What Display Daily thinks: Visionox is the exclusive supplier of the Honor 200 Pro displays but before we get to that, let’s just deal with Dxomark. All display tests, no matter how controlled or scientific they may be, are subjective. No one can replicate the experiences because no one is going to see things the same way. As a comparison methodology, I don’t have a problem with Dxomark. As a driver of value propositions or markets it is debatable.
On the one hand, there are so many influencers and channels for tech reviews, and most are so broad, that there are few with the capabilities or resources to do effective benchmarking. So, you need a Dxomark or an Rtings.com to provide a perspective. The overall Dxomark score is a proprietary blend of weightings based on the performance of a camera or display on various subset tests. The subsets can be more interesting because they address specific issues that may actually be more heavily weighted by a user.
The Visionox display here has an overall score that is impressive. However, if you dig in a little, you also see that it doesn’t do as well in rendering scenes outdoors. That might be a dealbreaker for me, as it might be for many. And that’s where Dxomarks get a little awkward. Everyone likes the big number and the high ranking, but the devil is in the details. All in all, for competitors, the Dxomark here, if you dig through those subset scores, is enough a smart engineer all they need to know about the underlying screen technology from Visionox.
But, when it comes to consumers, the big overall display score is the one that drives the most significant attention. And the camera score is probably going to be a bigger sway than the display score. It certainly seems to be for the tech commentators on social media. That should give solace to Chinese display manufacturers because they have two unmatched beachheads into gaining more market share in smartphones: growing Chinese smartphone suppliers like Honor, and overall benchmark scores from Dxomark that are easy to leverage for fun and profit.
There was a time when PC Magazine would do roundups of graphics cards. It happened around the third quarter of the year, and manufacturers would scurry to have their fourth quarter offerings in testing by the summer. Lead times for those tests and printed magazines were months in advance. A different time even if it was not that long ago. The benchmarks could make or break a product launch in the channel.
The fragmentation in authority that has taken place with influencers and social media channels replacing established publications means that there is no on make or break point in promotions. In fact, even the best influencers can have little influence if they go against a bigger tide of commentary on social media. What really matters is the conversation and the to and fro on the minutiae of specs or performance. Every influencer, like every analyst, is looking to pick on a point that others have missed, to lay claim to specific knowledge. In that sense, picking apart Dxomark subset scores works for driving conversations and awareness of a product. Whether it actually influences pull-through in the market to customers, I couldn’t tell you.
What I do know is, Honor and Dxomark, or any combination of Chinese smartphone makers and Dxomark, is a boon for China’s display manufacturers. It is a sort of reference platform that is going to allow new brands to grow and proliferate against the Samsungs and Apples massive branding machines. It’s also probably where Chinese display manufacturers can audition for Apple’s business. Displacing chunks of Samsung’s or LG’s business with Apple has huge repercussions. And maybe Honor and Xiaomi and Transsion are enough on their own to make the smartphone display market tilt so far in favor of Chinese display manufacturers to an extent that Apple’s business doesn’t matter. Maybe this latest data on foldables is an indication of things to come as Chinese smartphone brands drive Chinese display vendors to surpass competition from Samsung and LG.
Honor 200 Pro: A Display of Excellence with Room for Improvement
In Dxomark’s comprehensive evaluation, the Honor 200 Pro achieved an overall display score of 151, securing the 8th position globally and the top spot in the high-end category. One of the standout features of the Honor 200 Pro is its color performance. With a score of 165, it excelled in color accuracy across various lighting conditions. The device managed to maintain consistent and accurate colors, earning it the highest score in this attribute. Even though there was a slight green shift when viewed from an angle, the overall color fidelity was superior, making it ideal for media consumption, especially HDR10 video rendering in low-light conditions.
Touch performance also emerged as a highlight, with the Honor 200 Pro scoring 158. The device’s touch response time averaged an impressive 56 milliseconds, positioning it among the fastest in its category. However, despite its quick response, the device exhibited a lack of smoothness when scrolling through web pages and navigating the gallery app, which slightly detracted from the overall touch experience.
In terms of readability, the Honor 200 Pro scored 145, which is an adequate performance across different lighting conditions. While the display maintained decent brightness levels indoors, its readability was significantly challenged in outdoor environments.
Video performance was another area where the Honor 200 Pro had mixed results. Scoring 146, the device delivered good overall video quality but was held back by issues such as frame mismatches, particularly in 60 frames per second (fps) content. This problem was more pronounced in standard dynamic range (SDR) videos, indicating a need for better frame rate handling. In addition, the screen’s luminance for video content was generally low in indoor settings, affecting the brightness and clarity of videos.
The Honor 200 Pro also received Dxomark’s Eye Comfort label for effective management of brightness and blue light filtering.
