Huawei Nova Plus
Spécifications de l'ordinateur portable
Appareil photo secondaire: 8 MPix (focus fixe)
Price comparison
Moyenne de 35 notes (à partir de 71 critiques)
Critiques pour le/la Huawei Nova Plus
Enregistrement vidéo 4K enfin disponible! Le Nova Plus de Huawei apporte une touche premium au segment du milieu de gamme et est le premier smartphone du constructeur chinois à proposer l'enregistrement vidéo 4K. Cependant, Huawei a choisi un Soc de Qualcomm plutôt qu'un Soc Kirin de son propre cru. Comment se défend ce smartphone dans le segment très compétitif aux alentours de 400 € (~$432)?
Source: Ausdroid EN→FR Archive.org version
All in all it’s a solid, good looking device that will meet the needs of the vast majority of users and perhaps most importantly at an outright price that won’t break the bank. I’d seriously consider purchasing this as a backup device personally and wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it to the majority of my family and friends who are on the hunt for a new device.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 03/09/2017
Notes: Note globale: 74% prix: 80% mobilité: 85% finition: 80%
Source: Mobile Syrup EN→FR Archive.org version
The Asus Zenfone 3 offers a much more reasonable comparison at about $430. However, it’s only available online — which negates the opportunity to get it for a reduced rate upfront from a carrier and may not provide the same quality of warranty when bought from a carrier. Meanwhile, the Nova Plus can be picked up at Rogers, Fido and Virgin for $0 down on a two-year contract. While the bloated UI may be enough to turn some off of the phone, the steady capability of this well-designed device makes it a great contender in the mid-range space.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 12/14/2016
Source: Gadgetguy EN→FR Archive.org version
Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei has released in Australia its latest smart phone from its new Nova series, the Huawei Nova Plus. (I say giant” because it’s true: $US60 billion in revenues last year!) Priced at $549, it’s available now at Harvey Norman and Officeworks.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 11/24/2016
Source: Good Gear Guide EN→FR Archive.org version
Huawei’s Nova Plus is something of a jack of all trades. There’s little it can’t do and it uses the latest, second-tier components. The problem is that it’s still competing with many of the best last-gen phones which are still better and have reduced prices.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 11/21/2016
Notes: Note globale: 70%
Source: New Atlas EN→FR Archive.org version
We enjoyed our time with these two phones and they tick a lot of the right boxes – particular in design and battery life – but we don't think Huawei has quite done enough to make an impact in a very congested market. If it can build on what it's done with the Nova and Nova Plus, and get European and US carriers more interested in the coming months, then the 2017 editions could be much more appealing propositions.
Comparaison, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/26/2016
Source: Brighthand EN→FR Archive.org version
The Huawei nova plus has an excellent design and fantastic finish. This convincing craftsmanship is its chief selling point. The display, chipset, and camera performance are just good enough not to drag it down.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/24/2016
Notes: Note globale: 60%
Source: Tech Advisor EN→FR Archive.org version
While the Huawei Nova Plus certainly looks the part with a premium design and a bright, crisp display, the internals let it down. Despite featuring an improved camera with OIS, the photos produced by the smartphone are barely improved when compared to the Nova. However, we could look past the camera if it wasn’t for the sub-par CPU and GPU, which produce fairly disappointing results when compared to other mid-range Android smartphones. While the Nova Plus isn’t a terrible mid-range smartphone, there are better options on the market.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/24/2016
Notes: Note globale: 60% prix: 50% performances: 60% équipement: 70% finition: 90%
Source: International Business Times EN→FR Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova and Nova Plus are perfectly capable mid-range handsets from Huawei that offer solid specs at a reasonable price point. While they lack imagination from a design perspective, both are well-built and premium-looking, at times echoing the phones Huawei hopes to replace at the top of the smartphone pecking order. However, there's nothing on offer here to tip them much above the average mark, and once again Huawei's software prevents the smartphones from feeling like something that could pose a serious threat to its Android rivals. And in the mid-range smartphone market, Huawei has a lot to contend with.
Comparaison, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/20/2016
Notes: Note globale: 60%
Source: Phone Arena EN→FR Archive.org version
In the end, neither of these phones is likely to steer you wrong, especially if you're not demanding a ton from your smartphone – and if you want a handset that feels great to hold, and has a battery that won't leave you hanging, either makes a really nice choice. But there's also not a lot here that screams THIS is the mid-priced phone to get. As a result, we'd definitely recommend considering these two Novas – but maybe check out some phones from the competition, as well.
Comparaison, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/14/2016
Notes: Note globale: 73%
Source: Expert Reviews EN→FR Archive.org version
Even so, that puts the Nova Plus at a bit of a disadvantage, for while its screen, performance and camera are all fantastic, the OnePlus 3 does everything a lot better for less. I’d definitely recommend the Nova Plus over the regular Nova, but if you’re looking for a great mid-range phablet, the OnePlus 3 is still the way to go – not only is it considerably faster, but its battery life is also significantly better.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/13/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80%
Source: Recombu EN→FR Archive.org version
The Nova Plus is yet another 5.5-inch mighty mobile, which is elevated by some seriously impressive battery life. Media fans will love the spacious Full HD screen, but the likes of the OnePlus 3 and Samsung’s Galaxy A7 2016 boast the same strengths as the Nova Plus, at a lower asking price.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 10/04/2016
Notes: Note globale: 90%
Source: Android Headlines EN→FR Archive.org version
All-in-all, I think the Nova Plus is a device that Huawei has mis-positioned a little bit. In all of the above, we have established that the Nova Plus is a great smartphone, which it is. There’s no denying that, but with a price tag of €429, Huawei have priced it a little higher than I thought they would. Sure, the build quality and design here is great, and that fingerprint sensor is certainly a great luxury to have included, but the rest of the Nova Plus is pretty standard.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/03/2016
Source: Pocket Lint EN→FR Archive.org version
Huawei phones tend to deliver the same old story: great hardware, poor software. It's no different than with the Nova Plus which, at its €429 price point, makes it hard to recommend over a faster, more powerful OnePlus 3 or more exciting-looking Honor 8 (which, in essence, is from Huawei anyway!).
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/29/2016
Notes: Note globale: 70%
Source: Android Authority EN→FR Archive.org version
With 3GB of RAM, 32GB of internal storage, 4K video recording and Full HD displays then the nova and nova plus certainly have the hallmarks of couple of upper mid-range devices. That is even more so for the nova plus with its built-in OIS and larger display. The main weaknesses are the the processor package, and the camera setup.
Comparaison, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 09/21/2016
Notes: Note globale: 83% performances: 80% écran: 80% mobilité: 90% finition: 85%
Source: Android Central EN→FR Archive.org version
Overall, the Huawei Nova and Nova Plus are two excellent, if slightly overpriced mid-range phones. As always with Huawei, the build quality is excellent and performance is just fine, but software remains a sticking point. If you can get past (or even learn to like) EMUI, both phones deliver exceptional battery life, pretty good cameras and a choice of two form factors: The regular Nova is svelte and pocket-friendly, while the Nova Plus packs in a significant camera upgrade and a small battery bump alongside its bigger display.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 09/19/2016
Source: GSM Arena EN→FR Archive.org version
Huawei's on an upward trend and its recent phones are consistently showing it. The attention to detail on the exterior has been matched on the inside and the polished software is one of Huawei's definite strengths. This is really where the EMIUI is shining lately: innovative and helpful gestures, clean yet customizable interface and top-notch camera processing algorithms. The Huawei nova plus was developed and built to a high standard. The airplane-grade aluminum has made it reasonably lightweight but sturdy, and it feels quite convincingly premium in terms of both hand feel and performance.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 09/14/2016
Source: Tech Advisor EN→FR Archive.org version
While we’ve only had a limited time with the Huawei Nova Plus, we’re fairly happy with what we see. The display is bright and crisp, and the build quality is similar to that of a flagship smartphone. The 16Mp rear-facing snapper with OIS is also an attractive point, allowing users to take crisp, sharp and detailed photos and smooth videos. The biggest question is – is it worth the money? While no UK pricing has been announced, the 429 Euro price tag makes it more expensive than the OnePlus 3, which offers a more powerful processor and more RAM – but we’ll hold our reservations until we get one back to PC Advisor towers and put it through its paces. Make sure you check back soon for a more thorough verdict!
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très courte, Date: 09/05/2016
Source: Pocket Lint EN→FR Archive.org version
The Nova Plus gives Huawei a larger screened mid-range handset to rival some of the popular devices out there, like the offering from Moto. The Nova's strength is really in its premium metal bodywork, giving you a phone that looks the part.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Techradar EN→FR Archive.org version
Available in silver, grey or gold, the Huawei Nova+ is, like the Huawei Nova, a very competent device – and if the price isn't too extravagant it could be a top budget choice. However, there are some issues with the speed of the mid-range processor in our early testing, which causes a slight flicker of worry – but then these aren't retail-ready models, so performance could very well be optimised by the time they hit the stores.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très courte, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Trusted Reviews EN→FR Archive.org version
While the smaller dimensions of the Nova make that handset stand out, the larger Plus model sort of fades into the mass of 5.5-inch phones on the market. Its design is less interesting than the Nova's, but it packs a good selection of specs nonetheless. The camera needs work, though, and this could the Nova Plus' downfall.
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très courte, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: International Business Times EN→FR Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova and Nova Plus are unlikely to shake things up at the high end of the smartphone spectrum, but that's not the intention anyway. Instead, the devices are an attempt to tap into a burgeoning middle tier dominated by the likes of Samsung, Sony and LG and prove that no place is safe from the Chinese manufacturer's onslaught. On the other hand, despite their solid hardware and (mostly) good looks, there's no escaping the fact that the Nova and Nova Plus are two more additions to an ocean of mid-range smartphones.
Comparaison, disponibles en ligne, Très courte, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Connect - 01/2017
Critique simple, , Longueur inconnue, Date: 12/01/2016
Notes: Note globale: 88%
Source: WinFuture DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 11/28/2016
Source: Computerbase DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 11/09/2016
Source: Connect - Heft 12/2016
Critique simple, , Longueur inconnue, Date: 11/01/2016
Source: Smartphone Magazin - Heft 1/2017
Critique simple, , Longueur inconnue, Date: 11/01/2016
Source: Allround-PC.com DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/27/2016
Source: Teltarif DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/24/2016
Notes: Note globale: 79% écran: 80% mobilité: 60%
Source: n-tv DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 10/16/2016
Source: Inside Handy DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/14/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80%
Source: Curved DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/09/2016
Notes: Note globale: 81% performances: 77% écran: 78% mobilité: 84%
Source: MobiFlip DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/08/2016
Notes: Note globale: 84%
Source: WinFuture DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/04/2016
Source: Android Pit DE→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/02/2016
Notes: Note globale: 70%
Source: Arturogoga ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 11/14/2016
Notes: Note globale: 90% écran: 80% mobilité: 100% finition: 80%
Source: Andro 4 All ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 10/13/2016
Notes: Note globale: 85%
Source: Computerhoy ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 09/24/2016
Source: El Confidencial ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 09/21/2016
Source: Xataka ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/20/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80% performances: 78% écran: 80% finition: 90%
Source: Tuexperto ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 09/20/2016
Source: El Androide Libre ES→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 09/13/2016
Notes: Note globale: 88%
Source: Chimera Revo IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 02/15/2017
Notes: Note globale: 80% équipement: 80% écran: 80% mobilité: 80% finition: 85%
Source: Cinafoniaci IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 01/18/2017
Source: Stockisti IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 12/23/2016
Source: Notebook Italia IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 11/07/2016
Source: Androidiani IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 10/26/2016
Source: Tecno Cino IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/26/2016
Source: Ridble IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/25/2016
Notes: Note globale: 70%
Source: Smartphone e tablet android IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/20/2016
Notes: performances: 80% écran: 80% mobilité: 80% finition: 80%
Source: Quotidiano Hardware Upgrade IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/12/2016
Source: AndroidWorld.it IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/12/2016
Notes: Note globale: 82% prix: 75% écran: 80% ergonomie: 80%
Source: Techzilla.it IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/12/2016
Notes: Note globale: 83% prix: 75% performances: 80% écran: 80% finition: 90% ergonomie: 90%
Source: Leonardo.it Tech IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/09/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80% prix: 75% écran: 75% mobilité: 95% finition: 85% ergonomie: 80%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très courte, Date: 09/05/2016
Notes: Note globale: 79% prix: 70% mobilité: 95% finition: 75%
Source: AndroidPit.it IT→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 08/28/2016
Notes: Note globale: 70%
Source: Tablets Magazine NL→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/07/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80%
Source: Galaktyczny PL→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 12/05/2016
Notes: Note globale: 84% performances: 90% écran: 90% mobilité: 75% finition: 90%
Source: Tabletowo PL→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Longue, Date: 10/04/2016
Notes: Note globale: 83% performances: 60% écran: 80% mobilité: 95% finition: 75%
Source: Hitech Vesti RU→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/06/2016
Source: Ferra.ru RU→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 09/22/2016
Notes: Note globale: 78%
Source: Hi-Tech Mail RU→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/14/2016
Source: Geeks.hu HU→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/12/2016
Source: Svet Androida CZ→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 11/11/2016
Source: Svet Androida CZ→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 11/11/2016
Source: Mobilenet.cz CZ→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 09/16/2016
Source: Smartphone.bg BU→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, De taille moyenne, Date: 01/06/2017
Source: Tek.no NO→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Très longue, Date: 10/13/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80%
Source: Tek.no NO→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/13/2016
Notes: Note globale: 80%
Source: Fony.sk SK→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 10/15/2016
Source: Moj Android SK→FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 09/22/2016
Notes: Note globale: 83% performances: 85% écran: 87% mobilité: 88% finition: 85%
Source: Reviewzat →FR Archive.org version
Critique simple, disponibles en ligne, Courte, Date: 11/08/2016
Commentaire
Qualcomm Adreno 506:
Seuls les vieux jeux peuvent tourner de façon fluide sur ces ordinateurs (S'ils ne sont pas trop gourmands en ressources). Les coeurs à mémoire partagée de cette catégorie ont l'avantage d'être moins chaud et moins gourmand en énergie. Pour le bureau, internet, l'édition de photos, et le montage vidéo ces cartes graphiques n'ont aucune restrictions.
>> Plus d'informations sont à trouver dans notre comparaison des cartes graphiques mobiles et ainsi que dans notre liste des Benchmarks affiliés.
625:
SoC ARM milieu de gamme octo-cœur Cortex-A53 cadencé jusqu’à 2 GHz, intégrant un circuit graphique Adreno 506. SoC gravé selon un procédé d'une finesse de 14nm. Embarque un contrôleur mémoire DDR3L-1866 et un modem X9 LTE (Cat 7).
>> Plus d'informations sont à trouver dans notre comparaison des processeurs mobiles.
5.50": Avec 4,9 pouces, on commence à s’attaquer aux smartphones à grand écran. Cette taille d’écran reste néanmoins très répandue.
Un écran de plus grandes dimensions permettent des résolutions plus élevées, les détails comme la finesse des lettres seront meilleurs. Néanmoins, un écran de plus petite taille est synonyme de consommation énergétique moindre et souvent d’un terminal plus compact, plus léger et plus abordable.
>> Pour en savoir un peu plus sur la finesse des pixels à l'écran, jetez un coup d'œil à notre liste des DPI (PPP, points par pouce).
78.37%: La note n'est pas convaincante. On doit considérer qu'il n'y a pas beaucoup d'ordinateurs portables qui reçoivent une note en dessous de 60%. Ce portable est en dessous de la moyenne, Nous ne conseillons pas vraiment son achat.
>> Plus d'informations sont à trouver dans notre guide d'achat pour les ordinateurs portables.