honor 5X Review

Name: honor 5X Review
Item: Honor 5X
Rating: 6
Author: John V.

Posted: 20 Jan 2016, 05:02 , posted by John V.

Share Tweet Share

Tags: Android -Android +

Pages

Introduction

An explosion occurred in the mid-range smartphone market last year, showing all of us that there’s considerable value in price-conscious devices. Huawei, in particular, came swinging out of the gate with its own model in the P8 Lite, a $249.99, ‘lighter’ version of its high-end Huawei P8 smartphone. Despite the low cost, it failed to stand above the other prized devices in the segment at the time.

Fast forward to the present, they have something pretty sweet getting its name from Huawei’s sub-brand. Looking at the honor 5X, it’s hard to fathom that it’s been graced with an outright $200 price, seeing that it comes with a fingerprint sensor and a nice build. Other specs add to its drool worthy stature, but as we know, it takes more than that to be recognized as incredible.

The package contains:

honor 5X
Wall Charger
microUSB cable
SIM ejector tool
User guide

Design

The metal design is appreciable, but there’s a ‘cheapness’ to its feel.

The honor 5X's metal body looks nice from afar, including its chamfered beveled edge, but upon closer inspection, its brushed finish doesn’t seem to have the same level of sturdiness we get in more premium metal phones. In fact, there’s that slightly ‘cheap’ feel to it. Still, it’s a pleasant new direction for its cost and all, which is still better than how the Huawei P8 Lite attempted to look ‘premium’ with its plastic body.

The honor 5X comes with a recessed fingerprint sensor on its back side. It works rather well – it's been fairly responsive and accurate in our testing.

View more
+ 20 images

Front view | Side view

5.96 x 3 x 0.32 inches
151.3 x 76.3 x 8.15 mm
5.57 oz (158 g)

Honor 5X

6.01 x 2.96 x 0.29 inches
152.7 x 75.14 x 7.4 mm
4.96 oz (141 g)

Alcatel OneTouch IDOL 3 (5.5")

6.21 x 3.1 x 0.3 inches
157.7 x 78.74 x 7.74 mm
5.47 oz (155 g)

HTC Desire 820

6 x 3.04 x 0.43 inches
152.5 x 77.2 x 10.8 mm
6.00 oz (170 g)

Asus ZenFone 2 Laser (US)

To see the phones in real size or compare them with other models, visit our Visual Phone Size Comparison page.

Display

Resolution is great for a phone of this caliber, but colors are still a tad off.

For the price and all, we’re fairly excited to know that the honor 5X is endowed with a healthy 5.5-inch 1080 x 1920 IPS display. Sure enough, we’re satisfied to see 1080p resolution on a phone of this caliber. Details, as expected, are plentiful in providing sufficient sharpness.

Now, while we like that its peak brightness tops out at 585 nits, ensuring that outdoor visibility is not an issue, as well as its okay viewing angles, the other aspects about the display are just unflattering. Firstly, the panel is noticeably cold, so colors have a bluish tone to them, because of the ~8000K color temperature. It’s not necessarily the most color accurate screen: yellows are heavily influenced by green – while magentas favor a bluish hue.

Display measurements and quality

	Maximum brightness (nits)Higher is better	Minimum brightness (nits)Lower is better	Contrast Higher is better	Color temperature (Kelvins)	Gamma	Delta E rgbcmy Lower is better	Delta E grayscale Lower is better
Honor 5X	585 (Excellent)	7 (Good)	1:1251 (Excellent)	8021 (Poor)	2.19	2.9 (Good)	6.77 (Average)
Alcatel OneTouch IDOL 3 (5.5")	665 (Excellent)	29 (Poor)	1:960 (Average)	7280 (Good)	2.14	5.34 (Average)	5.68 (Average)
HTC Desire 820	543 (Excellent)	17 (Poor)	1:1813 (Excellent)	7119 (Good)	2.19	3.83 (Good)	5.16 (Average)
Asus ZenFone 2 Laser (US)	403 (Good)	23 (Poor)	1:1213 (Good)	7248 (Good)	2.68	3.25 (Good)	5.2 (Average)

View all

The numbers below represent the amount of deviation in the respective property, observed when a display is viewed from a 45-degree angle as opposed to direct viewing.

	Maximum brightness Lower is better	Minimum brightness Lower is better	Contrast Lower is better	Color temperature Lower is better	Gamma Lower is better	Delta E rgbcmy Lower is better	Delta E grayscale Lower is better
Asus ZenFone 2 Laser (US)	73.9%	78.3%	77.3%	16.9%	1.5%	9.5%	41.3%
Alcatel OneTouch IDOL 3 (5.5")	79.2%	79.3%	72.3%	17.9%	12.6%	15%	38.4%
HTC Desire 820	84.3%	82.4%	84.8%	16.7%	16.4%	5.7%	13.2%
Honor 5X	86.3%	85.7%	84.2%	6.6%	0.5%	12.4%	4.3%

View all

The CIE 1931 xy color gamut chart represents the set (area) of colors that a display can reproduce, with the sRGB colorspace (the highlighted triangle) serving as reference. The chart also provides a visual representation of a display's color accuracy. The small squares across the boundaries of the triangle are the reference points for the various colors, while the small dots are the actual measurements. Ideally, each dot should be positioned on top of its respective square. The 'x: CIE31' and 'y: CIE31' values in the table below the chart indicate the position of each measurement on the chart. 'Y' shows the luminance (in nits) of each measured color, while 'Target Y' is the desired luminance level for that color. Finally, 'ΔE 2000' is the Delta E value of the measured color. Delta E values of below 2 are ideal.

These measurements are made using SpectraCal's CalMAN calibration software.

View all

Pages:

Next page
Interface and Functionality

Related phones

PhoneArena rating:

6 Good

Honor 5X Compare

Specifications News^[16]

Rivals Photos

Size it Videos

37 Comments

Options
Close Follow › Following
Show comments:

Display mode:

Always view all comments

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 06:33 25

1. Ghost04 (Posts: 390; Member since: 03 May 2014)

This phone is better then the reviewer of the phonearena .

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 12:41 7

26. RuneMaster (Posts: 75; Member since: 31 May 2015)

Reviewer should be changed.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 02:13 1

32. andynaija (Posts: 1129; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)

*than

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 06:41 19

2. deanylev (Posts: 230; Member since: 11 Mar 2014)

A 6? Are you f**king kidding? This phone kicks ass for the price. The charging issue is probably a software flaw and you can't take points off for a metal body you jackasses.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 07:18 21

6. jellmoo (Posts: 2348; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

This phone could have cured cancer and still gotten a low score.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 19:50 5

30. NoToFanboys (Posts: 3170; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

I don't know if they are considering phone prices in their reviews.
They rated it as if it costs as much as a flagship.

posted on 11 Feb 2016, 07:04 2

38. tomn1ce (Posts: 244; Member since: 12 Mar 2012)

Pro..."sleek metal design"
Con..."Metal body feels a little cheap & prone to scratching"
make up your mind on the material of the phone, how can it be a pro and con at the same time? I guess he thought he was reviewing a $500+ phone. They need to separate reviews depending on the device they're reviewing. Mid range devices can not be compared with high devices. Don't expect a mid range device to give you performance that you would expect from from a high end device.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 06:42 1

3. GreenMan (Posts: 2493; Member since: 09 Nov 2015)

I look and weep at what they've done to Lollipop... They've turned it into a Lollipoop... Yuck.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 06:47 3

4. Felix_Gatto (Posts: 942; Member since: 03 Jul 2013)

Just look at this:
http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Samsung-Galaxy-Core-Review_id3394/page/4
It got a 8 and they said it have a mostly smooth perfomance LOL! My mom have one and it can't play subway surfers smoothly at 60fps.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:16

9. UglyFrank (Posts: 2140; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)

Even if it can't play a game at 60fps, that doesn't mean the rest of the phones experience will be slow.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 07:12 11

5. jellmoo (Posts: 2348; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

Five hours and forty five minutes to charge? What kind of charger do they include? a Nine volt battery?

This needs to be retested (new phone and different chargers) because this result is simply not believable.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:10

8. skips (Posts: 291; Member since: 04 Oct 2015)

Well let's start with the fact that there's no quick-charging support for the phone.
And most other reviews of the 5X also state that the charging times are quite dissapointing and are about 2-3hrs. I think the result times here on PA are ok.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:33 7

15. jellmoo (Posts: 2348; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

Yes. 2 or 3 hours could be seen as disappointing. 5 hours and 25 minutes is insanity. If PA is seeing charge times twice as long as other sites, that should be seen as something of an issue to explore, yes?

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:56 10

18. skips (Posts: 291; Member since: 04 Oct 2015)

woah holy crap i didnt actually notice you said FIVE HOURS
THAT'S INSANE.

MY BAD, SORRY.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:32 6

14. Arch_Fiend (Posts: 3827; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

LOL 9volt Battery.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 07:42 1

7. GreekGeek (Posts: 1276; Member since: 22 Mar 2014)

John V. definitely can't wait to see the next iPhone release that's why he treats these Android phones as punching bags.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:31 1

13. Arch_Fiend (Posts: 3827; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

The S7 Will Get A Good Score.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 09:50 6

21. squishypanda8 (Posts: 31; Member since: 28 Aug 2015)

He's probably gonna give the iPhone 7 like a 9.5 lol. I'm not sure if John V. is the best guy for reviewing budget phones. :P

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:18 11

10. ibend (Posts: 6747; Member since: 30 Sep 2014)

dear PA, if you decide to give some bad score to some phone, please give recommendation for better smartphone with the same PRICE RANGE and shortly explain why its better...
with that it will make your scoring system more legit, tq (and of course you should recommend phone with better score within same price range)

or just get rid of that scoring system, since its so useless this way

for $200 you get 1080p, FPscanner, 7hour battery life, SD615, fullmetal body, not so bad camera... whats more can you ask for $200? -_-

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 10:30 1

23. jellmoo (Posts: 2348; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

This. Exactly this. Device reviews should have value. They should give readers a good base for potential device purchases. Options at a similar price point would be a great start, and eliminating the arbitrary scoring system would seal the deal.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 03:54

33. zarkonj (Posts: 14; Member since: 30 Sep 2015)

Well they can't recommend a better phone in this price range, because the only better Phones are from Samsung and Apple, but their products are way more expensive.

Other similary priced phones are - according to PAs Reviews - same crap.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:23 5

11. Arch_Fiend (Posts: 3827; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

I don't understand you at all PA, you give high priced phones that are good lower scores for being high priced(Mate 8) and now you give what is suppose to be a cheap phone a low score for feeling cheap, you're being way to harsh on a $200 phone and you know it.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:27 2

12. RoBear (Posts: 12; Member since: 23 Nov 2015)

I've been testing the phone for about 4 weeks and I can assure you it does not take that long to charge.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:37

16. ShadowHammer (Posts: 160; Member since: 13 Mar 2015)

Yeah, definitely something weird going on with the charging.

I know some people don't care that much about call quality on their phones, but this just sounds like either a really bad sample from Huawei, or a poor design. It drives me nuts if I can't hear people speaking or voices sound distorted.

Still, for $200, you get a lot of other nice features that you could not get just a couple years ago.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 08:42 11

17. shahrooz (Posts: 792; Member since: 17 Sep 2013)

I click on PA reviews to read comments xD

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 09:24

19. zeeBomb (Posts: 2318; Member since: 14 Aug 2014)

I kinda agree with the score... I mean the UI is gaudy as sh*t, but really 345minutes to charge the damn device???

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 09:47

20. Planterz (Posts: 2118; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)

"Why the low score?" people ask? Did you miss the part about the piss-poor call quality on both ends? This is a phone, remember? Granted, many of us use them as pocket computers or text/message rather than actually making calls on it, but a phone that's barely usable as a phone

As for the charging time, something wonky might be going on. John V said he used the included charger, but doesn't state the amperage. Android Central says it's a 5V/1A charger, but doesn't say how long it takes for 0-100%. Android Police says it takes 2 hours, which isn't blazing fast, but it's a hell of a lot better than 5.75 hours. Maybe AP used a different charger.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 10:22 1

22. jellmoo (Posts: 2348; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

The lack of review consistency is the big issue. The 5.5 inch Idol 3 got a score of 8.5 and these two devices are very, very comparable. Heck, the OnePlus X got a 7, and it has incredibly poor LTE compatibility in the US.

Is the Honor 5X the best phone ever? Nope. But it *is* a pretty sweet bargain and deserves better than the zero effort review. Any sensible reviewer would balk at the 5 hour 45 minute charge time, and then do some research into it. Every other tech site I frequent would investigate to offer potential buyers as much info as possible. PA just tries to fill in their review template and move on. It's lazy. They can do so much better, and it frustrates me to no end that they refuse to see this as an issue.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 11:39 3

24. Tizo101 (Posts: 515; Member since: 05 Jun 2015)

Crap review yet again lol, but don't stop we all love the comment section that comes with your lies. Even my cheap 10 inch tablet doesn't take 5 hours to recharge - so good luck with that.

posted on 20 Jan 2016, 17:21

29. theo14461 (unregistered)

Another piece of junk. Heh-heh!

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Honor 5X

OS: Android 6.0 5.1
view full specs

PhoneArena rating:

6Good

Display	5.5 inches, 1080 x 1920 pixels (400 ppi) IPS LCD
Camera	13 megapixels
Hardware	Qualcomm Snapdragon 616, Octa-core, 1500 MHz, ARM Cortex-A53 processor 2 GB RAM
Size	5.96 x 3.00 x 0.32 inches (151.3 x 76.3 x 8.15 mm) 5.57 oz (158 g)
Battery	3000 mAh, 27 hours talk time