结论--强大的中期冠军，但也有一些弱点三星Galaxy A56 5G 为中端市场提供了均衡的整体解决方案。其全新的 Exynos 处理器具有良好的日常性能和效率，给人留下了深刻印象。搭配大容量电池，A56 的续航时间令人印象深刻。全新的设计使这款智能手机看起来更加独特，同时又不失与Galaxy 家族的联系。此外，它现在更轻薄，显示屏更亮，充电速度也得到了改善。最后但并非最不重要的一点是，它的更新交付期已延长至六年。
Test device courtesy of Samsung Germany
Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG
在背面摄像头方面，三星没有取得任何进展。在这方面，竞争对手有时会更胜一筹，但总的来说，三星仍能提供不错的质量。遗憾的是，该机不能再使用 microSD 卡，尤其是买家无法选择更大的存储配置。此外，A56 还缺少 6 GHz WLAN、无线充电和 UWB 功能。
Pros+ 设计精美，材料优质
+ 超长更新交付时间
+ 双 eSIM 卡
+ 通过 IP67 认证
+ 惊人的电池续航时间Cons- 不支持 microSD，无法升级存储空间
- 无无线充电功能
- 既没有 UWB 也没有 6 GHz 无线局域网
- 蓝牙音频编解码器数量少
价格和供应情况您可以从亚马逊等主要在线零售商处订购Galaxy A56 5G，目前售价为 411.35 美元。
Table of Contents结论--强大的中期冠军，但也有一些弱点规格：三星Galaxy A56 5G保护壳 -Galaxy A56 采用大猩猩 Glas Victus+ 保护壳，防护等级达到 IP67。连接性 -Galaxy A56 不再使用 microSD软件 -Android 15，六年更新一次通信和全球导航卫星系统 - 仍未配备 6 GHz 无线局域网电话功能和通话质量 - A56 上的双 eSIM 卡摄像头 - 现在可拍摄 HDR 视频配件和保修 -Galaxy A56 的配件不多输入设备和操作 - A56 上的光学指纹扫描仪显示屏 -Galaxy A56 配备更亮的 Super AMOLED 显示屏性能 -Galaxy A56 内的全新 Exynos 1580游戏 - 带有 HFR 游戏功能的三星手机排放 - 可能会很热，但保持稳定电池寿命 - 5,000 毫安时的三星智能手机Notebookcheck 总评分可能的替代品比较
4 Reviews ← exclude selected types
三星Galaxy A56 5G 是继去年的 Galaxy A55 5G.三星为其中档旗舰手机增添了一系列新功能。有些功能比较明显，比如它的设计，但 A56 在内部也进行了更新。
这款智能手机有两种存储配置：8/128 GB 和 8/256 GB，售价分别约为 370 美元和 410 美元。A56 发布时的 MRSP 为 499.99 美元，比上一代产品更便宜。
规格：三星Galaxy A56 5G
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GProcessorSamsung Exynos 1580 8 x 2 - 2.9 GHzGraphics adapterSamsung Xclipse 540Memory8 GB , LPDDR5Display6.70 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 385 PPI, Capacitive Touchscreen, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glas Victus+, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 HzStorage128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB Connections1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, compass, OTGNetworking802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5.3, 2G (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), LTE (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 40, 41, 66), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPSSizeheight x width x depth (in mm): 7.4 x 162.2 x 77.5Battery5000 mAh Lithium-IonChargingfast charging / QuickchargeOperating SystemAndroid 15CameraPrimary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.8, OIS) + 12 MPix (Ultra Wide, f/2.2) + 5 MPix (Macro, f/2.4); Camera2-API-Level: LimitedSecondary Camera: 12 MPix (f/2.2, FF)Additional featuresSpeakers: Dual, Keyboard: OnScreen, SIM tool, USB cable, One UI 7.0, 24 Months Warranty, Bluetooth Audio Codecs: SBC, AAC aptX, LDAC, SSC; ASHA | GNSS: GPS (L1), Glonass (L1), BeiDou (B1, B1C), Galileo (E1), QZSS (L1) | HDR: HLG, HDR10, HDR10+ | DRM Widevine L1 | Dual-eSIM | IP67 | USB Copy Test: 23.50 MB/s (connected to Samsung 980 Pro in an Asus ROG Strix Arion Case (USB 3.2 Gen. 2), Supported File Systems for external storages: NTFS (only reading), FAT32, exFAT | Body-SAR: 1.051 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.610 W/kg | max. charging speed: 45 W (wired) , fanless, waterproofWeight198 g
Price479 EuroLinksSamsung notebook sectionNote: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.see all specifications
保护壳 -Galaxy A56 采用大猩猩 Glas Victus+ 保护壳，防护等级达到 IP67。Galaxy A56 5G 的长度和宽度都略有增加，但机身更加纤薄，重量也减轻了 15 克。它有浅灰、橄榄、粉红和石墨四种配色。我们的测试设备是后者。
由于采用了拉丝铝边框，这款三星手机给人留下了极具吸引力的高品质印象。机身两侧再次采用康宁大猩猩 Victus+ 玻璃保护。所有缝隙都紧密而均匀，A56 完全不会受到扭曲的影响。与前代产品一样，这款手机通过了 IP67 认证，具有防水和防尘功能。
虽然它的显示屏边框仍然不是最薄的，但却再次变窄了，显示屏与表面的比例提高到了 88%，这是相当不错的。屏幕 A55只有 86%。
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
尺寸比较
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Motorola Edge 50 Pro Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Apple iPhone 16e DIN A6 ❌
连接性 -Galaxy A56 不再使用 microSD在连接性方面，三星Galaxy A56 5G 与去年的机型非常相似，不过，用户现在不得不放弃 microSD 卡插槽。虽然这在同价位机型中已不再罕见，但我们还是希望能有更大容量的存储空间。
USB 2.0 绝对不是闪电般的速度，但这也是这个价位的标准配置。Wi-Fi 6、NFC 和蓝牙 5.3 使其连接性更加完善。
首页: 麦克风
左侧
右侧：音量、电源
底部：扬声器、麦克风、USB、麦克风、SIM 卡
软件 -Android 15，六年更新一次Galaxy A56 5G 预装了谷歌Android 15 和三星 One UI 7.0。与前代机型相比，它的软件支持期延长至六年（至 2032 年 3 月 31 日），其中包括安全补丁和操作系统升级。
与Galaxy S 机型不同，该机型没有使用Galaxy AI，而是使用了名为 Awesome Intelligence 的瘦身版本。其中包括支持 AI 的图像编辑功能 "最佳面孔"、"自动修剪"、"对象橡皮擦 "以及创建自定义图像滤镜的选项。当然，Gemini 和 Circle to Search 也在其中。但不包括人工智能翻译器和人工智能代理。
可持续性三星将其智能手机包装在一个轻薄的无塑料盒中，而且现在还取消了手机边框周围的铝箔。关于Galaxy A56 使用了哪些可回收原材料，目前还没有确切的信息，不过三星的可持续发展报告中提供了该款智能手机的二氧化碳排放量数据。
与其他机型一样，A56 也提供备件和维修说明。
通信和全球导航卫星系统 - 仍未配备 6 GHz 无线局域网今年，手机的通信模块没有取得任何进展。Galaxy A56 5G 支持所有现代蜂窝标准，频段支持良好，我们在大城市进行测试时没有遇到接收问题。
这款手机使用 Wi-Fi 6，但仍只能在 2.4 和 5.0 GHz 频率范围内使用。与华硕 ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 参考路由器一起使用时，传输速率很稳定，但还可以再高一些。
NetworkingSamsung Galaxy A56 5G802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000
766 (min: 698) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
666 (min: 568) MBit/s ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000
735 (min: 671) MBit/s ∼77%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
823 (min: 704) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GWi-Fi 6E iperf3 transmit AXE11000
892 (min: 522) MBit/s ∼94%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
674 (min: 627) MBit/s ∼81%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1698 (min: 1552) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1539 (min: 695) MBit/s ∼100%
Apple iPhone 16e802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000
765 (min: 732) MBit/s ∼80%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
727 (min: 715) MBit/s ∼88%
Motorola Edge 50 Pro802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1600 (min: 1384) MBit/s ∼94%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1081 (min: 838) MBit/s ∼70%
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000
951 (min: 922) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
826 (min: 709) MBit/s ∼100%
Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax iperf3 transmit AXE11000
834 (min: 295) MBit/s ∼88%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
827 (min: 234) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1172 (min: 417) MBit/s ∼69%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1252 (min: 743) MBit/s ∼81%
Average of class Smartphone iperf3 transmit AXE11000
728 (min: 49.8) MBit/s ∼77%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
740 (min: 52) MBit/s ∼89%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1353 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼80%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1396 (min: 451) MBit/s ∼91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1698 (1552-1819) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1515 (695-1584) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø766 (698-805) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø892 (522-975) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø666 (568-772) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Wi-Fi 6E; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø673 (627-734)
室内
户外活动尽管是单频连接，但这款智能手机的卫星定位功能速度超快，精确度令人印象深刻。在室内，最初只需要稍长一点时间，但Galaxy A56 随后需要一段时间才能缩小精确定位范围。
我们将三星智能手机与 Garmin Venu 2健身智能手表进行了比较。A56很好地记录了我们的路线，完全可以胜任导航任务。
全球导航卫星系统测试：路线
全球导航卫星系统测试：池塘
全球导航卫星系统测试：摘要电话功能和通话质量 - A56 上的双 eSIM 卡总的来说，三星Galaxy A56 5G 的通话质量在日常使用中感觉很自然，能有效过滤掉大部分环境噪音。不过，在嘈杂的环境中，该设备会面临一些限制：有时会有干扰噪音传入，导致用户的声音听起来有点闷和刺耳。但总的来说，它的通话质量还是不错的。使用免提模式时，语音传输清晰，但与将手机举到耳边时相比，声音听起来略显沉闷。
Galaxy A56 支持 WLAN 通话（VoWiFi）和 VoLTE 等常用功能。可使用 Nano SIM 卡和 eSIM 卡进行双 SIM 操作。
摄像头 - 现在可拍摄 HDR 视频人像自拍Galaxy A56三星Galaxy A56 5G 的前置摄像头采用了新的传感器，虽然分辨率低于前代产品，但拍照效果却更好。三星尤其改进了色彩平衡。
从硬件角度看，三星没有对背面的三摄像头做任何改动，软件方面的更新也保持在最低水平。手机主摄像头拍摄的照片效果不错，但细节还可以再丰富一些，比如在 "Nothing Phone (3a) "上。 Nothing Phone (3a).在弱光环境下，如果不把亮度调得那么高，肯定会对照片有好处。
超广角摄像头的工作相当出色，专用微距镜头也是如此。用户只能进行数字变焦，但放大两倍以内的照片仍然可用。不过，如果放大到更近的距离，照片就会显得模糊不清。它的最大数码变焦为 10 倍（230 毫米）。
可使用前置摄像头、主镜头和超广角摄像头录制视频。所有三个镜头都支持超高清、全高清和 30fps 的高清；如果要以 60fps 的速度拍摄，则只能使用主传感器拍摄 1,080p 的视频。其 HDR 视频支持是一项新功能，可用于前置和后置摄像头。
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.
Main cameraMain cameraUltra-wide angle5x zoomLow-lightclick to load imagesSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a)Canon EOS 90D0.2x2 MPixel4 Mpixel1xclick to load imagesSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a)Canon EOS 90D0.2x2 MPixel4 Mpixel1xclick to load imagesSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a)Canon EOS 90D0.2x2 MPixel4 Mpixel1xclick to load imagesSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a)Canon EOS 90D0.2x2 MPixel4 Mpixel1xclick to load imagesSamsung Galaxy A56 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GNothing Phone (3a)Canon EOS 90D0.2x2 MPixel4 Mpixel1x
在可控的光线条件下，Galaxy A56 5G 的色彩平衡非常和谐，没有任何明显的异常。
这款手机在全分辨率下很好地再现了我们的测试图，仅在细节部分显示出轻微的锐度不足，边缘的噪点稍多一些。
5.6 ∆E1.9 ∆E2.6 ∆E9.7 ∆E3.5 ∆E7.1 ∆E0.7 ∆E3 ∆E4.1 ∆E6.1 ∆E4.8 ∆E1.8 ∆E2.9 ∆E8.9 ∆E4 ∆E3 ∆E3.8 ∆E7.4 ∆E5.8 ∆E2 ∆E2.2 ∆E4.2 ∆E4.6 ∆E3.1 ∆EColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A56 5G: 4.28 ∆E min: 0.73 - max: 9.67 ∆E13.9 ∆E18.3 ∆E16.9 ∆E14.4 ∆E21.6 ∆E18.2 ∆E18.9 ∆E14.2 ∆E15.3 ∆E16.3 ∆E14.5 ∆E23.6 ∆E15.4 ∆E15.3 ∆E9.9 ∆E17.7 ∆E19.8 ∆E21.1 ∆E26.2 ∆E20.9 ∆E20.7 ∆E21.2 ∆E18.6 ∆E12.5 ∆EColorChecker Samsung Galaxy A56 5G: 17.72 ∆E min: 9.92 - max: 26.23 ∆E
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Galaxy A56 5G
配件和保修 -Galaxy A56 的配件不多三星Galaxy A56 5G 的供货范围仅包括 SIM 卡工具和 USB-C 数据线。配套的电源和手机壳可直接从三星公司购买，但第三方供应商的价格通常更便宜。
手机享有 12 个月的标准保修服务，可通过Samsung Care+ 延长保修期。保修范围包括设备本身的损坏和失窃。保修期为 24 个月，费用在 129 美元到 349 美元之间。
输入设备和操作 - A56 上的光学指纹扫描仪Galaxy A56 5G 采用电容式触摸屏，整个面板都能可靠地响应输入。光学指纹扫描仪再次安装在显示屏底部边缘相对较近的位置，它工作可靠，可立即识别保存的指纹。此外，用户还可以选择通过前置摄像头进行面部识别，在光线充足的条件下，面部识别的工作同样可靠，但安全性较低。
三星又一次将电源键变成了功能键，用户可以根据自己的需要对其进行定制。默认情况下，双击该按钮可打开相机，如果按住该按钮，则会启动 Bixby。
手机仍然支持双信使和单手模式等功能。线性振动马达可以在手机设置中进行自定义，声音非常小，但仍然精确可感。
显示屏 -Galaxy A56 配备更亮的 Super AMOLED 显示屏子像素阵列与前代机型相比，三星Galaxy A56 5G 的显示屏略有增大，达到了 6.7 英寸（17.02 厘米）。由于分辨率保持不变，因此像素密度略低，但即便如此，画面仍然非常清晰。
三星再次提高了 Super AMOLED 面板的亮度，使其照明更加均匀。在显示全白表面时，面板亮度略低于 1,200 cd/m²，而在显示较小的白色部分时，亮度则高达 2,001 cd/m²。
OLED 显示屏的闪烁频率高达 240 赫兹，但振幅平缓，并具有减少蓝光的眼睛舒适模式。尽管如此，由于频率较低，敏感用户仍可能会有一些抱怨。
1174cd/m²1171cd/m²1181cd/m²1175cd/m²1184cd/m²1180cd/m²1187cd/m²1183cd/m²1172cd/m²
Distribution of brightnesstested with X-Rite i1Pro 3Maximum: 1187 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1178.6 cd/m² Minimum: 2.23 cd/m²Brightness Distribution: 99 %Center on Battery: 1184 cd/m²Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.7 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.81}ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.4 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø5.1}99.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)Gamma: 2.12CCT: 6544 K
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSuper AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7"Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSuper AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.6"Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAMOLED, 2712x1220, 6.7"Apple iPhone 16eOLED, 2532x1170, 6.1"Motorola Edge 50 ProP-OLED, 2712x1220, 6.7"Nothing Phone (3a) ProAMOLED, 2392x1080, 6.8"Screen4%16%21%6%8%Brightness middle (cd/m²)1184962 -19%1210 2%833 -30%1064 -10%1318 11%Brightness (cd/m²)1179967 -18%1222 4%837 -29%1038 -12%1306 11%Brightness Distribution (%)9999 0%92 -7%99 0%88 -11%98 -1%Black Level * (cd/m²)Colorchecker dE 2000 *1.71.6 6%1 41%0.7 59%1.17 31%1.5 12%Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *3.22.6 19%2.7 16%1.6 50%2.47 23%2.9 9%Greyscale dE 2000 *2.41.5 37%1.5 37%0.6 75%2 17%2.3 4%Gamma2.12 104%2.13 103%2.25 98%2.19 100%2.238 98%2.26 97%CCT6544 99%6382 102%6509 100%6525 100%6423 101%6819 95%* ... smaller is better
Display: APL18 Peak Brightness | HDR Peak Brightness Display / APL18 Peak Brightness
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1952 cd/m² Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1678 cd/m² -14%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1412 cd/m² -28%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1280 cd/m² -34%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
832 cd/m² -57%Display / HDR Peak Brightness
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3081 cd/m² +54%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2001 cd/m² Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1883 cd/m² -6%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1347 cd/m² -33%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1201 cd/m² -40%
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)ℹTo 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 120 HzAmplitude: 14.29 %Secondary Frequency: 240 HzThe display backlight flickers at 120 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .
The frequency of 120 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8260 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.
分钟
25 %
50 %
75 %
100 %固定缩放级别和不同亮度设置下的测量系列（最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来很平，但这是缩放造成的。信息框显示的是最小亮度下的振幅放大图）。
我们使用照片光谱仪和卡尔曼分析软件测量了Galaxy A56 色彩再现的准确度。我们注意到，选择 "自然 "模式的效果最佳。
它的白平衡有点偏向绿色，但在日常使用中应该不会注意到。颜色和灰度的描绘都很准确，不过，从竞争对手的表现来看，我们还可以做得更多。
灰度（配置文件：自然，目标色彩空间：sRGB）
色彩（配置文件：自然，目标色彩空间：sRGB）
色彩空间（配置文件：自然，目标色彩空间：sRGB）
饱和度（配置文件：自然，目标色彩空间：sRGB）
Display Response TimesℹDisplay 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 White1.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.616 ms rise↘ 0.581 ms fallThe screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.4 ms). ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey1.15 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.5805 ms rise↘ 0.565 ms fallThe screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (31.9 ms).
在室外，只要环境光线传感器被激活，三星Galaxy A56 的显示屏就能保持清晰易读。如果手动设置亮度，则只能达到 440 cd/m²。
三星Galaxy A56 的可视角度稳定性非常好；在非常平的可视角度下，内容只是显示得稍暖一些，亮度也略有下降。
三星Galaxy A56 5G 的视角稳定性性能 -Galaxy A56 内的全新 Exynos 1580Galaxy A56 采用三星自己的 Exynos 1580与前代产品相比，它使用了更先进的 Cortex 内核，因此 CPU 性能更高。
在我们的测试中，该系统芯片明显领先于大多数竞争对手，但它无法与 iPhone 16e's Apple A18或 Pixel 9a 的 张量 G4.
Geekbench 6.4 | Antutu v10 | PCMark for Android | CrossMark | BaseMark OS II | UL Procyon AI Inference for Android | AImark | Geekbench AI | AI Benchmark Geekbench 6.4
Single-CoreApple iPhone 16eApple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
3338 Points +142%Average of class Smartphone (196 - 3479, n=206, last 2 years)
1664 Points +21%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
1380 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (1367 - 1380, n=3)
1372 Points -1%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1179 Points -15%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1162 Points -16%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
1157 Points -16%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
1147 Points -17% Multi-CoreApple iPhone 16eApple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
8044 Points +107%Average of class Smartphone (830 - 10401, n=206, last 2 years)
4847 Points +25%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (3890 - 3921, n=3)
3911 Points +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
3890 Points Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
3456 Points -11%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
3298 Points -15%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
3239 Points -17%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
3129 Points -20%Antutu v10 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 16eApple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
1432050 Points +59%Average of class Smartphone (142748 - 3015111, n=148, last 2 years)
1378870 Points +53%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
901303 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (894364 - 901303, n=2)
897834 Points 0%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
787469 Points -13%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
767395 Points -15%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
756800 Points -16%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
740935 Points -18%PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
15165 Points +6%Average of class Smartphone (4507 - 27169, n=188, last 2 years)
14435 Points +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
14298 Points Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
13874 Points -3%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (13094 - 14298, n=3)
13579 Points -5%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
13393 Points -6%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
10617 Points -26%CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (187 - 2674, n=138, last 2 years)
1077 Points +4%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (1036 - 1052, n=2)
1044 Points +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
1036 Points Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
784 Points -24%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
760 Points -27%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
759 Points -27%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
759 Points -27%BaseMark OS II
OverallAverage of class Smartphone (1196 - 14066, n=147, last 2 years)
7311 Points +24%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
6028 Points +2%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (5881 - 6058, n=3)
5976 Points +2%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
5881 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5430 Points -8%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5402 Points -8%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
4964 Points -16% SystemSamsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
11778 Points +21%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
11239 Points +15%Average of class Smartphone (2368 - 20776, n=147, last 2 years)
11020 Points +13%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
10153 Points +4%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (9765 - 10013, n=3)
9891 Points +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
9765 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
7930 Points -19% MemoryAverage of class Smartphone (962 - 20652, n=147, last 2 years)
8283 Points +19%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8078 Points +16%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (6960 - 7563, n=3)
7359 Points +6%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
6960 Points Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
5719 Points -18%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
5642 Points -19%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
4109 Points -41% GraphicsAverage of class Smartphone (1046 - 384996, n=147, last 2 years)
24137 Points +134%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
13308 Points +29%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (10293 - 10461, n=3)
10358 Points 0%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
10319 Points Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
9482 Points -8%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8662 Points -16%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
8511 Points -18% WebSamsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
1706 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (1659 - 1730, n=3)
1698 Points 0%Average of class Smartphone (858 - 2363, n=147, last 2 years)
1660 Points -3%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1567 Points -8%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1566 Points -8%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
1543 Points -10%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
1474 Points -14%UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Average of class Smartphone (3769 - 81594, n=139, last 2 years)
19972 Points +79%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
11181 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (10372 - 11181, n=3)
10765 Points -4%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
8985 Points -20%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8652 Points -23%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
8460 Points -24%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
5205 Points -53%AImark - Score v3.x
Apple iPhone 16eApple A18, A18 GPU, 8192
30473 Points +3191%Average of class Smartphone (82 - 307528, n=129, last 2 years)
26772 Points +2791%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
926 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (873 - 926, n=2)
900 Points -3%Motorola Edge 50 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3, Adreno 720, 12288
717 Points -23%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
702 Points -24%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
585 Points -37%Geekbench AI
Single Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2Average of class Smartphone (51 - 2472, n=55, last 2 years)
508 Points +84%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
276 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (276 - 276, n=2)
276 Points 0%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
231 Points -16%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
230 Points -17%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
121 Points -56% Half Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2Average of class Smartphone (51 - 9453, n=55, last 2 years)
1148 Points +316%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (276 - 277, n=2)
277 Points 0%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
276 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
232 Points -16%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
231 Points -16%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
123 Points -55% Quantized TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2Average of class Smartphone (123 - 13084, n=55, last 2 years)
1868 Points +189%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
646 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (646 - 646, n=2)
646 Points 0%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
549 Points -15%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
536 Points -17%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
445 Points -31%AI Benchmark
Score V5Average of class Smartphone (46.4 - 3334, n=41, last 2 years)
911 Points +699%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
114 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1)
114 Points 0%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
107 Points -6%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
96.6 Points -15% Score V6Average of class Smartphone (68.9 - 12845, n=61, last 2 years)
4316 Points +1334%Nothing Phone (3a) ProQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1373 Points +356%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 3, Adreno 810, 12288
1246 Points +314%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GSamsung Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530, 8192
324 Points +8%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Exynos 1580, Xclipse 540, 8192
301 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (300 - 301, n=2)
301 Points 0%
图形计算由集成的 Xclipse 540 执行，与去年的机型相比，性能有了明显提升，但仍不支持光线追踪。
3DMark: Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | Wild Life Extreme | Wild Life Unlimited Score | Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score | Steel Nomad Light Score GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | 3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
2827 Points +108%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1451 Points +7%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1362 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1060 Points -22%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1039 Points -24%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
915 Points -33%3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
3330 Points +141%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1474 Points +7%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1382 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
1055 Points -24%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1054 Points -24%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
926 Points -33%3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
14024 Points +168%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5434 Points +4%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5237 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
4176 Points -20%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4131 Points -21%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3992 Points -24%3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1149 Points +74%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
659 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
383 Points -42%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
354 Points -46%3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
1517 Points +132%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
654 Points Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
375 Points -43%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
359 Points -45%GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
116 fps 0%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
116 fps Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
111 fps -4%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98 fps -16%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps -48%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
60 fps -48%GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
397.5 fps +155%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
174 fps +12%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
156 fps Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
134 fps -14%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
131 fps -16%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
130 fps -17%GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
97 fps Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps -16%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
78 fps -20%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps -38%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
59 fps -39%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
57 fps -41%GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
259.9 fps +132%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
112 fps Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
107 fps -4%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
95 fps -15%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
85 fps -24%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
84 fps -25%GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 fps Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps -19%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
60 fps -19%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps -23%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
54 fps -27%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
42 fps -43%GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
175.3 fps +106%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
85 fps Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
84 fps -1%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps -21%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
62 fps -27%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
61 fps -28%GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
60 fps +43%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
32 fps -24%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
31 fps -26%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
29 fps -31%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
23 fps -45%GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
129.1 fps +175%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47 fps Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps -23%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
35 fps -26%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
34 fps -28%GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
59.2 fps +64%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
36 fps Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
28 fps -22%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
27 fps -25%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
27 fps -25%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps -39%GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
50 fps +92%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
26 fps Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
23 fps -12%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
20 fps -23%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
20 fps -23%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
19 fps -27%GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
59.9 fps +13%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
46 fps -13%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps -21%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
40 fps -25%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
35 fps -34%GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
140 fps +115%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65 fps Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
57 fps -12%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
52 fps -20%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
52 fps -20%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps -25%GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
20.6 fps +72%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
12 fps Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
11 fps -8%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.8 fps -27%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
8.8 fps -27%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7.9 fps -34%
在Galaxy A56 上浏览网页非常方便快捷。在基准测试中，与竞争对手相比，A56 总是名列前茅；在这方面，只有 iPhone 16e 能与之媲美。
Jetstream 2 | Speedometer 2.0 | Speedometer 3.0 | WebXPRT 4 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
299.928 Points +98%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1)
151.6 Points 0%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
151.579 Points Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=153, last 2 years)
149.7 Points -1%Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
132.67 Points -12%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
131.393 Points -13%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
123.193 Points -19%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
118.037 Points -22%Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
550 runs/min +188%Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 585, n=135, last 2 years)
194.9 runs/min +2%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (191 - 194, n=2)
192.5 runs/min +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
191 runs/min Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135)
170 runs/min -11%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
147 runs/min -23%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
144 runs/min -25%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
116 runs/min -39%Speedometer 3.0 - Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
33.3 runs/min +178%Average of class Smartphone (1.03 - 34, n=112, last 2 years)
13.2 runs/min +10%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (12 - 12.3, n=3)
12.2 runs/min +2%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
12 runs/min Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135)
10 runs/min -17%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
8.58 runs/min -28%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
7.04 runs/min -41%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
6.3 runs/min -47%WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
273 Points +98%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (138 - 144, n=3)
140 Points +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
138 Points Average of class Smartphone (22 - 273, n=145, last 2 years)
137 Points -1%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
126 Points -9%Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
125 Points -9%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
110 Points -20%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
103 Points -25%Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
97104 Points +91%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
50719 Points Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (49327 - 50864, n=3)
50303 Points -1%Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=201, last 2 years)
46379 Points -9%Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
44460 Points -12%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
41576 Points -18%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
39130 Points -23%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
37415 Points -26%Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=156, last 2 years)
1229 ms * -55%Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124)
1150 ms * -45%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132)
1044 ms * -32%Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123)
1012.6 ms * -28%Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134)
875.1 ms * -10%Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (791 - 851, n=3)
812 ms * -2%Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134)
792.6 ms * Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18)
287.8 ms * +64%* ... smaller is better
与前代机型相比，三星提高了 UFS 3.1 存储的写入率，尽管Galaxy A56 仍无法充分发挥这种快速存储的潜力。
Samsung Galaxy A56 5GSamsung Galaxy A55 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GMotorola Edge 50 ProNothing Phone (3a) ProAverage 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class SmartphoneAndroBench 3-57%-16%35%12%5%61% Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s)1634.81688.53 3%992.72 -39%1023.6 -37%996.23 -39%1589 ?(529 - 3134, n=66) -3%2213 ?(270 - 4370, n=189, last 2 years) 35% Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s)999.95831.44 -17%931.68 -7%1025.9 3%970.63 -3%757 ?(233 - 1745, n=66) -24%1815 ?(103.2 - 4035, n=189, last 2 years) 82% Random Read 4KB (MB/s)207.01351.47 70%171.2 -17%337 63%255.89 24%242 ?(126.2 - 428, n=66) 17%295 ?(47.6 - 504, n=189, last 2 years) 43% Random Write 4KB (MB/s)184.08132.11 -28%186.14 1%390.2 112%304.95 66%240 ?(61.8 - 503, n=66) 30%340 ?(9.4 - 964, n=189, last 2 years) 85%
游戏 - 带有 HFR 游戏功能的三星手机我们借助GameBench 分析了三星Galaxy A56 5G 的游戏性能。.在我们测试的所有游戏中，《死亡扳机 2》（Dead Trigger 2）等较老的游戏最高可达到 120fps。
对于图形要求较高的游戏，你必须降低细节级别以确保显示流畅。虽然在测试过程中显示效果基本流畅，但我们还是多次注意到一些小的卡顿，智能手机也变得非常热。最高细节模式甚至不适用于《PUBG Mobile》。
玄心对Galaxy A56 的影响
Galaxy A56 上的 PUBG Mobile
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G; Dead Trigger 2: Ø118.6 (109-121) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G; Genshin Impact; lowest 120 fps: Ø58.9 (48-61) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G; Genshin Impact; highest 120 fps: Ø47.3 (32-60) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G; PUBG Mobile; Smooth; 3.8.0: Ø59 (46-61) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø39.8 (35-41)
排放 - 可能会很热，但保持稳定温度在我们的测试中，在连续负载的情况下，它的表面温度在某些地方上升到了 49 °C，我们使用 Burnout 基准进行了模拟。虽然温度相对较高，但仍在可接受范围内。
另一方面，三星似乎能很好地将 SoC 的热量散发出去，因为它在压力测试中基本没有受到影响。
Max. LoadIdle
47.1 °C46.8 °C44.8 °C 48.5 °C47.4 °C42.4 °C 47.7 °C47.5 °C40.8 °C
Maximum: 48.5 °CAverage: 45.9 °C
42 °C44.8 °C46.6 °C42.5 °C44.6 °C49 °C40.6 °C44.2 °C47.7 °C
Maximum: 49 °CAverage: 44.7 °C Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260Max. LoadIdle
27 °C26.9 °C27.8 °C 26.8 °C27.1 °C28.1 °C 26.7 °C27.1 °C27.5 °C
Maximum: 28.1 °CAverage: 27.2 °C
27.1 °C26.9 °C26.7 °C27.1 °C26.7 °C26.9 °C26.8 °C26.7 °C27.1 °C
Maximum: 27.1 °CAverage: 26.9 °C Room Temperature 22 °C | Voltcraft IR-260(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 45.9 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48.5 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.2 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
3DMark stress tests
3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test StabilitySamsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
99.7 % +5%Nothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99.5 % +4%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
95.4 % Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
93.4 % -2%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
88.6 % -7%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
83 % -13% Wild Life Extreme Stress TestNothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99 % +1%Samsung Galaxy A55 5GXclipse 530, Exynos 1480, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
98.9 % +1%Motorola Edge 50 ProAdreno 720, SD 7 Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.8 % +1%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
97.7 % Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
97.3 % 0%Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
82.5 % -16% Steel Nomad Light Stress Test StabilityNothing Phone (3a) ProAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3
99 % 0%Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5GAdreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
98.8 % 0%Samsung Galaxy A56 5GXclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
98.7 % Apple iPhone 16eA18 GPU, A18, 128 GB NVMe
75 % -24%
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø8.6 (8.48-8.68) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø6.29 (6.26-6.43) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.2 (31.3-32.8) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø24.1 (23.1-24.7) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø32.1 (31.4-33) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø24.6 (24.6-24.8) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Xclipse 540, Exynos 1580, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.1.1.3: Ø4.85 (4.81-4.88) Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G Adreno 810, SD 7s Gen 3, 512 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.1.1.3: Ø2.65 (2.63-2.66)
发言人Galaxy A56 的两个扬声器提供了相当一般的音频体验，主要表现在全音量时，低频听起来有点弱，超高音调几乎听不到。
USB-C 可用于有线音频输出。蓝牙可用于无线，但音频编解码器范围有限。Galaxy A56 支持 Auracast。
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)Samsung Galaxy A56 5G audio analysis(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.7 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median(+) | mids are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(±) | higher highs - on average 8% higher than median(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)Compared to same class» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 58% worse» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 35%, worst was 134%Compared to all devices tested» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G audio analysis(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.6 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.6% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(±) | reduced mids - on average 5% lower than median(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)Compared to same class» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 88% worse» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 35%, worst was 134%Compared to all devices tested» 27% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 67% worse» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
电池寿命 - 5,000 毫安时的三星智能手机耗电量三星改进了Galaxy A56 在闲置模式下的功耗，但在负载情况下功耗相当高。
有线状态下，三星智能手机的充电功率高达 45 瓦，名义上比Galaxy S25（25 瓦、4,000 毫安时）快。不过，由于 A56 的电池容量更大，这在日常使用中并没有什么区别。在我们的测试中，S25需要70分钟才能充满电，而A56需要71分钟（50%：21分钟，80%：38分钟，90%：48分钟）。与 A55相比，A56 的充电时间缩短了 12 分钟。这款中档智能手机不支持无线充电。
Power Consumption
Off / Standby 0.02 / 0.22 WattIdle 0.72 / 1.45 / 1.49 Watt
Load
9.68 / 13.39 Watt
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G5000 mAhSamsung Galaxy A55 5G5000 mAhXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G5110 mAhApple iPhone 16e4005 mAhMotorola Edge 50 Pro4500 mAhNothing Phone (3a) Pro5000 mAhAverage Samsung Exynos 1580 Average of class Smartphone Power Consumption5%17%8%16%25%-67%4%Idle Minimum * (Watt)0.720.85 -18%1.07 -49%0.68 6%0.9 -25%0.89 -24%1.337 ?(0.72 - 2.1, n=3) -86%0.855 ?(0.4 - 1.65, n=157, last 2 years) -19%Idle Average * (Watt)1.451.51 -4%1.26 13%1.89 -30%1.3 10%1.3 10%3.34 ?(1.45 - 6.06, n=3) -130%1.423 ?(0.6 - 4.36, n=157, last 2 years) 2%Idle Maximum * (Watt)1.491.71 -15%1.28 14%1.93 -30%1.6 -7%1.33 11%3.49 ?(1.49 - 6.07, n=3) -134%1.587 ?(0.85 - 4.46, n=157, last 2 years) -7%Load Average * (Watt)9.684.87 50%3.7 62%3.77 61%4.8 50%3.29 66%8.98 ?(5.8 - 11.5, n=3) 7%7.13 ?(2.3 - 16.5, n=138, last 2 years) 26%Load Maximum * (Watt)13.3911.73 12%7.52 44%9.04 32%6.7 50%4.76 64%12.3 ?(7.9 - 15.7, n=3) 8%10.9 ?(3.53 - 20.8, n=138, last 2 years) 19%* ... smaller is better
Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Samsung Exynos 1580; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø4.54 (1.012-11) Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Samsung Exynos 1480; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø4.37 (1.064-10.1) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Samsung Exynos 1580; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.067 (1.034-1.349) Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Samsung Exynos 1480; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.242 (1.109-1.603)
Power consumption: GFXbench (150 cd/m²)
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Samsung Exynos 1580; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø6.04 (5.72-7.42) Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Samsung Exynos 1480; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø5.21 (4.99-5.9) Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Samsung Exynos 1580; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.067 (1.034-1.349) Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Samsung Exynos 1480; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.242 (1.109-1.603)
运行时间三星Galaxy A56 5G 的电池续航时间给人带来了惊喜，在我们的大多数测试中，它的续航时间都明显较长。不出所料，它在负载情况下的运行时间略短。
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
52h 53min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 134)
19h 59min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
41h 46min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 35min
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G5000 mAhSamsung Galaxy A55 5G5000 mAhXiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G5110 mAhApple iPhone 16e4005 mAhMotorola Edge 50 Pro4500 mAhNothing Phone (3a) Pro5000 mAhBattery Runtime-20%-24%-6%-19%-1%Reader / Idle (h)52.936.7 -31%23.9 -55%47.4 -10%31.6 -40%H.264 (h)41.825.2 -40%18.5 -56%24.3 -42%18.7 -55%WiFi v1.3 (h)2018 -10%19.5 -2%23.2 16%16.3 -18%19.8 -1%Load (h)3.63.7 3%4.2 17%4.1 14%5 39%
Notebookcheck 总评分三星Galaxy A56 5G 是一款功能强大的中端智能手机，它可能不会在所有方面都达到同类产品的最佳标准，但它确实提供了一个不错的整体解决方案。
Back to the verdict
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
- 05/20/2025 v8
Daniel Schmidt
Chassis93%
Keyboard67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device93%
Connectivity48 / 69 → 70%
Weight88%
Battery92%
Display91%
Games Performance23 / 55 → 41%
Application Performance64 / 85 → 75%
AI Performance15%
Temperature82%
Noise100%
Audio73 / 90 → 81%
Camera73%
Average75%
80%
Smartphone - Weighted Average
CO2 Emissions92.2%Materials50%Packaging90%Power Use97.3%Repairability60%Software Updates100% Total Sustainability Score: 81.6%
可能的替代品比较
Benchmark Comparison Plugin: ERROR, Layout "57" not supported!
More articles related to this deviceSamsung Galaxy A56 5G (Galaxy A56 Series)News•三星Galaxy A56 即将推出 One UI 8 |Magazine•2025 年，三星Galaxy A 智能手机： Galaxy A56、A36、A26 和 A16 的对比 |News•三星Galaxy A56 5G：中端之王或将摇摇欲坠 |News•三星Galaxy A56 泄露中档智能手机信息，设计新颖，提供四种颜色
TransparencyThe selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Editor of the original article: Daisy Dickson - Translator - 460 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2023Translator: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 619208 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008contact me via:
Please share our article, every link counts!