All those who like to write in comments to reviews of thin and beautiful Android-smartphones “would be better done
On the exterior of Highscreen Boost say decisivelythere is nothing. It is black, plastic, with rounded corners. Behind the plastic is textured, it is not the most pleasant to the touch, but it will come down considering the price of the device. Control keys on the front panel - touch. In addition to them, here you can see the eye of the front 1.3-megapixel camera, the speaker grid and scratches (alas, the screen is easily subject to mechanical damage). The screen lock and volume buttons are located on the right and left ends of the device, respectively. Both barely protrude above the body, they are difficult to find by touch even after a week of using the device. The matter is further aggravated by the fact that at both ends of Highscreen Boost there are protrusions that completely correspond in size to both buttons. SIM card slots and a memory card are hidden under the battery. So it all looks.
The screen of the smartphone makes a good impression inindoors - good viewing angles, decent pixel density (256 ppi), honest black. But the trouble is - he has an extremely weak backlight. Remember, in the review of the Samsung Galaxy Xcover 2, I complained that the screen is badly read in the sun? And now look at the photo below (on the left Samsung Galaxy Xcover 2, on the right Highscreen Boost) and imagine what the owner of this device will do when the long-awaited solar time of the year comes.
The main difference between Highscreen Boost andAndroid devices with a similar pedigree is that it does not have a production Mediatek processor (or some other countryman), but Qualcomm. The heart of the model is the MSM8225 Snapdragon S4 with a clock speed of 1.4 GHz and the Adreno 203 graphics core. All this is supported by 1 GB of RAM (by the way, the built-in 4 GB here) and bare Android 4.1. Benchmark results can be seen in the screenshot gallery below. They are average (in a good sense of the word) in graphic tests (29.2 in Nenamark 2 and 22.3 in Open Citadel), above the average in AnTuTu Benchmark (7,206 points) and Vellamo (1313 points). But in any case, the results are decent, taking into account the price of a smartphone - 9,000 rubles for Russia, which in terms of the native currency amounts to almost 2,400 UAH.
For a snack, I left the most interesting part -battery life. In the test AnTuTu Battery Highscreen Boost scored 857 points, while at the very maximum load it was discharged from 100% to 19% in 4 hours and 44 minutes. GBL Mark in the battery test showed 6 hours and 39 minutes when broadcasting images in HD-resolution at maximum brightness of the screen with a frequency of 60 fps. In my use case, the battery charge melted for three days, or even more. Equal Highscreen Boost battery life of Android-smartphones, I have not met, it is a fact.
So, if you belong to that categoryusers for whom the price and characteristics of the device are in the first place, while the brand does not matter, and you are looking for a smartphone with maximum autonomy, Highscreen Boost should be considered as one of the main candidates. In addition to excellent autonomy, the user will also get very decent performance and good screen resolution by the standards of the price category. But the main contraindication to the purchase of Highscreen Boost is a weak screen backlight, which will turn into a big problem with the onset of sunny days. Because in such conditions, the Highscreen Boost screen becomes completely unreadable.