Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Tablet Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Marcus Herbrich (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 07/21/2017

Feito para os "mãos-fechadas". A mais recente geração do Tablet Fire 7 da Amazon é mais fina, mais leve, equipada com uma melhor tela e supostamente oferece uma duração melhorada da bateria. O preço, no entanto, manteve-se praticamente inalterado, e a geração de 2017 permanece muito acessível. Descubra em nossa análise se o tablet de nível de entrada vale a pena.

Amazon Fire 7 2017 (Fire Serie)
Processador
Mediatek MT8127 1.3 GHz
Placa gráfica
ARM Mali-450 MP4
Memória
1024 MB 
Pantalha
7 polegadas 16:10, 1024x600 pixel 170 PPI, capacitiva, multitouch, LCD, IPS, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
8 GB eMMC Flash, 8 GB 
, 4.5 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Card Reader: Cartão MicroSD de até 256 GB, Sensores: Sensor de aceleração, OTG
Funcionamento em rede
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.1
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 9.6 x 192 x 115
Bateria
2980 mAh Lítio-Polímero, Duração da bateria (de acordo com o fabricante): 6 h
Sistema Operativo
Android 5.1 Lollipop
Camera
Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Secondary Camera: 0.3 MPix
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: mono, Teclado: onscreen, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Cabo USB, Carregador modular de 5 W, guia de início rápido, Fire OS 5, 12 Meses Garantia, fanless
peso
295 g, Suprimento de energia: 67 g
Preço
70 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
615 MBit/s ∼100% +1200%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash
47.3 MBit/s ∼8%
Amazon Fire Tablet
Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash
45.1 MBit/s ∼7% -5%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
569 MBit/s ∼100% +679%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash
73 MBit/s ∼13%
Amazon Fire Tablet
Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash
45.6 MBit/s ∼8% -38%

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
369
cd/m²
324
cd/m²
337
cd/m²
347
cd/m²
328
cd/m²
325
cd/m²
354
cd/m²
329
cd/m²
324
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 369 cd/m² Médio: 337.4 cd/m² Minimum: 1.67 cd/m²
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 328 cd/m²
Contraste: 937:1 (Preto: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.6 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 3.8 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.25
Amazon Fire 7 2017
IPS, 1024x600, 7
Amazon Fire Tablet
IPS, 1024x600, 7
Acer Iconia One 8
IPS, 1280x800, 8
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
IPS, 1280x800, 7
Xiaomi MiPad 2
IPS, 2048x1536, 7.9
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Super AMOLED, 2048x1526, 9.7
Screen
-40%
5%
-6%
-4%
40%
Brightness
337
299
-11%
338
0%
344
2%
402
19%
468
39%
Brightness Distribution
88
83
-6%
83
-6%
92
5%
91
3%
82
-7%
Black Level *
0.35
0.38
-9%
0.31
11%
0.37
-6%
0.4
-14%
Contrast
937
850
-9%
1184
26%
968
3%
1063
13%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.6
9.3
-102%
4.1
11%
5.3
-15%
4.98
-8%
1.8
61%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.8
7.8
-105%
4.38
-15%
4.7
-24%
5.2
-37%
1.2
68%
Gamma
2.25 107%
1.99 121%
2.33 103%
2.44 98%
2.65 91%
2.11 114%
CCT
7338 89%
7736 84%
6394 102%
7222 90%
7249 90%
6500 100%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
82.32
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.06

* ... 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 detected 12500 Hz17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 12500 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 12500 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8568 (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
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16 ms rise
↘ 12.4 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. » 64 % 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
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.4 ms rise
↘ 18.8 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. » 41 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.5 ms).
viewing angles
viewing angles
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
144426 Points ∼63% +452%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
73083 Points ∼32% +180%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
26141 Points ∼11%
Amazon Fire Tablet
26094 Points ∼11% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
22854 Points ∼10% -13%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
5432 Points ∼53% +132%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
2345 Points ∼23%
Work performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
5608 Points ∼66% +60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
5279 Points ∼62% +51%
Acer Iconia One 8
4739 Points ∼55% +35%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
3499 Points ∼41%
Amazon Fire Tablet
3480 Points ∼41% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
3095 Points ∼36% -12%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
1007 Points ∼59% +103%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
952 Points ∼56% +92%
Acer Iconia One 8
837 Points ∼49% +68%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
521 Points ∼31% +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
497 Points ∼29%
Amazon Fire Tablet
10 Points ∼1% -98%
Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
4941 Points ∼53% +2209%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1609 Points ∼17% +652%
Acer Iconia One 8
692 Points ∼7% +223%
Amazon Fire Tablet
248 Points ∼3% +16%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
214 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
150 Points ∼2% -30%
Memory
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
1931 Points ∼44% +444%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1379 Points ∼31% +288%
Acer Iconia One 8
765 Points ∼17% +115%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
431 Points ∼10% +21%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
355 Points ∼8%
Amazon Fire Tablet
337 Points ∼8% -5%
System
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
3505 Points ∼34% +267%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1921 Points ∼19% +101%
Acer Iconia One 8
1359 Points ∼13% +42%
Amazon Fire Tablet
978 Points ∼10% +2%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
955 Points ∼9%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
923 Points ∼9% -3%
Overall
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
2409 Points ∼64% +433%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1419 Points ∼37% +214%
Acer Iconia One 8
881 Points ∼23% +95%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
452 Points ∼12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
345 Points ∼9% -24%
Amazon Fire Tablet
167 Points ∼4% -63%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
7063 Points ∼82%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
4187 Points ∼17% +244%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
1216 Points ∼5%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
1745 Points ∼29% +290%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
448 Points ∼8%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
1798 Points ∼58%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1572 Points ∼51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
2943 Points ∼55%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1261 Points ∼23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
2578 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1319 Points ∼34%
Acer Iconia One 8
0 Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
1811 Points ∼59%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1580 Points ∼51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
4626 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1300 Points ∼17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
3438 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
1353 Points ∼27%
Acer Iconia One 8
0 Points ∼0%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
21886 Points ∼30% +196%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
20142 Points ∼28% +172%
Acer Iconia One 8
15430 Points ∼21% +109%
Amazon Fire Tablet
8881 Points ∼12% +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
7790 Points ∼11% +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
7395 Points ∼10%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
34002 Points ∼7% +1094%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
27537 Points ∼6% +867%
Acer Iconia One 8
12471 Points ∼3% +338%
Amazon Fire Tablet
4136 Points ∼1% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
3146 Points ∼1% +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
2848 Points ∼1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
30277 Points ∼15% +818%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
25460 Points ∼13% +672%
Acer Iconia One 8
13026 Points ∼7% +295%
Amazon Fire Tablet
4693 Points ∼2% +42%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
3626 Points ∼2% +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
3299 Points ∼2%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
92 fps ∼7% +934%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
32 fps ∼2% +260%
Amazon Fire Tablet
9 fps ∼1% +1%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
8.9 fps ∼1%
Acer Iconia One 8
6 fps ∼0% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
4.2 fps ∼0% -53%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
59 fps ∼13% +354%
Acer Iconia One 8
24.4 fps ∼5% +88%
Amazon Fire Tablet
13 fps ∼3% 0%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
13 fps ∼3% 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
13 fps ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
6.5 fps ∼1% -50%

Legend

 
Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Amazon Fire Tablet Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Acer Iconia One 8 Intel Atom Z3735G, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 Spreadtrum SC7731, ARM Mali-400 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash
 
Xiaomi MiPad 2 Intel Atom x5-Z8500, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
9531 Points ∼100% +368%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
7994 Points ∼84% +292%
Acer Iconia One 8
6110 Points ∼64% +200%
Amazon Fire Tablet
2326 Points ∼24% +14%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
2300 Points ∼24% +13%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
2037 Points ∼21%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
132 Points ∼100% +230%
Acer Iconia One 8
95 Points ∼72% +138%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
40 Points ∼30% 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
40 Points ∼30%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Xiaomi MiPad 2
43.039 Points ∼100% +259%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
42.73 Points ∼99% +256%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
14.5 Points ∼34% +21%
Amazon Fire Tablet
14.116 Points ∼33% +18%
Amazon Fire 7 2017
12.004 Points ∼28%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Amazon Fire 7 2017
17719.6 ms * ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
15533.8 ms * ∼88% +12%
Amazon Fire Tablet
14186.5 ms * ∼80% +20%
Acer Iconia One 8
5579.6 ms * ∼31% +69%
Xiaomi MiPad 2
4420.4 ms * ∼25% +75%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
2244.4 ms * ∼13% +87%

* ... smaller is better

Amazon Fire 7 2017Amazon Fire TabletAcer Iconia One 8Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016Xiaomi MiPad 2Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
AndroBench 3-5
22%
-12%
-14%
60%
120%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
27.74
29.19
5%
18.4
-34%
58.56
111%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
45.54
49.4
8%
21.41
-53%
76.39
68%
Random Write 4KB
6.03
11
82%
2.9
-52%
9.55
58%
13.96
132%
13.13
118%
Random Read 4KB
21.97
22
0%
17
-23%
21.95
0%
24.42
11%
45.82
109%
Sequential Write 256KB
34.1
37
9%
40
17%
28.95
-15%
56.37
65%
87.6
157%
Sequential Read 256KB
113.7
147
29%
126
11%
65.94
-42%
147.85
30%
288.58
154%
Carga Máxima
 39.3 °C37.3 °C37.5 °C 
 39.1 °C36.3 °C37.1 °C 
 39.1 °C37.5 °C34.7 °C 
Máximo: 39.3 °C
Médio: 37.5 °C
30.5 °C31.1 °C39.9 °C
31.9 °C32.3 °C43.3 °C
31.4 °C32.3 °C42.5 °C
Máximo: 43.3 °C
Médio: 35 °C
alimentação elétrica  36.3 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.635.52525.436.13125.333.54032.934.25033.629.86331.639.28028.448.71002749.812520.8371602235.520021.330.125020.831.131521.241.440019.445.750019.552.563017.756.780017.962.2100017.865.9125017.370.6160017.473.1200016.772.1250017.269.7315018.266.9400017.967.9500017.666.9630017.766.8800017.870.11000017.966.91250018.160.81600018.249.2SPL3080N1.344.8median 17.9Amazon Fire 7 2017median 62.2Delta1.310.931.73832.431.73430.331.33427.824.131.727.828.627.22628.63838.639.43827.430.336.227.427.525.828.627.524.723.625.424.72622.521.32626.822.523.326.834.52422.534.54628.122.44656.136.121.356.160.241.518.460.26548.117.56568.452.117.568.469.853.317.269.873.556.516.873.574.658.317.374.676.959.417.476.975.558.916.675.572.154.417.372.172.754.917.672.774.255.917.674.27455.917.77480.662.617.480.682.464.617.782.472.254.317.972.262.544.218.162.55435.718.15487.870.229.887.871.624.61.371.6median 69.8Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016median 53.3median 17.7median 69.81210.31.61240.735.335.240.739.430.137.839.443.33028.443.346.727.733.846.747.535.639.547.545.426.934.345.445.524.627.345.544.626.330.844.64731.226.24752.943.623.852.956.552.122.956.560.452.122.460.463.854.519.963.866.557.120.466.572.163.818.772.174.667.517.774.677.86917.977.878.9701878.980.47117.880.483.873.51783.885.175.816.985.183.473.317.483.483.473.117.883.483.974.417.583.983.473.517.383.48575.617.38586.6771886.684.674.518.384.681.571.817.981.572.261.217.972.295.185.430.195.1110.763.21.4110.7median 78.9Xiaomi MiPad 2median 70median 17.9median 78.910.49.52.410.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Amazon Fire 7 2017 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.04 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 74% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.76 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi MiPad 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (95.07 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (1.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 76% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.05 / 0.19 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.97 / 2.68 / 2.69 Watt
Carga midlight 4.26 / 4.64 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Amazon Fire 7 2017
2980 mAh
Amazon Fire Tablet
2980 mAh
Acer Iconia One 8
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
4000 mAh
Xiaomi MiPad 2
6190 mAh
Power Consumption
-13%
-16%
-35%
-124%
Idle Minimum *
0.97
1.12
-15%
0.8
18%
1.91
-97%
3.33
-243%
Idle Average *
2.68
3.06
-14%
3.1
-16%
3.59
-34%
5.01
-87%
Idle Maximum *
2.69
3.31
-23%
3.3
-23%
4.06
-51%
5.19
-93%
Load Average *
4.26
4.44
-4%
5.1
-20%
4.29
-1%
8.32
-95%
Load Maximum *
4.64
5.09
-10%
6.5
-40%
4.31
7%
9.33
-101%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
15h 41min
Navegar com WLAN v1.3
8h 36min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
8h 31min
Carga (máximo brilho)
3h 29min
Amazon Fire 7 2017
2980 mAh
Amazon Fire Tablet
2980 mAh
Acer Iconia One 8
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016
4000 mAh
Xiaomi MiPad 2
6190 mAh
Battery Runtime
-17%
31%
36%
-18%
Reader / Idle
941
1257
34%
1353
44%
H.264
511
795
56%
513
0%
WiFi v1.3
516
428
-17%
742
44%
619
20%
421
-18%
Load
209
185
-11%
379
81%

Pro

+ Preço
+ Painel IPS
+ Boa duração da bateria
+ Sólida qualidade de construção

Contra

- CPU e GPU pobres
- Lento armazenamento
- Câmeras ruins
- Alto falante
In review: Amazon Fire 7 (2017). Review unit courtesy of Amazon Germany.
In review: Amazon Fire 7 (2017). Review unit courtesy of Amazon Germany.

Considerando o baixo preço de apenas $49, o Fire 7 (2017) é uma ótima e bem planejada oferta. Teríamos preferido ver uma atualização mais significativa, mas, infelizmente, o SoC lento e o armazenamento interno, a tela de baixa resolução e apenas 1 GB de RAM ainda estão conosco. Assim, apesar do fato de que a duração da bateria e a precisão das cores foram melhoradas, o desempenho geral do sistema do tablet ainda é bastante pobre.

A pergunta sobre na mente de todos é: para que serve o tablet Fire 7 (2017)? A tela de 170 ppp de baixa resolução certamente não é feita para extensas sessões de leitura. A falta de potência para executar jogos sem problemas ou mesmo simplesmente navegar na web. Assistir filmes teria sido muito mais agradável, se não fosse pelo único alto-falante traseiro de baixa qualidade. Obviamente, tudo sobre essa lista pode ser feito com o Fire 7 (2017), mas requer alguns compromissos sérios.

O mais recente Tablet Fire 7 da Amazon será mais uma vez suficiente para os usuários mais modestos. Infelizmente, a Amazon não conseguiu atualizar o hardware do tablet. Assim, o ponto de venda mais convincente do Fire 7 (2017) continua sendo seu baixo preço.

Amazon Fire 7 2017 - 07/10/2017 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Acabamento
73%
Teclado
63 / 80 → 79%
Mouse
83%
Conectividade
23 / 65 → 36%
Peso
87 / 88 → 97%
Bateria
90%
Pantalha
81%
Desempenho do jogos
8 / 68 → 12%
Desempenho da aplicação
25 / 76 → 33%
Temperatura
88%
Ruído
100%
Audio
52 / 91 → 57%
Camera
25 / 85 → 29%
Médio
61%
77%
Tablet - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Tablet Amazon Fire 7 (2017)
Marcus Herbrich, 2017-07-21 (Update: 2017-07-27)