumption of charger when the device was fully charged and still plugged in. However, the wireless charge efficiency was better than average. The discharge currents were low when gaming and scrolling on social apps, but high when using the camera, and average for other usages, meaning that the device is not perfectly optimized.

Compared with devices from the Ultra-Premium range prices ($800+), the Huawei P60 Pro ranked among the best devices. The autonomy and charging experiences were very good for this segment, and the efficiency was quite good too.

Test Summary

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Battery Charger Wireless Display Processor
Huawei P60 Pro 4815mAh 88W
(included)
50W LTPO OLED
1220 x 2700
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1
Huawei P50 Pro 4360mAh 66W
(not included)
50W OLED
1228 x 2700
HiSilicon Kirin 9000
Xiaomi 13 Ultra 5000mAh 90W
(included)
50W OLED
1440 x 3200
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2

[glossary_exclude]Autonomy[/glossary_exclude]

134

Huawei P60 Pro

188

[glossary_exclude]Honor X7a[/glossary_exclude]
How Autonomy score is composed

Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

Light Usage
84h
Light Usage
Active: 2h30/day
Moderate Usage
57h
Moderate Usage
Active: 4h/day
Intense Usage
35h
Intense Usage
Active: 7h/day

[glossary_exclude]Home/Office[/glossary_exclude]

144

Huawei P60 Pro

213

[glossary_exclude]Honor X7a[/glossary_exclude]

A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power.

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves

[glossary_exclude]On the go[/glossary_exclude]

119

Huawei P60 Pro

195

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy M51[/glossary_exclude]

Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)

[glossary_exclude]Calibrated[/glossary_exclude]

126

Huawei P60 Pro

198

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy M51[/glossary_exclude]

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)

[glossary_exclude]Charging[/glossary_exclude]

153

Huawei P60 Pro

218

[glossary_exclude]Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)[/glossary_exclude]
How Charging score is composed

Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.

Wired
Wired
82%
in 30 min
0h29
0 - 80%
0h47
Full charge
Wireless
Wireless
54%
in 30 min
0h46
0 - 80%
1h15
Full charge

[glossary_exclude]Full charge[/glossary_exclude]

144

Huawei P60 Pro

224

[glossary_exclude]Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)[/glossary_exclude]

Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.

[glossary_exclude]Power consumption and battery level during full charge[/glossary_exclude]
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
[glossary_exclude]Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge[/glossary_exclude]
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Time to full charge
Time to full charge

[glossary_exclude]Quick boost[/glossary_exclude]

163

Huawei P60 Pro

212

[glossary_exclude]Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)[/glossary_exclude]

With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.

Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)

[glossary_exclude]Efficiency[/glossary_exclude]

124

Huawei P60 Pro

154

[glossary_exclude]Oppo Reno6 5G[/glossary_exclude]
How Efficiency score is composed

The DXOMARK power efficiency score consists of two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge rate, both of which combine data obtained during robot-based typical usage scenario, calibrated tests and charging evaluation, taking into consideration the device’s battery capacity. DXOMARK calculate the annual power consumption of the product, shown on below graph, which is representative of the overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.

Annual Consumption Huawei P60 Pro
4.8 kWh
Efficient
Good
Bad
Inefficient

[glossary_exclude]Charge up[/glossary_exclude]

115

Huawei P60 Pro

205

[glossary_exclude]Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.

Overall charge efficiency

[glossary_exclude]Discharge[/glossary_exclude]

129

Huawei P60 Pro

194

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The discharge subscore rates the speed of a battery’s discharge during a test, which is independent of the battery’s capacity. It is the ratio of a battery’s capacity divided by its autonomy. A small-capacity battery could have the same autonomy as a large-capacity battery, indicating that the device is well-optimized, with a low discharge rate.

Average discharge current

The post Huawei P60 Pro Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-p60-pro-battery-test/feed/ 0 Huawei P60 Pro Charging Time Charging Time Charging Time Quick Boost BATTERY BATTERY Light Usage Moderate Usage Intense Usage BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless Wired Wireless
A closer look at DXOMARK’s laptop protocol https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-laptop-test-protocol/ https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-laptop-test-protocol/#respond Wed, 06 Sep 2023 10:39:16 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=151205 The early 2020s brought significant changes to our lives, including an increased reliance on laptops for work, education, and entertainment. For example, video calls have become a vital part of many people’s daily routines. However, not all laptops provide the same audio and video quality during these calls. As another example, laptops have morphed into [...]

The post A closer look at DXOMARK’s laptop protocol appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
The early 2020s brought significant changes to our lives, including an increased reliance on laptops for work, education, and entertainment. For example, video calls have become a vital part of many people’s daily routines. However, not all laptops provide the same audio and video quality during these calls.

As another example, laptops have morphed into personal entertainment centers, allowing us to enjoy listening to music and watching movies. But here, too, discrepancies arise. Some laptops offer high-quality audio, while others leave us wanting more. Display color accuracy and brightness also vary, impacting enjoyment.

In this closer look, we will explore DXOMARK’s new laptop test protocol that is designed to thoroughly assess laptop video call and music & video performance. Join us as we delve into some of the intricacies of laptop performance in audio, camera, and display. Our aim is to provide you with valuable insights that will help you find a laptop that meets your requirements.

What we test

This protocol applies to any product intended to be used as a laptop. Multiple form factors are compatible with our tests and ranking, such as clamshell (most laptops), 360°, and 2-in-1 devices.

Testing philosophy

As with our other protocols, our testing philosophy for laptop evaluation is centered on how people use their laptops and the features that are most important to them. We research this information through our own formal surveys and focus groups, in-depth studies of customer preferences conducted by manufacturers, and interviews with imaging and sound professionals.

By knowing consumers’ preferences and needs,  we can identify the camera, audio, and display attributes that affect the user experience. This  allows us to build a protocol that tests use cases and the attributes using scientific objective measurements and perceptual evaluations.

Use cases

For this initial version of our laptop audiovisual score, we selected two use cases that are representative of both professional and personal laptop use — Video Call and Music & Video.

  • Video Call focuses on the ability of the device to  show faces clearly and with stability and to capture and render  voices in a manner that is pleasant and readily intelligible.
  • Music & Video focuses on the quality of the display for videos in all conditions and the quality of the audio playback for both music and videos.

Video Call Music & Video
Test scenario description Using the laptop with its integrated webcam, speakers, microphone(s) and screen for one-to-one and group calls using a video conferencing app. Using the laptop with its integrated screen and speakers to watch videos or movies or to listen to music.
Usual place used Office, home Home
Some typical applications Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, Tencent VooV, Facetime YouTube, Netflix, Youku, Spotify, iTunes
Consumer pain points Poor visibility of faces
Low dynamic range (webcam)
Low intelligibility of voices
Poor screen readability in backlit situations
Poor color fidelity
Poor contrast
Low audio immersiveness
Poor high-volume audio performance
Low display readability in lit environments

Test conditions

AUDIO

Volume Low (50 dBA @1m)
Medium (60 dBA @1m)
High (70 dBA @1m)
Content Custom music tracks
Custom voice tracks
Selected movies
Apps Capture: Built-in camera app
Playback: Built-in music/video player app Duplex: Zoom

CAMERA

Lighting conditions 5 to 1000 Lux
D65, TL83, TL84, LED
Distances 30 cm to 1.20 m
Charts DXOMARK test charts
App Built-in camera app

DISPLAY

Lighting conditions Dark room
Screen brightness Minimum, 50%, Maximum
Contents Custom SDR video patterns
Custom HDR10 video patterns
Apps Built-in video player app

As we always evaluate objective measurements and perceptual evaluations in the context of an attribute, here are DXOMARK’s definitions of the attributes for the three laptop components that we test — audio, display, and camera.

Audio

For our video call use case, we look at audio capture, handling full duplex situations, and audio playback. Quality audio capture provides good voice intelligibility, a good signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), satisfactory directivity, and  good management of audio when the user interacts with the laptop (such as typing during a call.)

Good laptop audio processing can also handle duplex situations —  when more than one person is talking at the same time — without  echoes or gating, when  necessary sounds are lost. For playback, we assess how faithfully sound sources are replicated, how intelligible voices are, how immersive the spatial reproduction is, and how artifacts are controlled, and satisfactory directivity.

We evaluate the following audio attributes (also part of our smartphone Audio protocol):

List of Audio Sub-scores

Timbre

Timbre describes a device’s ability to render the correct frequency response according to the use case and users’ expectations, taking into account bass, midrange, and treble frequencies, as well as the balance among them. Good tonal balance typically consists of an even distribution of these frequencies according to the reference audio track or original material. We evaluate tonal balance at different volumes depending on the use case. In addition, we look for unwanted resonances and notches in each of the frequency regions as well as for extensions at low- and high-end frequencies.

Dynamics

Dynamics covers a device’s ability to render loudness variations and to convey punch as well as clear attack and bass precision. Sharp musical notes and voice plosives sound blurry and imprecise with loose dynamics rendering, which can hinder the listening experience and voice intelligibility. This is also the case with movies and games, where action segments can easily feel sloppy with improper dynamics rendering. As dynamics information is mostly carried by the envelope of the signal, not only does the attack for a given sound need to be clearly defined for notes to be distinct from each other, but sustain also needs to be rendered accurately to convey the original musical feeling.

In addition, we also assess the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in capture evaluation, as it is of the highest importance for good voice intelligibility.

Spatial

Spatial describes a device’s ability to render a virtual sound scene as realistically as possible. It includes perceived wideness and depth of the sound scene, left/right balance, and localizability of individual sources in a virtual sound field and their perceived distance. Good spatial conveys the feeling of immersion and makes for a better experience whether listening to music or watching movies.

We also evaluate capture directivity to assess the device’s ability to adapt the capture pattern to the test situation.

Volume

The volume attribute covers the loudness of both capture and playback (measured objectively), as well as the ability to render both quiet and loud sonic material without defects (evaluated both objectively and perceptually).

Artifacts

An artifact is any accidental or unwanted sound resulting from a device’s design or its tuning, although an artifact can also be caused by user interaction with the device, such as changing the volume level, play/pausing, typing on the keyboard, or simply handling it. Artifacts can also result from a device struggling to handle environmental constraints, such as wind noise during recording use cases.

We group artifacts into two main categories: temporal (e.g., pumping, clicks) and spectral (e.g., distortion, continuous noise, phasing).

Display

A laptop needs to provide users with good readability, no matter the lighting conditions. Its color rendition should be faithful in the SDR color space (and in the HDR color space for HDR-capable devices. Main challenges:

We evaluate the following display attributes (also part of our smartphone Display protocol):

List of Display Sub-scores

Color

From the end-user’s point of view, color rendering refers to how the device manages the hues of each particular color, either by exactly reproducing what’s coded in the file or by tweaking the results to achieve a given signature. For videos, we expect that devices will reproduce the artistic intent of the filmmaker as provided in the metadata. We evaluate the color performance for both SDR (Rec 709 color space) and HDR (BT-2020 color space) video content.

Brightness & Contrast

We evaluate minimum and maximum brightness to help us ascertain if a laptop can be used in low light and in bright, backlit environments.

We also evaluate a device’s brightness range, which gives crucial information about its readability under various kinds and levels of ambient lighting. A high maximum brightness allows a user to use the laptop in bright environments (outdoors, for example), and a low minimum brightness will ensure that user can set the brightness according to their preference in a dark environment.

We evaluate maximum contrast using a checkerboard pattern, which also lets us see blooming impacts display performance.

Tone mapping

We evaluate the electro-optical transfer function (EOTF), which represents the rendering of details in dark tones, midtones, and highlights. It should be as close as possible to that of the target reference screen but should adapt to bright lighting conditions to ensure that the content is still enjoyable.

Uniformity

We evaluate the uniformity of the laptop display both at maximum and minimum brightness to assess any uniformity defects that would be noticeable to the end-user.

Reflectance & Angular

We use a spectrophotometer to evaluate spectral reflectance level on laptop displays when turned off. Additionally, we use a glossmeter to measure the reflectance profile — for example, how diffuse reflectance is. These two measurements are important indicators of laptop readability in bright lighting environments.

Click for more information about these measurements.

Camera

To provide a good end-user experience, a laptop’s built-in camera has to provide a stable image throughout the call, and keep faces in focus and well exposed even in challenging lighting conditions. Viewers should be able to follow facial expressions and mouth movements that are perfectly synchronized with the audio.

We evaluate the following camera attributes (also part of our DSLR Sensor and smartphone Camera and Selfie protocols):

List of Camera Sub-scores

Exposure

Exposure measures how well the camera adjusts to and captures the brightness of the subject and the background. It relates as much to the correct lighting level of the picture as to the resulting contrast. For this attribute, we also pay special attention to high dynamic range conditions, in which we check the ability of the camera to capture detail from the brightest to the darkest portions of a scene.

Color

The color attribute is a measure of how faithfully the camera reproduces color under a variety of lighting conditions and how pleasing its color rendering is to viewers. As with exposure, good color is important to nearly everyone. Pictures of people benefit greatly from natural and pleasant skin-tone representation.

Texture

The texture attribute focuses on how well the camera can preserve small details. This has become especially important because camera vendors have introduced noise reduction techniques that sometimes lower the amount of detail or add motion blur. For some applications, such as videoconferencing in low-bandwidth network conditions, the preservation of tiny details is not essential. But users using their webcam in high-end videoconferencing applications with decent bandwidth will appreciate a good texture performance score.

Noise

Texture and noise are two sides of the same coin: improving one often leads to degrading the other. The noise attribute indicates the amount of noise in the overall camera experience. Noise comes from the light of the scene itself, but also from the sensor and the electronics of the camera. In low light, the amount of noise in an image increases rapidly. Some cameras increase the integration time, but poor stability or post-processing can produce images with blurred rendering or loss of texture. Image overprocessing for noise reduction also tends to decrease detail and smooth out the texture of the image.

Artifacts

The artifacts attribute quantifies image defects not covered by the other attributes, caused either by a camera’s lens, sensor, or in-camera processing. These can range from straight lines looking curved or strange multi-colored areas indicating failed demosaicing. In addition, lenses tend to be sharper at the center and less sharp at the edges, which we also measure as part of this sub-score. Other artifacts such as ghosts or halo effects can be a consequence of computational photography.

Focus

The focus attribute evaluates how well the camera keeps the subject in focus in varying light conditions and at multiple distances. Most laptops use a fixed-focus lens, though we expect to see autofocus cameras in laptops in the future. Our testing methodology applies to both fixed-focus and autofocus in all tested situations. When several people are at different distances from the camera, a lens design with a shallow depth of field implies that not all people will be in focus. We evaluate the camera’s ability to keep all faces sharp in such situations.

Test environments

Test environments are divided into two parts — lab scenes and natural or real scenes.

  Lab scenes Real scenes
Location Audio, Camera & Display labs Meeting rooms, living room, etc.
Main goal Repeatable conditions Real-life situations
Evaluations Objective and Perceptual Perceptual
Single call
Dual call

Lab setups: repeatable procedures and controlled environments

Video call lab

This setup tests the quality of a video-call capture from a single-user perspective for audio and video in multiple lighting conditions.

Items measured and/or evaluated:

  • Camera
    • Face exposure
    • Face details
    • Highlight recovery (entropy)
    • White balance
    • Skin tones
    • Noise & Texture
    • Artifacts
  • Audio
    •  Voice capture (including spatial)
    • Background noise handling

 

Test conditions

  • Distance: By framing (FoV dependent)
  • Light conditions: 20 lux A, 100 lux TL84, 1000 lux D65

 

Equipment Used

  • Image
    • Realistic mannequin (x2)
    • HDR Chart
    •  Automated Lighting system
  • Audio
    • Genelec 8010 (x2)
    • Genelec 8030 (x2)

 

HDR Portrait setup (camera and audio)

This setup tests the quality of video call capture with two users in front of the computer for audio and video in multiple backlit conditions.

Items measured and/or evaluated:

  • Camera
    • Face exposure
    •  Face details
    •  Highlight recovery (entropy)
    •  White balance
    •  Skin tones
    • Noise & Texture
    • Artifacts
  • Audio
      • Voice capture (including spatial)
      •  Background noise handling

 

Test conditions

  • Distance: By framing (FoV dependent)
  • Light conditions: 20 lux A, 100 lux TL84, 1000 lux D65

 

Equipment Used

  • Image
    • Realistic mannequin (x2)
    • HDR Chart
    • Automated Lighting system
  • Audio
    • Genelec 8010 (x2)
    • Genelec 8030 (x2)

 

Depth of field (camera only)

This tests the laptop camera’s ability to keep multiple users who are in front of the camera in focus during a video call at various distances. This involves moving one of the mannequins to the foreground or background to see whether the face remains focused.

Attributes evaluated

  • Camera
    •  Focus / Depth of Field
    • Noise
    • Artifacts

Test conditions

  • Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  • Light conditions: D65 1000 lux & 20 lux SME A

Equipment used

  • Image
    • Realistic manneqin (x2)
    • Automated lighting system

 

DXOMARK Camera charts

DXOMARK Chart

 

DXOMARK chart

Attributes evaluated and/or measured:
Camera
  • Texture
  • Color
  • Noise
  • Artifacts
Test conditions
  • Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  •  Lighting: D65 1000 lux, TL84 5-1000 lux, LED 1-500 lux
Equipment used
  • DXOMARK chart
  • Automated lighting system
Dead Leaves

Dead leaves

Attributes measured
Camera
  • Texture
  • Noise
Test conditions
  • Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  • Lighting: D65 1000 lux, TL84 5-1000 lux, LED 1-500 lux
Equipment used
  • Dead Leaves chart
  • Automated lighting system

Read more about this measurement on this scientific paper: https://corp.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Dead_Leaves_Model_EI2010.pdf

Focus range

Focus range chart

 

Attributes measured
Camera
  • Focus / Depth of field
Test conditions
  •  Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  • Lighting: D65 1000 Lux, TL84 5-1000 Lux, LED 1-500 Lux
Equipment used
  • Focus chart
  • Automated lighting system
Visual noise

Visual Noise Chart

Attributes measured
Camera
  • Noise
Test conditions
  • Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  •  Lighting: D65 1000 Lux, TL84 5-1000 Lux, LED 1-500 Lux
Equipment used:
  • Dots chart
  • Automated lighting system
Dots

DOTS chart

Attributes measured:
Camera
  • Resolution
  • Distortion
Test conditions
  •  Distance: By framing (FoV-dependent)
  •  Lighting: 1000 lux D65
Equipment used:
  • Dots chart
  • Automated lighting system

 

 

Presentation of Display-testing equipment

Laptop display tests are conducted in low-light conditions only. We also test color and EOTF for both SDR and HDR video. The reflectance and gloss measurements in low-light are sufficient to indicate the display’s performance in brightly lit environments.

Display color analyzer

  • Attributes measured
    •  Display — Readability
      • Brightness
    • Display — SDR and HDR
      •  Color gamut and rendering
      • EOTF
  • Equipment used
    • Konica Minolta CA410

 

Spectrophotometer

  • Attributes measured
    • Display — Readability
      • Reflectance
  • Equipment used
    • Konica Minolta CM-25d

 

Glossmeter

  • Attributes measured
    •  Display – Readability
      • Gloss & Haze
      • Reflectance profile
  • Equipment used
    •  Rhopoint Glossmeter

 

Presentation of recording lab setups

Video-call audio lab

This setup aims at testing the quality of the voices and sounds captured during a video call when multiple people are in the same room. The audio is captured using a popular videoconferencing application.

  • Attributes evaluated
    • Audio
      • Duplex
  • Equipment used
    • Head Acoustics – 3PASS
    • Yamaha HS7 (background noise)
    • Genelec 8010 (voices)

 

Semi-anechoic room

This semi-anechoic room setup allows for sound to be captured and measured in optimal audio conditions, free of any reverberations and echoes.

  • Attributes measured
    • Audio
      • Frequency response
      • THD+N (distortion)
      • Directivity
      • Volume
  • Equipment used
    • Genelec 8361
    • Earthworks M23R
    • Rotating table

 

Laptop scoring architecture

To better understand consumer laptop preferences and usages, we conducted a survey recently with YouGov that showed laptops were used mostly for web browsing (76%), office work (59%) and streaming video (44%), and listening to music (35%).

Our laptop overall score combines the equally weighted scores of both the Video Call and Music & Video use cases, which in turn are based on the use case and feature scores for camera, audio, and display.

Use case scores

Camera performance has the highest weight in our calculation of the Video Call score, as it is a major pain point for users right now. (We expect this feature to improve a lot in the coming years, as laptop makers are putting a lot of effort into bringing the quality of built-in cameras closer to that of smartphones and external webcams.) Audio comes next, as a video call cannot happen without it! We evaluate both voice playback and capture, but also “duplex” — situations in which more than one person is speaking at a time, which can cause significant problems in terms of intelligibility. Finally, we assess quality of a display’s readability, as many laptops still do not handle bright situations correctly.

The Music & Video score comprises Display and Audio subscores. Display testing focuses on correct reproduction of colors and tones for both SDR and HDR video and movie contents. Although SDR accounts for most content viewed on a laptop, video streaming platforms are providing more and more HDR content. We evaluate laptops both with and without HDR panels using HDR contents. We apply a penalty to the HDR score for any laptop for having a panel that is not HDR-capable, as that can limit certain usages. We also evaluate audio as part of this use case.

Feature scores

Besides the use-case scores, we calculate general feature scores for Audio, Camera and Display. These scores are representative of the overall performance of the laptop for each individual audiovisual feature, independent of the use case. In practice, the camera score is the same as the video call camera score. For the display feature, we reuse the music and video scores; but for audio, we combine the scores from the Video Call and the Music & Video use cases.

Score structure

laptop score structure
We use geometric means to combine all scores according to the weights given in the table above.

We scale the camera scores to have the same impact as audio and display scores in order to keep each feature score relevant for a direct evaluation of perceived quality in our use cases.

Conclusion

Testing a laptop takes about one workweek in different laboratories with up to 20 lab setups.

We hope this article has given you a more detailed idea about some of the scientific equipment and methods we use to test the most important characteristics of your laptop’s video call and music & video performance.

The post A closer look at DXOMARK’s laptop protocol appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-laptop-test-protocol/feed/ 0 Laptop testing (2) Laptop testing (5) Picture2 Graph 1 Lab duo HDR Audio video graph for duo lab Portrait mannequins DXOMARK chart Dead leaves Focus range chart Visual noise chart DOTS chart Spectrophotometer Glossmeter dxomark_lab_setup_videoconference_perceptual_measurements-e1662985443932-1024×548 Semi anechoic room Laptop-Score-Structure_New-1024×550
Nothing Phone (2) Battery test https://www.dxomark.com/nothing-phone-2-battery-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/nothing-phone-2-battery-test/#respond Tue, 05 Sep 2023 13:22:30 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=155308 We put the Nothing Phone (2) through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key specifications: Battery capacity: 4700 mAh 45W charger (not included) 6.7-inch, [...]

The post Nothing Phone (2) Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Nothing Phone (2) through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

  • Battery capacity: 4700 mAh
  • 45W charger (not included)
  • 6.7-inch, 1080 x 2412, 120 Hz, OLED display
  • Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 (4 nm)
  • Tested ROM / RAM combination: 256 GB + 12 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Nothing Phone (2)
Nothing Phone (2)
124
battery
116
Autonomy
110

213

122

195

123

198

135
Charging
135

224

135

212

141

205

121

194

Key performances

Charging Time
2 days 7h
Battery life
Charging Time
0h32
80% Charging time
Charging Time
0h56
Full charging time
Quick Boost
5h05 autonomy
after 5-minute charge