Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Subportátil Huawei MateBook X (i5-7200U, 256 GB)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 408 cd/m²
Contraste: 907:1 (Preto: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.55 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 1.91 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
96% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
61% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
66.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
65.8% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.34
| Huawei MateBook X Chi Mei CMN8201 / P130ZDZ-EF1, , 2160x1440, 13.30 | HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA Sharp SHP1465, , 3200x1800, 13.30 | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 Sharp SHP1449 LQ133M1, , 1920x1080, 13.30 | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB LG Philips LP133WF4-SPB1 (LGD04EF), , 1920x1080, 13.30 | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 LG Display LP123WQ112604, , 2736x1824, 12.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 1% | -25% | -8% | 3% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 65.8 | 67.6 3% | 48.94 -26% | 65.3 -1% | 67.6 3% |
| sRGB Coverage | 96.2 | 94.7 -2% | 73.3 -24% | 82.9 -14% | 99 3% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 66.8 | 69 3% | 50.5 -24% | 60.6 -9% | 69.1 3% |
| Response Times | -18% | -19% | -29% | -24% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 33 ? | 42.4 ? -28% | 32.8 ? 1% | 45 ? -36% | 42 ? -27% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 24 ? | 25.6 ? -7% | 33.2 ? -38% | 29 ? -21% | 29 ? -21% |
| PWM Frequency | 21000 | ||||
| Screen | -40% | -86% | -60% | -25% | |
| Brightness middle | 408 | 401 -2% | 351.2 -14% | 343 -16% | 417 2% |
| Brightness | 395 | 369 -7% | 325 -18% | 306 -23% | 401 2% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 85 -3% | 89 1% | 81 -8% | 88 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.45 | 0.35 22% | 0.195 57% | 0.3 33% | 0.29 36% |
| Contrast | 907 | 1146 26% | 1801 99% | 1143 26% | 1438 59% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.55 | 3.5 -126% | 7.4 -377% | 4.73 -205% | 3.63 -134% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.19 | 6.33 -189% | 9.08 -315% | 9.05 -313% | 6.74 -208% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.91 | 4.13 -116% | 6.71 -251% | 3.29 -72% | 2.18 -14% |
| Gamma | 2.34 94% | 2.28 96% | 2.74 80% | 2.36 93% | 3.09 71% |
| CCT | 6491 100% | 6508 100% | 7222 90% | 6437 101% | 6767 96% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 61 | 61.56 1% | 50.48 -17% | 54 -11% | 63 3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 96 | 94.64 -1% | 73.31 -24% | 83 -14% | 99 3% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -19% /
-28% | -43% /
-65% | -32% /
-46% | -15% /
-19% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 12 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 48 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 33 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 38 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 17903 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | ||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3507 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4276 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Huawei MateBook X LITEON CB1-SD256 | HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-512G-1006 | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 Samsung PM971 KUS030202M | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -21% | 41% | 117% | 30% | |
| Read Seq | 741 | 387.5 -48% | 1233 66% | 1577 113% | 723 -2% |
| Write Seq | 461.2 | 348.7 -24% | 733 59% | 1472 219% | 853 85% |
| Read 512 | 504 | 239.9 -52% | 1036 106% | 1165 131% | 225 -55% |
| Write 512 | 310.3 | 335.3 8% | 439.9 42% | 1244 301% | 445 43% |
| Read 4k | 29.48 | 30.34 3% | 29.31 -1% | 54.8 86% | 46 56% |
| Write 4k | 68.1 | 75.9 11% | 116.9 72% | 121.5 78% | 125 84% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 498.9 | 311.3 -38% | 479.2 -4% | 407.5 -18% | 423 -15% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 257.5 | 192.8 -25% | 218.3 -15% | 321.4 25% | 373 45% |
| 3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA | |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1667 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 54224 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5691 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 785 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
| Battlefield 1 (2016) | 11.7 | |||
| Farming Simulator 17 (2016) | 61.2 | 40.8 | 14 | |
| For Honor (2017) | 20.2 |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.4 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.2 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.3 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 30.7 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (32.8 °C / 91 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (-4.5 °C / -8.1 F).
Huawei MateBook X audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 15% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 57% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 48% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (68 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.4 / 0.64 Watt |
| Ocioso |  4.6 / 11 / 12 Watt |
| Carga |
39.5 / 34.6 Watt |
    
| |
| Huawei MateBook X i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, LITEON CB1-SD256, , 2160x1440, 13.30 | HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-512G-1006, IPS, 3200x1800, 13.30 | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB i7-7500U, GeForce 940MX, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 i5-7300U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM971 KUS030202M, IPS, 2736x1824, 12.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 20% | 38% | 10% | 28% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 4.6 | 4 13% | 4.1 11% | 3.6 22% | 3.6 22% |
| Idle Average * | 11 | 8 27% | 4.2 62% | 7.4 33% | 8.1 26% |
| Idle Maximum * | 12 | 8.6 28% | 5.1 57% | 8.7 27% | 8.7 27% |
| Load Average * | 39.5 | 26.5 33% | 22.1 44% | 43 -9% | 25.5 35% |
| Load Maximum * | 34.6 | 34.8 -1% | 29.4 15% | 42 -21% | 23.5 32% |
* ... smaller is better
| Huawei MateBook X i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 40 Wh | HP EliteBook 1030 G1-X2F03EA 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, 40 Wh | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S Plus-13IKB i7-7500U, GeForce 940MX, 46 Wh | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 i5-7300U, HD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 0% | 84% | -18% | 77% | |
| Reader / Idle | 512 | 618 21% | 1295 153% | 468 -9% | 1054 106% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 337 | 305 -9% | 677 101% | 338 0% | 744 121% |
| Load | 162 | 144 -11% | 157 -3% | 89 -45% | 168 4% |
| H.264 | 377 |
Pro
Contra
Em nossa opinião, a estreia da Huawei no mercado de portáteis foi um sucesso. O bem equipado MateBook X no formato emergente de 3: 2 é muito compacto, robusto, tem um visual bom e traz um novo e sistema de resfriamento passivo MEPCM, que é bom o suficiente para uma operação normal para permitir que seus componentes aproveitem suas reservas, mesmo que atinja seus limites durante usos intensos constantes. Os recursos de segurança disponíveis, como um sensor de digitais e TPM 2.0, sublinham seu aspecto móvel.
Você provavelmente pode se acostumar com o teclado com sua resposta que parece inferior para o testador. O consumo de energia muito alto e com isso, a decepcionante duração da bateria poderia ser corrigida com uma atualização do BIOS/UEFI. A Huawei definitivamente deveria melhorar isso. O assunto do touchpad permanecerá sob observação.
A pobreza das conexões no próprio aparelho, o que muitas vezes o obriga a usar o adaptador bem-sucedido incluído é uma questão diferente, dado que deve carregá-lo. No entanto, talvez não tenha sido possível implementar o conceito da carcaça de forma diferente. As únicas fraquezas da ótima tela são o seu valor preto ligeiramente alto e, claro, a superfície refletiva.
Se a Huawei pudesse cuidar do alto consumo de energia e com isso, baixa duração da bateria, o inovador MateBook X chegaria mais perto de uma classificação de 90%. Ele fala por si mesmo que apesar de tudo isso, atinge uma avaliação geral de 87%, o que ainda é excelente.
Huawei MateBook X
-
07/26/2017 v6(old)
Sven Kloevekorn