Video quality also yielded similar, passable results. Nearby audio picked up well, and colors were true to life. Both moving and still objects, in general, remained in focus. However, when I moved the camera around, I could see a subtle, but nonetheless distracting, "pulsating" effect due to the lens readjusting itself for lighting and focus.
The camera holds a slew of editing options, including 11 Instagram-esque filters and three shooting modes: Pro, Basic, or Scenes. Each mode then has six more editing options underneath it. For instance, Basic gives you all your standard photo features like Auto, HDR shooting, panorama, and low-light. Pro has options such as blink and smile detection, as well as timed interval shooting. Scene enables users to adjust for macro shooting or taking photos in the dark or at sunset.
Images ranges from 640x480 to 3,264x2,448-pixels. There's also a timer, white-balance settings, geotagging, and more. As for video, it utilizes the same filters. You can take photos while recording, and there is a time-lapse option. Recording quality spans from MMS video for texts to 1080p.
I tested the Boost Max in our San Francisco offices, where I found call quality to be good, but not stellar. Although none of my calls dropped and audio remained consistent without cutting in and out, my calling partner did sound a bit scratchy. The distortion wasn't overly distracting, nor did it render the call unintelligible. However, it was noticeable, and during times of absolute silence when no one was speaking, I could hear the subtle hint of static.
As for audio speaker quality, voices sounded tinny and thin. Increasing the volume made the audio's hollowness even more apparent. But again, even though my partner's voice sounded "pinched," I was still able to understand what was being said.
Meanwhile, I was told that my voice sounded clear on the other end, though just a tad muffled. Volume levels were also appropriate on both ends, and my calling partner said that there was no indication of any background or extraneous noises.Listen now: ZTE Boost Max call quality sample
Because it is a Boost Mobile device, the handset operates on Sprint's network. 4G LTE speeds were consistent and reliable, but altogether quite slow. For instance, Ookla's speed test app showed an average of 0.48Mbps down and a mere 0.14Mbps up. It also took a whopping 22 minutes and 24 seconds to download and install the 40.89MB Temple Run 2 game. As for Web browsing, it took about 11 seconds and 29 seconds, respectively, to load the mobile and desktop versions of CNET's site. The New York Times' mobile site loaded on average in 12 seconds and its full site took 30 seconds. Lastly, the mobile site for ESPN clocked in at 14 seconds, and 27 seconds passed before its desktop site fully loaded.
|ZTE Boost Max||Performance|
|Average 4G LTE download speed||0.48Mpbs|
|Average 4G LTE upload speed||0.14Mbps|
|App download (Temple Run 2)||40.89MB in 22 minutes and 24 seconds|
|CNET mobile site load||11 seconds|
|CNET desktop site load||29 seconds|
|Power off and restart time||37 seconds|
|Camera boot time||2.5 seconds|
Powering the smartphone is a 1.2GHz dual-core Snapdragon 400 processor. Small but necessary tasks that are performed daily were executed without a hitch. Browsing through the app drawer, for example, or returning to the home pages and unlocking the screen, were done smoothly and timely. In addition, when I played the graphics-intensive game Riptide GP 2, I didn't notice any stuttering, and the app never force-quit. Compared to high-tiered flagship devices, however, the Max didn't have as high of a frame-rate, and its rendering of images wasn't as smooth.
Moreover, while the 37 seconds it took in order to power off and restart the handset didn't stand out to me, the 2.5 seconds it took to launch the camera definitely did. Even though the camera itself operated swiftly (as I mentioned before), opening it took a hair longer than what I was used to. When I ran benchmark tests on the smartphone for CPU performance, the Max's highest Quadrant score out of three trials was 4,795. For comparison, that puts it on a par with devices like the ZTE Warp 4G Boost and the Huawei Ascend Mate (which scored 4,868 and 4,818, respectively). It also had a Linpack multi-thread result of 227 MFLOPs in 0.74-second.
During our battery drain test for video playback, the device lasted 12 hours and 51 minutes, and it has a reported talk time of 16 hours. In general, its nonremovable 3,200mAh battery was decent, but it takes an abnormally long time to charge. I had to wait about a full workday to have a full battery charge. At the end of another workday (after it had been fully charged), the smartphone would be at 66 percent capacity, even with medium to high usage and the screen brightness cranked all the way up. According to FCC radiation measurements, the handset has a digital SAR rating of 0.91W/kg.
Though it appears that phablets are all the rage right now, the number of reliable but inexpensive devices are slim. Phablets that are the top of their game can cost a pretty penny off-contract (the Samsung Galaxy Note 3, for example, is $708, prepaid, on T-Mobile).
True, the Boost Max may not have the sharpest screen, the fastest processor, or the most powerful camera, but for its 5.7-inch size, $299.99 is a reasonable price to pay for its just-fair performance.
However, if you are able to spend $50 more, the prepaid, 6.3-inch Samsung Galaxy Mega is worth the extra dough. While its screen has a lower ppi ratio, its camera takes better photos, its processor is faster, and it has a handful of nifty and useful Samsung software features.