Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Asus X555DA (A10-8700P, FHD)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 04/16/2017

Lento e desatualizado. A plataforma AMD Carrizo não envelheceu bem. O desempenho é mais lento que o de um processador Intel U-class enquanto oferece uma duração de bateria mais curta e uma experiência geral mais pobre.

Asus X555DA-BB11 (X555 Serie)
Processador
AMD A10-8700P 1.8 GHz
Placa gráfica
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo) - 512 MB, Análises do: 626 MHz, Memoría: 667 MHz, DDR3, 15.201.1101.1002
Memória
8192 MB 
, 4 GB soldered + 4 GB DDR3 SODIMM, Dual-Channel, 1066.7 MHz, 9-9-9-24
Pantalha
15.6 polegadas 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 141 PPI, TN LED, Name: AU Optronics B156HTN03.8, ID: AUO38ED, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
AMD CZ FCH
Disco rígido
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB, 1000 GB 
, 5400 rpm
Placa de Som
AMD Kabini - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD reader
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC (ac), Bluetooth 4.0
Unidade ótica
TSSTcorp CDDVDW SU-228HB
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 25.8 x 382 x 256
Bateria
37 Wh Lítio-Polímero, 2-cell
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 0.3 MP
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: não, Avast SecureLine, Asus Smart Gesture, AMD Catalyst Control Center, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
2.132 kg, Suprimento de energia: 242 g
Preço
420 USD

 

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit Ethernet, VGA, HDMI, 2x USB 3.0, Kensington Lock
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit Ethernet, VGA, HDMI, 2x USB 3.0, Kensington Lock
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Right: SD reader, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 2.0, Optical drive
Right: SD reader, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 2.0, Optical drive
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
71.2 MB/s ∼100% +186%
Asus X555DA-BB11
24.9 MB/s ∼35%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
22.7 MB/s ∼32% -9%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
90.4 MB/s ∼100% +237%
Asus X555DA-BB11
26.8 MB/s ∼30%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
26.6 MB/s ∼29% -1%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
635 MBit/s ∼100% +86%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
341 MBit/s ∼54%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
310 MBit/s ∼49% -9%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
532 MBit/s ∼100% +170%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
341 MBit/s ∼64% +73%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
197 MBit/s ∼37%
223.2
cd/m²
235.9
cd/m²
222.4
cd/m²
216.4
cd/m²
242.7
cd/m²
220.9
cd/m²
241.6
cd/m²
243.6
cd/m²
244.8
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Máximo: 244.8 cd/m² Médio: 232.4 cd/m² Minimum: 10.74 cd/m²
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 242.7 cd/m²
Contraste: 467:1 (Preto: 0.52 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.9 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | - Ø
52.5% sRGB (Argyll) 33.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.34
Asus X555DA-BB11
TN LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Toshiba, TN LED, 15.6, 1366x768
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
BOE NT156WHM-N32, TN LED, 15.6, 1366x768
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
AU Optronics AUO41ED, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Asus X555LN-XO112H
AU Optronics B156XW04 V6, TN LED, 15.6, 1366x768
Response Times
-39%
-21%
-14%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
42 (23.6, 18.4)
68 (32, 36)
-62%
58
-38%
44.4 (15.2, 29.2)
-6%
Response Time Black / White *
22.4 (14.4, 8)
26 (20, 6)
-16%
23
-3%
27.2 (6.8, 20.4)
-21%
PWM Frequency
217 (90)
200 (90)
Screen
-51%
-43%
-5%
-95%
Brightness
232
217
-6%
246
6%
193
-17%
184
-21%
Brightness Distribution
88
91
3%
86
-2%
75
-15%
92
5%
Black Level *
0.52
0.58
-12%
0.44
15%
0.19
63%
2.2
-323%
Contrast
467
390
-16%
575
23%
1104
136%
86
-82%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.9
9.84
-101%
9.2
-88%
7.8
-59%
7.77
-59%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.7
11.1
-311%
11.05
-309%
7.3
-170%
8.82
-227%
Gamma
2.34 103%
2.35 102%
2.55 94%
2.39 100%
2.43 99%
CCT
6876 95%
11979 54%
11451 57%
5771 113%
9275 70%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
33.5
39
16%
36
7%
39.3
17%
48
43%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
52.5
61
16%
56
7%
56.5
8%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-45% / -49%
-32% / -38%
-10% / -6%
-95% / -95%

* ... 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
22.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.4 ms rise
↘ 8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 20 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 23.6 ms rise
↘ 18.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 51 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (43 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: 58 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 5559 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
119 Points ∼61% +86%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
115 Points ∼59% +80%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
108 Points ∼55% +69%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
99 Points ∼51% +55%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
88 Points ∼45% +38%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
64 Points ∼33%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
35 Points ∼18% -45%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
27 Points ∼14% -58%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
288 Points ∼13% +60%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
257 Points ∼12% +43%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
234 Points ∼11% +30%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
223 Points ∼10% +24%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
206 Points ∼10% +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
180 Points ∼8%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
118 Points ∼5% -34%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
94 Points ∼4% -48%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
1.33 Points ∼60% +60%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
1.28 Points ∼58% +54%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
1.14 Points ∼52% +37%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
1.08 Points ∼49% +30%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
0.98 Points ∼44% +18%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
0.83 Points ∼38%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
0.43 Points ∼19% -48%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
0.35 Points ∼16% -58%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
3.19 Points ∼13% +39%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
2.81 Points ∼12% +22%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
2.62 Points ∼11% +14%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
2.49 Points ∼10% +8%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
2.3 Points ∼10%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
2.27 Points ∼10% -1%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
1.42 Points ∼6% -38%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
1.17 Points ∼5% -49%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
4359 Points ∼49% +99%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
4134 Points ∼47% +89%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
3725 Points ∼42% +70%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
3286 Points ∼37% +50%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
2192 Points ∼25%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
1164 Points ∼13% -47%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
948 Points ∼11% -57%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
9852 Points ∼20% +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
8672 Points ∼17% +80%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
7580 Points ∼15% +58%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
6994 Points ∼14% +45%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
4808 Points ∼10%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
3563 Points ∼7% -26%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
2911 Points ∼6% -39%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
790 s * ∼9% -56%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
787.585 s * ∼9% -55%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
698 s * ∼8% -38%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
507.427 s * ∼6%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
2252.64 Seconds * ∼10% -130%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
977.893 Seconds * ∼4%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
898 Seconds * ∼4% +8%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
849 Seconds * ∼4% +13%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
640 Seconds * ∼3% +35%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
4055
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
4808
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
2192
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
14.45 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
2.3 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
0.83 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
98 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
19.23 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
180 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
64 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
4231 Points ∼65% +30%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
3707 Points ∼57% +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
3246 Points ∼50%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
2880 Points ∼44% -11%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
5275 Points ∼57% +85%
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
3343 Points ∼36% +17%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
3234 Points ∼35% +13%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
2856 Points ∼31%
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
4182 Points ∼70% +79%
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
3178 Points ∼53% +36%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
2937 Points ∼49% +26%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
2335 Points ∼39%
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
1956 Points ∼33% -16%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2335 pontos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
2856 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
3246 pontos
Ajuda
Asus X555DA-BB11
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Asus X555LN-XO112H
Toshiba MQ01ABF050
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-12%
-13%
12909%
28%
Write 4k QD32
0.682
0.706
4%
0.473
-31%
140.2
20457%
1.099
61%
Read 4k QD32
0.694
0.595
-14%
0.921
33%
400.9
57667%
0.894
29%
Write 4k
0.636
0.836
31%
0.283
-56%
89.84
14026%
1.044
64%
Read 4k
0.373
0.342
-8%
0.372
0%
33.12
8779%
0.47
26%
Write 512
35.39
19.83
-44%
26.71
-25%
185.4
424%
44.85
27%
Read 512
32.28
20.82
-36%
32.94
2%
399.7
1138%
35.72
11%
Write Seq
97.48
77.93
-20%
88.49
-9%
476.6
389%
104
7%
Read Seq
106.9
96.48
-10%
92.05
-14%
522.1
388%
105.8
-1%
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Velocidade de Transferência Mínima: 41.5 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Máxima: 111.6 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Média: 78.8 MB/s
Tempo de Acesso: 18.7 ms
Índice de Explosão: 140.7 MB/s
Uso da CPU: 3.2 %
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7270 Points ∼45% +744%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
1769 Points ∼11% +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1525 Points ∼10% +77%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
1370 Points ∼9% +59%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
1220 Points ∼8% +42%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
1191 Points ∼7% +38%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
1179 Points ∼7% +37%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6006U
867 Points ∼5% +1%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
861 Points ∼5%
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410
850 Points ∼5% -1%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
441 Points ∼3% -49%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
361 Points ∼2% -58%
1280x720 Performance GPU
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7564 Points ∼15% +487%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
2341 Points ∼5% +82%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1834 Points ∼4% +42%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
1376 Points ∼3% +7%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
1288 Points ∼3%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
1265 Points ∼2% -2%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
1206 Points ∼2% -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
1154 Points ∼2% -10%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6006U
1090 Points ∼2% -15%
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410
899 Points ∼2% -30%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
411 Points ∼1% -68%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
342 Points ∼1% -73%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6100 Points ∼15% +698%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
1567 Points ∼4% +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1010 Points ∼2% +32%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
897 Points ∼2% +17%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
810 Points ∼2% +6%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
770 Points ∼2% +1%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
764 Points ∼2%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
762 Points ∼2% 0%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
281 Points ∼1% -63%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
225 Points ∼1% -71%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
38748 Points ∼24% +861%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
8744 Points ∼5% +117%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
6597 Points ∼4% +64%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
6426 Points ∼4% +59%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
6106 Points ∼4% +51%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
5769 Points ∼4% +43%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
5592 Points ∼3% +39%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
4033 Points ∼2%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
1928 Points ∼1% -52%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
1708 Points ∼1% -58%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
116616 Points ∼16% +209%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
85402 Points ∼11% +126%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
68464 Points ∼9% +81%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
59371 Points ∼8% +57%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
53318 Points ∼7% +41%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
51362 Points ∼7% +36%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
51015 Points ∼7% +35%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
37735 Points ∼5%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
23395 Points ∼3% -38%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
17603 Points ∼2% -53%
3DMark 11 Performance
1297 pontos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
31586 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
3248 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
666 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
337 pontos
Ajuda
BioShock Infinite - 1280x720 Very Low Preset
Asus X555LD-XX283H
GeForce 820M, 4010U, Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680
55.3 fps ∼100% +52%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
52.42 fps ∼95% +44%
Lenovo ThinkPad L470-20J5S00C00
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, SanDisk X400 256GB, SATA (SD8SB8U-256G)
41.4 fps ∼75% +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
36.3 fps ∼66%
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
34.6 fps ∼63% -5%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
28.9 fps ∼52% -20%
HP Split x2 13-m210eg
HD Graphics 4200, 4210Y, Micron RealSSD C400 MTFDDAT064MAM-1J2 64 GB
24 fps ∼43% -34%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500, 128 GB eMMC Flash
20.1 fps ∼36% -45%
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 36.3fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 28.2fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 17fps

Barulho

Ocioso
31.6 / 32 / 32.4 dB
Carga
33.3 / 35.5 dB
 
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 28.9 dB(A)
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Asus X555LN-XO112H
GeForce 840M, 4210U, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
Noise
2%
3%
-13%
-8%
-6%
off / environment *
28.9
30.4
-5%
30.4
-5%
29.3
-1%
30.7
-6%
Idle Minimum *
31.6
31.8
-1%
30.9
2%
32.3
-2%
31.7
-0%
32
-1%
Idle Average *
32
31.8
1%
30.9
3%
32.3
-1%
31.7
1%
32
-0%
Idle Maximum *
32.4
31.8
2%
31
4%
32.4
-0%
31.8
2%
32.2
1%
Load Average *
33.3
31.9
4%
31.8
5%
44.4
-33%
40.8
-23%
37.3
-12%
Load Maximum *
35.5
31.8
10%
31.9
10%
49.2
-39%
43.2
-22%
42.6
-20%

* ... smaller is better

Carga Máxima
 32.6 °C31 °C26.4 °C 
 33 °C36.8 °C26.4 °C 
 26.8 °C26.8 °C30 °C 
Máximo: 36.8 °C
Médio: 30 °C
27.8 °C40 °C31.2 °C
27.8 °C36.4 °C45 °C
32.2 °C27.6 °C28.6 °C
Máximo: 45 °C
Médio: 33 °C
alimentação elétrica  32.4 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.939.42534.534.83131.833.94031.6325032.632.96332.233.28033.33410031.731.512529.830.116029.230.820028.839.125027.748.431526.755.3400265650025.251.163024.957.180025.761.110002652.4125024.760.6160024.266200023.970250023.662.5315023.361.5400023.264.4500023.376.4630023.374.2800023.271.91000023.363.11250023.460.81600023.557.9SPL36.481.2N2.743.3median 24.7Asus X555DA-BB11median 60.6Delta1.76.135.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHzmedian 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Asus X555DA-BB11 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.36 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (14.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (14.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 87% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 9% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 76% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, 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
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% 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, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.2 / 0.6 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 8.3 / 8.6 / 13.1 Watt
Carga midlight 31.2 / 43.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus X555DA-BB11
A10-8700P, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
6006U, HD Graphics 520, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
A8-7410, Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus X555LN-XO112H
4210U, GeForce 840M, Toshiba MQ01ABF050, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
Power Consumption
29%
35%
-68%
19%
Idle Minimum *
8.3
6
28%
5.4
35%
8.29
-0%
4.2
49%
Idle Average *
8.6
8.7
-1%
6.8
21%
8.9
-3%
6.3
27%
Idle Maximum *
13.1
9.2
30%
7.3
44%
10.2
22%
7.1
46%
Load Average *
31.2
18.6
40%
21.1
32%
77.1
-147%
35.2
-13%
Load Maximum *
43.9
23.8
46%
25.5
42%
136.6
-211%
49.2
-12%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
7h 15min
Navegar com WLAN v1.3
2h 56min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 12min
Asus X555DA-BB11
A10-8700P, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), 37 Wh
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 44 Wh
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
A8-7410, Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), 24 Wh
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 63.3 Wh
Asus X555LN-XO112H
4210U, GeForce 840M, 37 Wh
Battery Runtime
102%
14%
101%
Reader / Idle
435
961
121%
WiFi v1.3
176
356
102%
201
14%
389
121%
Load
72
115
60%
WiFi
256

Pro

+ Escala de cinzas precisa sem calibração
+ Design refletivo atraente
+ Baixas temperaturas
+ CPU sem afogamento
+ HDMI e VGA
+ Econômico

Contra

- Gama de cores estreita; cores suaves
- As teclas poderiam ser mais rígidas
- Desempenho lento da CPU e GPU
- Brilho médio da iluminação de fundo
- Ventoinha do sistema sempre ativa
- Duração pobre da bateria
- Sem USB Tipo C
In review: Asus X555DA-BB11-RD
In review: Asus X555DA-BB11-RD

O X555DA é uma recomendação difícil, especialmente quando o antigo SKU X555LN ou X555LD equipados com Intel podem superar o nosso equivalente AMD. Normalmente quando o hardware é mais lento e mais econômico, os usuários têm mais probabilidades de esperar durações de bateria mais longas e temperaturas mais baixas, para compensar. O X555DA é o pior de ambos os mundos, dado que o desempenho e a duração da bateria estão abaixo da média.

Fora a lenta APU AMD, o hardware da Asus sofre de sua própria série de problemas. A base da tampa e do teclado se flexiona muito facilmente para o nosso gosto e a tela TN 1080p TN tem uma reprodução de cores muito pobre. Os usuários interessados estarão melhor com os portáteis ULV Broadwell ou inclusive Haswell que com o que a Asus tem a oferecer neste SKU AMD.

Este portátil falha como um PC de consumo econômico por causa de sua curta duração da bateria, tela pobre, e desempenho lento. As alternativas da Intel datadas há três ou quatro anos ainda fornecerão mais poder pelo dinheiro, em quase todos os aspectos que ha para oferecer.

Asus X555DA-BB11 - 04/13/2017 v6
Allen Ngo

Acabamento
72 / 98 → 74%
Teclado
70%
Mouse
81%
Conectividade
61 / 81 → 75%
Peso
62 / 67 → 90%
Bateria
69%
Pantalha
73%
Desempenho do jogos
54 / 85 → 63%
Desempenho da aplicação
55 / 92 → 60%
Temperatura
92%
Ruído
89 / 95 → 93%
Audio
40%
Camera
40 / 85 → 47%
Médio
66%
73%
Multimedia - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Asus X555DA (A10-8700P, FHD)
Allen Ngo, 2017-04-16 (Update: 2017-04-17)