Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH (N4200, HD)

Sascha Mölck (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 06/18/2017

Nada surpreendente. O conversível Asus possui um processador Apollo Lake a bordo e oferece muito espaço de armazenamento. A duração da bateria pode ser chamada de média, na melhor das hipóteses. A um preço de quase 500 Euros (~ $560), o dispositivo não é um dos modelos mais acessíveis.

Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Placa gráfica
Intel HD Graphics 505, Análises do: 200-750 MHz, 21.20.16.4678
Memória
4096 MB 
, DDR3-1866
Pantalha
11.6 polegadas 16:9, 1366x768 pixel 135 PPI, capacitivA, 10 pontos de toque, AU Optronics B116XAN04.3, IPS, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, 1024 GB 
, 900 GB livre
Placa de Som
Realtek ALC256 @ Intel Apollo Lake SoC - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexões
3 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, Conexões Audio: Áudio combinado, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, Sensores: Sensor de aceleração, TPM 2.0
Funcionamento em rede
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 21.35 x 293.4 x 198
Bateria
42 Wh Lítio-Ion
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Estéreo, Teclado: chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: não, McAfee LiveSafe (versão de teste), Ms Office 365 (versão de teste), Team Viewer 11, WPS Office for Asus, 12 Meses Garantia, fanless
peso
1.3 kg, Suprimento de energia: 132 g
Preço
499 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Left side: USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Type A), audio combo, fingerprint reader, volume rocker, power button
Left side: USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Type A), audio combo, fingerprint reader, volume rocker, power button
Right side: card reader (microSD), 2x USB 3.1 Gen 1 (1x Type C, 1x Type A), HDMI, power
Right side: card reader (microSD), 2x USB 3.1 Gen 1 (1x Type C, 1x Type A), HDMI, power
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
657 MBit/s ∼100% +91%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
344 MBit/s ∼52%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Realtek RTL8723BS
52 MBit/s ∼8% -85%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
548 MBit/s ∼100% +62%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
338 MBit/s ∼62%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Realtek RTL8723BS
46 MBit/s ∼8% -86%
260
cd/m²
253
cd/m²
266
cd/m²
234
cd/m²
253
cd/m²
277
cd/m²
179
cd/m²
221
cd/m²
266
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 277 cd/m² Médio: 245.4 cd/m² Minimum: 16 cd/m²
iluminação: 65 %
iluminação com acumulador: 253 cd/m²
Contraste: 1488:1 (Preto: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.17 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 2 | - Ø
66% sRGB (Argyll) 42% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.43
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
IPS, 1366x768, 11.6
Dell Latitude 3189
IPS, 1366x768, 11.6
ODYS Vario Pro 12
IPS, 1366x768, 11.6
Medion Akoya E2215T
IPS, 1920x1080, 11.6
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
IPS, 1366x768, 11.6
Response Times
-13%
-49%
9%
30%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
39 (18, 21)
40 (18.8, 21.2)
-3%
60 (31, 29)
-54%
31 (13, 18)
21%
18.8 (6.8, 12)
52%
Response Time Black / White *
25 (13, 12)
30.4 (16.4, 14)
-22%
36 (22, 14)
-44%
26 (6, 20)
-4%
23.2 (10, 13.2)
7%
PWM Frequency
50 (20)
Screen
12%
-47%
-20%
-3%
Brightness
245
284
16%
250
2%
309
26%
186
-24%
Brightness Distribution
65
92
42%
74
14%
76
17%
86
32%
Black Level *
0.17
0.16
6%
0.37
-118%
0.39
-129%
0.22
-29%
Contrast
1488
1819
22%
762
-49%
867
-42%
882
-41%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.17
3.4
-7%
5.63
-78%
3.94
-24%
3.06
3%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2
1.8
10%
5.04
-152%
2.54
-27%
1.42
29%
Gamma
2.43 99%
2.14 112%
2.19 110%
2.38 101%
2.34 103%
CCT
6850 95%
6544 99%
7254 90%
6902 94%
6432 101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
42
42.8
2%
43
2%
46
10%
42.98
2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
66
67
2%
67
2%
71
8%
67.56
2%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-1% / 7%
-48% / -48%
-6% / -14%
14% / 3%

* ... smaller is better

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: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8586 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

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
25 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13 ms rise
↘ 12 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 36 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (26.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 18 ms rise
↘ 21 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. » 39 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.5 ms).
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
1680
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
4673
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
3331
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
53 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
167 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
17.82 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Ajuda
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
53 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
51 Points ∼96% -4%
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Pentium N4200
50 Points ∼94% -6%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
Intel Celeron N3050
35 Points ∼66% -34%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
175 Points ∼100% +5%
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Pentium N4200
174 Points ∼99% +4%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
167 Points ∼95%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
Intel Celeron N3050
65 Points ∼37% -61%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
1680 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
1638 Points ∼98% -2%
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Pentium N4200
1633 Points ∼97% -3%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
938 Points ∼56% -44%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
921 Points ∼55% -45%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
5440 Points ∼100% +16%
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Pentium N4200
5346 Points ∼98% +14%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
4673 Points ∼86%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
3076 Points ∼57% -34%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
2897 Points ∼53% -38%
Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
4736 Points ∼100% +1%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
4682 Points ∼99%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
2289 Points ∼48% -51%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
2130 Points ∼45% -55%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
1430 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
1400 Points ∼98% -2%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
760 Points ∼53% -47%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
726 Points ∼51% -49%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
4558 Points ∼100% +1%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
4491 Points ∼99%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
1609 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
1541 Points ∼96% -4%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
4729 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
4719 Points ∼100% 0%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
1616 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
1571 Points ∼97% -3%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel Pentium N4200
91.527 Points ∼100%
Dell Latitude 3180
Intel Pentium N4200
87.494 Points ∼96% -4%
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel Pentium N4200
84.572 Points ∼92% -8%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
44.098 Points ∼48% -52%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
Intel Celeron N3050
43.305 Points ∼47% -53%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
42.548 Points ∼46% -54%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2094 pontos
Ajuda
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Dell Latitude 3189
HD Graphics 505, N4200, Liteonit CV3-8D128
2273 Points ∼100% +9%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
HD Graphics 505, N4200, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
2094 Points ∼92%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
HD Graphics (Braswell), N3050, Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680
1545 Points ∼68% -26%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8350, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1437 Points ∼63% -31%
Medion Akoya E2215T
HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1282 Points ∼56% -39%
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Velocidade de Transferência Mínima: 26.5 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Máxima: 135 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Média: 100.6 MB/s
Tempo de Acesso: 19.9 ms
Índice de Explosão: 78.7 MB/s
Uso da CPU: 5.9 %
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Dell Latitude 3189
Liteonit CV3-8D128
ODYS Vario Pro 12
32 GB eMMC Flash
Medion Akoya E2215T
64 GB eMMC Flash
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
7181%
1851%
1279%
68%
Write 4k QD32
0.518
111.7
21464%
13.65
2535%
10.05
1840%
1.003
94%
Read 4k QD32
0.998
132.2
13146%
32.2
3126%
15.11
1414%
0.898
-10%
Write 4k
0.263
49.14
18584%
11.64
4326%
7.915
2910%
1.026
290%
Read 4k
0.378
8.864
2245%
15.91
4109%
13.09
3363%
0.407
8%
Write 512
67.31
170.6
153%
33.71
-50%
27.45
-59%
39.03
-42%
Read 512
22.62
243.7
977%
155
585%
155.3
587%
33.53
48%
Write Seq
66.38
214.3
223%
43.13
-35%
39.77
-40%
106.1
60%
Read Seq
53.91
408.4
658%
168.3
212%
169.6
215%
106
97%
3DMark 11 Performance
672 pontos
Ajuda
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Dell Latitude 3189
Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200
804 Points ∼100% +31%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200
616 Points ∼77%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
Intel HD Graphics (Braswell), Intel Celeron N3050
377 Points ∼47% -39%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Intel Atom x5-Z8350
297 Points ∼37% -52%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Intel Atom x5-Z8350
297 Points ∼37% -52%
baixo média alto ultra
World of Warcraft (2005) 62.325.2fps
BioShock Infinite (2013) 25.414.411.5fps
Risen 3: Titan Lords (2014) 14.29.3fps
GTA V (2015) 9.54.3fps
Far Cry Primal (2016) 3fps
Civilization VI (2016) 9.7fps
Titanfall 2 (2016) 2.3fps
Prey (2017) 5.4fps
Rocket League (2017) 26.6fps
Dirt 4 (2017) 14.7fps

Barulho

Ocioso
31.7 / 31.7 / 31.7 dB
HDD
32.3 dB
Carga
31.7 / 31.7 dB
 
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 30.8 dB(A)
Carga Máxima
 30.9 °C42 °C45.2 °C 
 30.1 °C39.4 °C44.6 °C 
 26.7 °C30.6 °C33.8 °C 
Máximo: 45.2 °C
Médio: 35.9 °C
42 °C50.4 °C28.4 °C
39.8 °C39.4 °C27.8 °C
33.9 °C33 °C26.8 °C
Máximo: 50.4 °C
Médio: 35.7 °C
alimentação elétrica  39.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 23 °C | FIRT 550-Pocket
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.334.733.32536.534.536.53140.943.140.94033.132.133.15031.738.931.76332.733.432.7802927.92910029.926.229.912531.527.831.516035.724.735.720036.723.536.725050.122.750.131556.121.556.140062.220.762.250065.319.765.363065.519.665.580065.518.565.5100066.118.166.112506218.2621600571857200059.617.959.6250060.91860.9315059.218.159.2400060.418.460.4500058.518.458.5630061.518.661.580006319631000059.419.159.41250062.51962.51600065.919.565.9SPL7430.974N34.61.534.6median 60.4Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049Tmedian 19median 60.4Delta6.21.66.235.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHzmedian 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 27% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 9%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.46 / 0.47 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 5.7 / 7.8 / 8.7 Watt
Carga midlight 21 / 19 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Navegar com WLAN v1.3 (Edge 40)
6h 05min
Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing 1.3
Dell Latitude 3189
N4200, HD Graphics 505, 42 Wh
607 min ∼100% +66%
Medion Akoya E2215T
Z8350, HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 38 Wh
474 min ∼78% +30%
ODYS Vario Pro 12
Z8350, HD Graphics (Cherry Trail),  Wh
453 min ∼75% +24%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
N4200, HD Graphics 505, 42 Wh
365 min ∼60%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360
N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 32 Wh
286 min ∼47% -22%

Pro

+ Tela IPS
+ Muito espaço de armazenamento
+ USB Tipo C

Contra

- Duração média da bateria
- Caro
The Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T, provided by notebooksbilliger.de.
The Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T, provided by notebooksbilliger.de.

Com o VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH, a Asus oferece um conversível no formato de 11,6 polegadas. O processador incorporado do Apollo Lake oferece desempenho suficiente para aplicativos do escritório e áreas da Internet. Dado que o decodificador integrado na GPU permite reproduzir todos os formatos de vídeo habituais, o computador pode ser usado como um reprodutor de vídeo silencioso para a TV em casa.

A tela deixa uma boa impressão confusa. A Asus oferece uma tela de alto contraste com ângulos de visão estáveis, cujo brilho resulta ser um pouco baixo.

O VivoBook Flip 12 é destinado principalmente para uso em casa.

Graças ao disco rígido de 1 TB, o pequeno computador não é escasso de espaço de armazenamento. No entanto, um SSD de pouca capacidade teria sido a melhor escolha. Especialmente em computadores que possuem CPUs fracos, a diferença entre um SSD e HDD é considerável no uso diário. Os usuários que desejem mudar para um SSD devem fazê-lo sozinhos. No entanto, esta troca não é tão fácil. Infelizmente, a Asus não possui variantes do VivoBook equipadas com SSDs em suas ofertas.

A duração da bateria é média no melhor dos casos: Em nosso teste WLAN, o dispositivo atinge uma autonomia de 6:05 h. Se o aparelho é usado exclusivamente na sala de estar em casa, a duração da bateria é completamente suficiente. Mas se o aparelho deve ser usado longe de casa, como na escola ou na faculdade, você sempre precisa levar a fonte de alimentação. O Dell Latitude 3189, que está equipado com a mesma plataforma de hardware e capacidade da bateria, dura boas quatro horas a mais.

E, finalmente, devemos mencionar o preço da compra. A Asus pede 500 Euros (~ $560) pelo VivoBook, que é um preço bastante elevado para um conversível simples. No entanto, a este respeito, a concorrência não parece ser muito melhor e os modelos comparativos da concorrência estão no mesmo nível de preços.

Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T - 06/16/2017 v6
Sascha Mölck

Acabamento
74 / 98 → 75%
Teclado
69%
Mouse
88%
Conectividade
42 / 80 → 52%
Peso
71 / 78 → 85%
Bateria
88%
Pantalha
82%
Desempenho do jogos
48 / 68 → 71%
Desempenho da aplicação
46 / 87 → 52%
Temperatura
88%
Ruído
92%
Audio
50 / 91 → 55%
Camera
40 / 85 → 47%
Médio
68%
79%
Convertible - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH (N4200, HD)
Sascha Mölck, 2017-06-18 (Update: 2017-06-21)