Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Conversível Asus NovaGo TP370QL (Snapdragon 835)

Andreas Osthoff (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 05/23/2018

PC com SoC de smartphone. O Asus NovaGo é um dos primeiros dispositivos equipados com um processador Snapdragon 835, que geralmente é usado para smartphones e tablets. Colocamos as mãos em uma amostra de pré-produção e testamos como o conversível compacto lida com o Windows e tarefas diárias.

Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Placa gráfica
Memória
8192 MB 
, LPDDR4x onboard
Pantalha
13.3 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 166 PPI, Capacitiva, IPS, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
256 GB NVMe, 256 GB 
Conexões
2 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, Conexões Audio: 3.5mm, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais
Funcionamento em rede
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n), LTE
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 1.49 x 316 x 221
Bateria
52 Wh Lítio-Polímero, Duração da bateria (de acordo com o fabricante): 22 h
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD 720p
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
1.392 kg, Suprimento de energia: 200 g

 

Size Comparison

Left side: Power, 2x USB 3.1 Gen.1 (Type-A)
Left side: Power, 2x USB 3.1 Gen.1 (Type-A)
Right side: Power button, volume rocker, 3.5 mm stereo jack, HDMI, Nano-SIM & microSD
Right side: Power button, volume rocker, 3.5 mm stereo jack, HDMI, Nano-SIM & microSD
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
802.11a/b/g/n
569 MBit/s ∼100%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
560 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Marvell AVASTAR Wireless-AC Network Controller
550 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Average of class Convertible
  (38.3 - 678, n=105)
474 MBit/s ∼83% -17%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
347 MBit/s ∼61% -39%
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
338 MBit/s ∼59% -41%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
802.11a/b/g/n
670 MBit/s ∼100%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Marvell AVASTAR Wireless-AC Network Controller
655 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
573 MBit/s ∼86% -14%
Average of class Convertible
  (39.2 - 685, n=105)
485 MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
349 MBit/s ∼52% -48%
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
343 MBit/s ∼51% -49%
282
cd/m²
282
cd/m²
276
cd/m²
283
cd/m²
296
cd/m²
277
cd/m²
273
cd/m²
278
cd/m²
263
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 296 cd/m² Médio: 278.9 cd/m² Minimum: 11.1 cd/m²
iluminação: 89 %
iluminação com acumulador: 295 cd/m²
Contraste: 2467:1 (Preto: 0.12 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.3 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 6.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
Gamma: 2.23
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
B133HAB01.0, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
XR122EA2T, , 1920x1200, 12.2
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
LG Display LP123WQ112604, , 2736x1826, 12.3
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
AU Optronics AUO226D / B125HAN02.2, , 1920x1080, 12.5
Response Times
6%
27%
17%
30%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
55.6 (28.4, 27.2)
56 (18, 38)
-1%
37 (18, 19)
33%
42 (20, 22)
24%
32 (15, 17)
42%
Response Time Black / White *
31.2 (14.8, 16.4)
27 (8, 19)
13%
25 (14, 12)
20%
28 (18, 10)
10%
26 (16, 10)
17%
PWM Frequency
20000 (90)
Screen
-12%
-24%
2%
-19%
Brightness middle
296
245
-17%
364
23%
461
56%
285
-4%
Brightness
279
233
-16%
341
22%
444
59%
274
-2%
Brightness Distribution
89
87
-2%
85
-4%
93
4%
87
-2%
Black Level *
0.12
0.21
-75%
0.47
-292%
0.34
-183%
0.23
-92%
Contrast
2467
1167
-53%
774
-69%
1356
-45%
1239
-50%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.3
4.2
21%
3.4
36%
3.43
35%
5.6
-6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9
8.75
3%
7.61
15%
5.55
38%
10.49
-17%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.7
3.94
41%
1.7
75%
3.08
54%
5.39
20%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.66 83%
2.36 93%
3.03 73%
2.2 100%
CCT
8233 79%
6096 107%
6750 96%
7014 93%
5925 110%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
38
59
64
41
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
59
91
99
64
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-3% / -9%
2% / -14%
10% / 5%
6% / -9%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.8 ms rise
↘ 16.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 80 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
55.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 28.4 ms rise
↘ 27.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41.1 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8811 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
11866 Points ∼100% +180%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
6935 Points ∼58% +64%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
6047 Points ∼51% +43%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
5270 Points ∼44% +24%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
4627 Points ∼39% +9%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
4384 Points ∼37% +3%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4240 Points ∼36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (3960 - 4240, n=2)
4100 Points ∼35% -3%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
3189 Points ∼100% +173%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
3107 Points ∼97% +166%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
2829 Points ∼89% +143%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
2510 Points ∼79% +115%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
2018 Points ∼63% +73%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
1396 Points ∼44% +20%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
1166 Points ∼37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (1144 - 1166, n=2)
1155 Points ∼36% -1%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4135.9 ms * ∼100%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
3434.1 ms * ∼83% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (2425 - 4813, n=19)
3219 ms * ∼78% +22%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
3108 ms * ∼75% +25%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
2621.7 ms * ∼63% +37%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
2401 ms * ∼58% +42%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
1681.7 ms * ∼41% +59%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
1661.9 ms * ∼40% +60%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
1652.3 ms * ∼40% +60%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
1428 ms * ∼35% +65%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
1320 ms * ∼32% +68%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
27818 Points ∼100% +165%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
23605 Points ∼85% +125%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
21581 Points ∼78% +106%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
21368 Points ∼77% +104%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
21322 Points ∼77% +103%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
17131 Points ∼62% +63%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
11945 Points ∼43% +14%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
11308 Points ∼41% +8%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
11290 Points ∼41% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (3086 - 14300, n=20)
11209 Points ∼40% +7%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
10484 Points ∼38%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
223.45 Points ∼100% +212%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
208.95 Points ∼94% +192%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
172.36 Points ∼77% +141%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
158.09 Points ∼71% +121%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
157.15 Points ∼70% +119%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
120.48 Points ∼54% +68%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
90.86 Points ∼41% +27%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
88.444 Points ∼40% +24%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
79.1 Points ∼35% +10%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Pentium N4200
78.773 Points ∼35% +10%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
78.274 Points ∼35% +9%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
71.6 Points ∼32% 0%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
71.6 Points ∼32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (52.9 - 80.4, n=19)
66.1 Points ∼30% -8%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
64.709 Points ∼29% -10%
Acer Aspire 1 A114-31-C472
Intel Celeron N3450
52.5 Points ∼23% -27%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
5526 Points ∼100% +732%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
5476 Points ∼99% +725%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
4338 Points ∼79% +553%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
4071 Points ∼74% +513%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
3587 Points ∼65% +440%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
3203 Points ∼58% +382%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
1630 Points ∼29% +145%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
1503 Points ∼27% +126%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
664 Points ∼12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
 
664 Points ∼12% 0%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
17166 Points ∼100% +437%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
12142 Points ∼71% +280%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
9828 Points ∼57% +207%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
8846 Points ∼52% +177%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
8169 Points ∼48% +155%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
7293 Points ∼42% +128%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
4909 Points ∼29% +54%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
3198 Points ∼19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
 
3198 Points ∼19% 0%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
2654 Points ∼15% -17%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
664
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
3198
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
0.27 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
1.59 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Liteonit CV3-8D128
3699 Points ∼100% +229%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
HD Graphics 610, 4415U, Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
3230 Points ∼87% +187%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
HD Graphics 520, 6100U, Hynix HFS128G39TND
3224 Points ∼87% +187%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
HD Graphics 615, 7Y30, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
2896 Points ∼78% +158%
Average of class Convertible
  (741 - 4741, n=235)
2726 Points ∼74% +143%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
HD Graphics 505, N4200, Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB
2066 Points ∼56% +84%
Acer Aspire 1 A114-31-C472
HD Graphics 500, N3450, Hynix HBG4a2 32 GB eMMC
1864 Points ∼50% +66%
Jumper EZbook 3
HD Graphics 500, N3350, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC
1592 Points ∼43% +42%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Adreno 540, 835, 256 GB NVMe
1124 Points ∼30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
1124 Points ∼30% 0%
PCMark 10 - Score
Average of class Convertible
  (1006 - 4347, n=58)
3076 Points ∼100% +197%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
HD Graphics 615, 7Y30, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
2509 Points ∼82% +142%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
HD Graphics 610, 4415U, Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
2492 Points ∼81% +141%
Jumper EZbook 3
HD Graphics 500, N3350, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC
1195 Points ∼39% +15%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Adreno 540, 835, 256 GB NVMe
1036 Points ∼34%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
1036 Points ∼34% 0%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
1124 pontos
Ajuda
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
256 GB NVMe
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Liteonit CV3-8D128
Google Pixel 2 XL
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
OnePlus 5
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
Average 256 GB NVMe
 
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-32%
171%
99%
30%
Write 4k QD32
50.36
33.54
-33%
172
242%
153.5
205%
75.7 (50.4 - 101, n=2)
50%
Read 4k QD32
56.45
30.39
-46%
301.8
435%
295.8
424%
93.4 (56.5 - 130, n=2)
65%
Write 4k
25.17
26.31
5%
98.76
292%
68.08
170%
41.1 (25.2 - 57, n=2)
63%
Read 4k
14.28
11.43
-20%
40.11
181%
28.01
96%
12.5 (10.8 - 14.3, n=2)
-12%
Write 512
204.8
140
-32%
241
18%
153
-25%
296 (205 - 387, n=2)
45%
Read 512
412
231.6
-44%
261.1
-37%
225.6
-45%
365 (319 - 412, n=2)
-11%
Write Seq
211.4
149.3
-29%
669.9
217%
195.6
-7%
326 (211 - 440, n=2)
54%
Read Seq
589.3
272.2
-54%
690.5
17%
449.7
-24%
520 (450 - 589, n=2)
-12%
256 GB NVMe
Sequential Read: 589.3 MB/s
Sequential Write: 211.4 MB/s
512K Read: 412 MB/s
512K Write: 204.8 MB/s
4K Read: 14.28 MB/s
4K Write: 25.17 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 56.45 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 50.36 MB/s
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1507 Points ∼100% +89%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
1251 Points ∼83% +57%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
1213 Points ∼80% +52%
Average of class Convertible
  (173 - 7483, n=288)
1162 Points ∼77% +46%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
796 Points ∼53%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
  (786 - 796, n=2)
791 Points ∼52% -1%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200
726 Points ∼48% -9%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1028 Points ∼100% +102%
Average of class Convertible
  (132 - 5965, n=205)
950 Points ∼92% +87%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
752 Points ∼73% +48%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
748 Points ∼73% +47%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
  (508 - 518, n=2)
513 Points ∼50% +1%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
508 Points ∼49%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
8576 Points ∼100% +101%
Average of class Convertible
  (1023 - 37388, n=249)
6308 Points ∼74% +48%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
6249 Points ∼73% +47%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
6096 Points ∼71% +43%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4259 Points ∼50%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
4259 Points ∼50% 0%
3DMark 11 Performance
836 pontos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
12459 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
2359 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
451 pontos
Ajuda
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 20.414.212.6fps
Carga Máxima
 34.1 °C38.3 °C33.8 °C 
 28.5 °C29.4 °C28.8 °C 
 25.1 °C25.3 °C25.5 °C 
Máximo: 38.3 °C
Médio: 29.9 °C
37.8 °C40.3 °C38.6 °C
28.5 °C30.1 °C28.1 °C
26.2 °C26.3 °C26.4 °C
Máximo: 40.3 °C
Médio: 31.4 °C
alimentação elétrica  31.5 °C | Temperatura do quarto 20.8 °C | Voltcraft IR-900
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.934.32531.8313135.332.34033.730.65041.240.96330.328.28027.72810026.435.712524.743.616023.952.620022.259.225021.462.931520.86640018.968.950018.567.36301870.680017.571.610001766.6125016.869.9160016.869.1200017.270.825001772.731501776.2400017.274.4500017.473.1630017.672.5800017.770.31000017.769.71250017.665.11600017.455SPL29.884N1.361.6median 17.6Asus NovaGo TP370QLmedian 69.1Delta1.85.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus NovaGo TP370QL audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 8% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.5 / 0.59 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 2.2 / 4.5 / 5.2 Watt
Carga midlight 8.8 / 11.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
835, Adreno 540, 256 GB NVMe, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
6100U, HD Graphics 520, Hynix HFS128G39TND, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
N4200, HD Graphics 505, Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB, IPS, 1920x1200, 12.2
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
7Y30, HD Graphics 615, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M, IPS, 2736x1826, 12.3
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Liteonit CV3-8D128, IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
Average of class Convertible
 
Power Consumption
-92%
-93%
-99%
-105%
49%
-129%
Idle Minimum *
2.2
4.1
-86%
4.1
-86%
3.1
-41%
3.7
-68%
0.852 (0.45 - 2.2, n=18)
61%
4.81 (2.2 - 23, n=328)
-119%
Idle Average *
4.5
6.8
-51%
9.3
-107%
8.8
-96%
5.7
-27%
2.02 (0.84 - 4.5, n=18)
55%
7.97 (4.2 - 32.3, n=328)
-77%
Idle Maximum *
5.2
7.9
-52%
9.8
-88%
9.8
-88%
6.9
-33%
2.12 (0.85 - 5.2, n=18)
59%
9.44 (5.15 - 61, n=328)
-82%
Load Average *
8.8
20.4
-132%
18.9
-115%
22.7
-158%
29.6
-236%
4.69 (2.71 - 8.8, n=18)
47%
26.1 (1.4 - 94, n=327)
-197%
Load Maximum *
11.2
26.8
-139%
19
-70%
23.6
-111%
29.4
-163%
8.46 (6.96 - 11.2, n=18)
24%
30.3 (11.2 - 117, n=327)
-171%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
31h 23min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Edge 41.16299.248.0)
16h 50min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
14h 41min
Carga (máximo brilho)
9h 29min
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
835, Adreno 540, 52 Wh
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
6100U, HD Graphics 520, 45 Wh
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
N4200, HD Graphics 505, 36 Wh
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
7Y30, HD Graphics 615, 45 Wh
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 36 Wh
Average of class Convertible
 
Battery Runtime
-64%
-69%
-43%
-70%
-60%
Reader / Idle
1883
749
-60%
933
-50%
688
-63%
758 (117 - 1985, n=270)
-60%
H.264
881
668
-24%
446 (206 - 1070, n=98)
-49%
WiFi v1.3
1010
463
-54%
309
-69%
682
-32%
359
-64%
444 (153 - 1010, n=204)
-56%
Load
569
133
-77%
198
-65%
89
-84%
149 (49 - 677, n=259)
-74%
In review: Asus NovaGo TP370QL. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.
In review: Asus NovaGo TP370QL. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.

Não é fácil encontrar um veredicto real sobre o NovaGo, porque temos que dar uma olhada no próprio dispositivo, mas também no Windows, com suas limitações atuais, que é apenas uma parte da experiência do usuário. O dispositivo em si deixa uma impressão decente. A carcaça tem boa aparência e é bem construída, os dispositivos de entrada são utilizáveis, a operação é sempre silenciosa, os alto-falantes são comparativamente bons e as superfícies mal aquecem durante as cargas de trabalho do dia-a-dia.

O SoC de smartphone também tem duas grandes vantagens em relação às CPUs comuns para portáteis: módulos de comunicação integrados e baixo consumo de energia. O último resulta em longos tempos de duração da bateria, que são facilmente suficientes para cobrir um dia útil completo ou um longo voo. O módulo LTE integrado certamente pode ser uma vantagem, mas é questionável com que frequência esse recurso é usado, já que quase todo usuário também terá um smartphone. Um cartão SIM adicional normalmente também significa despesas adicionais.

Há também desvantagens, incluindo a luminosidade da tela refletiva. Se você passa muito tempo viajando, terá que encontrar uma boa posição para evitar reflexos e trabalhar confortavelmente, especialmente em ambientes claros. A situação das portas também poderia ser melhorada. Gostamos da implementação de portas USB regulares e até mesmo uma saída HDMI em tamanho normal, mas o fabricante infelizmente usa um conector de carregamento proprietário em vez de uma porta USB-C universal.

O próximo grande tópico são as limitações do Windows no ARM. Desde que você esteja usando principalmente aplicativos nativos do Windows, como o navegador Edge, o sistema funciona muito bem e sem problemas, e não há diferença subjetiva de desempenho em comparação com um portátil Windows completo. A reprodução de vídeo também não é problema, e o mesmo se aplica aos serviços baseados em nuvem. A emulação de aplicativos realmente depende de quão desafiador é o aplicativo. Também não há garantia se o aplicativo irá rodar, em primeiro lugar. A Microsoft ainda trabalha com o suporte para aplicativos de 64 bits, então teremos que esperar e ver.

Finalmente, há a questão sobre o conceito em si. O conceito funcionará ou será um segundo Windows RT? Depende muito da capacidade da Microsoft de adicionar suporte para aplicativos de 64 bits e como eles se desempenharão. Existem inúmeras restrições agora e isso nos leva ao segundo ponto, o preço. Provavelmente estamos falando de preços de varejo na faixa dos 600 euros, o que significa que há muitas alternativas completas do Windows sem essas limitações. Você terá que renunciar ao LTE integrado e os tempos de duração da bateria provavelmente serão menores, mas é questionável se esses dois aspectos realmente afetam a decisão de compra.

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Conversível Asus NovaGo TP370QL (Snapdragon 835)
Andreas Osthoff, 2018-05-23 (Update: 2018-05-31)