Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Tablet Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4

Florian Wimmer, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Tanja Hinum (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 05/11/2018

Pequeno especialista em som. Os recursos multimídia e boas câmeras ainda são considerações importantes ao comprar um tablet caro. No papel, o Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 traz tudo o que é necessário. Descubra aqui se ele consegue nos convencer no teste.

Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 (MediaPad Serie)
Processador
HiSilicon Kirin 960
Placa gráfica
ARM Mali-G71 MP8
Memória
4096 MB 
Pantalha
8.4 polegadas 16:10, 2560 x 1600 pixel 359 PPI, Tela táctil capacitiva, IPS, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 24 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 3.0, Conexões Audio: Saída de áudio via USB-C, Card Reader: microSD de até 256 GB, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, Sensores: sensor de aceleração, giroscópio, sensor hall, aptX
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, 4G (1,3,4,5,7,8,12,17,18,19,20,26,34,38,39,40,41), 3G (850/​900/​1900/​2100), 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 7.3 x 212.6 x 124.8
Bateria
19.4 Wh, 5100 mAh Lítio-Polímero, Quick Charge 9 V / 2 A
Sistema Operativo
Android 8.0 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/2.2, autofocus
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.2
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 2 alto-falantes, Teclado: Teclado virtual, carregador, cabo USB, adaptadores de áudio USB-C, ferramenta SIM, HiCare, Game Suite, PhoneClone, 24 Meses Garantia, LTE-A Cat6 download: 300 MBit/s, ​upload: 50 MBit/s; SAR value: 0,271 W/kg (head), 1,01 W/kg (body), fanless
peso
316 g, Suprimento de energia: 72 g
Preço
379 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
315 MBit/s ∼100% +55%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash
209 MBit/s ∼66% +3%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 32 GB eMMC Flash
203 MBit/s ∼64%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
Mali-T720, MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz, 16 GB eMMC Flash
99.3 MBit/s ∼32% -51%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
46.5 MBit/s ∼15% -77%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
260 MBit/s ∼100% +27%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash
209 MBit/s ∼80% +2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 32 GB eMMC Flash
205 MBit/s ∼79%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
Mali-T720, MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz, 16 GB eMMC Flash
86 MBit/s ∼33% -58%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash
41.5 MBit/s ∼16% -80%
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – gardens
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – gardens
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – bridge
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – overview
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – overview
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – gardens
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – gardens
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – bridge
GPS Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 – bridge

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
click to load images
Picture of test chart
Picture of test chart
Detail of test chart
Detail of test chart
Picture of ColorChecker: The original color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.
Picture of ColorChecker: The original color is displayed in the bottom half of each field.
382
cd/m²
398
cd/m²
408
cd/m²
389
cd/m²
405
cd/m²
385
cd/m²
389
cd/m²
397
cd/m²
374
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 408 cd/m² Médio: 391.9 cd/m²
iluminação: 92 %
iluminação com acumulador: 403 cd/m²
Contraste: 604:1 (Preto: 0.67 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.78 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 7.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.278
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
IPS, 2560x1600, 8.4
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
IPS, 1280x800, 8
Lenovo Tab 4 8
IPS, 1280x800, 8
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
TFT LCD, 1280x800, 8
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
IPS, 2560x1600, 8.4
Screen
-1%
9%
34%
16%
Brightness middle
405
419
3%
455
12%
509
26%
460
14%
Brightness
392
412
5%
446
14%
477
22%
445
14%
Brightness Distribution
92
91
-1%
91
-1%
91
-1%
90
-2%
Black Level *
0.67
0.39
42%
0.51
24%
0.48
28%
0.45
33%
Contrast
604
1074
78%
892
48%
1060
75%
1022
69%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.78
8.5
-47%
5.5
5%
3.45
40%
6.2
-7%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.82
13.8
-41%
14.8
-51%
5.17
47%
10.5
-7%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7.2
10.3
-43%
5.5
24%
4.5
37%
6.5
10%
Gamma
2.278 97%
2.6 85%
2.23 99%
2.11 104%
2.33 94%
CCT
8405 77%
6216 105%
7852 83%
7171 91%
8056 81%

* ... 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 2451 Hz ≤ 25 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2451 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 25 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2451 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (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
20.5 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 22 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. » 21 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15 ms rise
↘ 11 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
147597 Points ∼58%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (124087 - 157445, n=7)
143408 Points ∼56% -3%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
86735 Points ∼34% -41%
Average of class Tablet (14200 - 227987, n=59)
71242 Points ∼28% -52%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
45573 Points ∼18% -69%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
36893 Points ∼15% -75%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
34714 Points ∼14% -76%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
181614 Points ∼32%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (170015 - 181614, n=4)
174560 Points ∼31% -4%
Average of class Tablet (20856 - 566378, n=17)
170590 Points ∼30% -6%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (6006 - 6299, n=7)
6136 Points ∼60% +2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
6006 Points ∼58%
Average of class Tablet (2345 - 6315, n=26)
4260 Points ∼41% -29%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
3789 Points ∼37% -37%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
3312 Points ∼32% -45%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
2907 Points ∼28% -52%
Work performance score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (6830 - 7403, n=7)
7199 Points ∼53% +2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
7053 Points ∼52%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
5204 Points ∼38% -26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4945 Points ∼37% -30%
Average of class Tablet (2529 - 7053, n=68)
4483 Points ∼33% -36%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
4457 Points ∼33% -37%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
4125 Points ∼30% -42%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
1215 Points ∼60%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (913 - 1215, n=7)
1076 Points ∼53% -11%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
1022 Points ∼50% -16%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
773 Points ∼38% -36%
Average of class Tablet (9 - 2034, n=98)
743 Points ∼37% -39%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
699 Points ∼34% -42%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
593 Points ∼29% -51%
Graphics
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
4143 Points ∼14%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (2284 - 4143, n=7)
3731 Points ∼13% -10%
Average of class Tablet (98 - 28853, n=98)
2090 Points ∼7% -50%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
1302 Points ∼5% -69%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
530 Points ∼2% -87%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
447 Points ∼2% -89%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
334 Points ∼1% -92%
Memory
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
3985 Points ∼63%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (2778 - 4277, n=7)
3512 Points ∼56% -12%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
2212 Points ∼35% -44%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
1176 Points ∼19% -70%
Average of class Tablet (56 - 5423, n=98)
1046 Points ∼17% -74%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
784 Points ∼12% -80%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
736 Points ∼12% -82%
System
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
3940 Points ∼24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (3572 - 4154, n=7)
3826 Points ∼23% -3%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
3581 Points ∼22% -9%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
2337 Points ∼14% -41%
Average of class Tablet (482 - 16467, n=98)
2259 Points ∼14% -43%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
1477 Points ∼9% -63%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
1152 Points ∼7% -71%
Overall
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
2982 Points ∼35%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (2204 - 2985, n=7)
2701 Points ∼32% -9%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
1800 Points ∼21% -40%
Average of class Tablet (150 - 8450, n=98)
1217 Points ∼14% -59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
1005 Points ∼12% -66%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
796 Points ∼9% -73%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
640 Points ∼8% -79%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
11539 Points ∼26%
Average of class Tablet (862 - 43802, n=24)
7773 Points ∼18% -33%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (9492 - 11539, n=4)
5258 (min: 9492, max: 11539) Points ∼12% -54%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
2369 Points ∼5% -79%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
1324 Points ∼3% -89%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
6509 Points ∼18%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (6173 - 6527, n=7)
6384 Points ∼18% -2%
Average of class Tablet (1106 - 18041, n=37)
4647 Points ∼13% -29%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
3710 Points ∼10% -43%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
1908 Points ∼5% -71%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
1683 Points ∼5% -74%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
1896 Points ∼30%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1852 - 1899, n=7)
1875 Points ∼30% -1%
Average of class Tablet (429 - 5002, n=37)
1605 Points ∼25% -15%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
726 Points ∼11% -62%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
688 Points ∼11% -64%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
628 Points ∼10% -67%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
2653 Points ∼63%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
2322 Points ∼55% -12%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1679 - 2653, n=7)
2181 Points ∼52% -18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
1721 Points ∼41% -35%
Average of class Tablet (793 - 2952, n=49)
1435 Points ∼34% -46%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
878 Points ∼21% -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1646 - 2798, n=7)
2063 Points ∼38% +16%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
1778 Points ∼33%
Average of class Tablet (102 - 5384, n=49)
1174 Points ∼22% -34%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
832 Points ∼15% -53%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
239 Points ∼4% -87%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
121 Points ∼2% -93%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1747 - 2666, n=7)
2064 Points ∼44% +8%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
1919 Points ∼41%
Average of class Tablet (134 - 3806, n=54)
1031 Points ∼22% -46%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
970 Points ∼20% -49%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
296 Points ∼6% -85%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
150 Points ∼3% -92%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
2555 Points ∼61%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
2261 Points ∼54% -12%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1662 - 2555, n=7)
2086 Points ∼49% -18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
1522 Points ∼36% -40%
Average of class Tablet (810 - 2952, n=52)
1368 Points ∼32% -46%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
881 Points ∼21% -66%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
874 Points ∼21% -66%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
2501 Points ∼30%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1856 - 2990, n=7)
2496 Points ∼30% 0%
Average of class Tablet (42 - 7525, n=52)
1603 Points ∼19% -36%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
997 Points ∼12% -60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
399 Points ∼5% -84%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
193 Points ∼2% -92%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
42 Points ∼1% -98%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
2513 Points ∼39%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (1865 - 2649, n=7)
2374 Points ∼37% -6%
Average of class Tablet (53 - 4588, n=56)
1269 Points ∼20% -50%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
1139 Points ∼18% -55%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
477 Points ∼7% -81%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
234 Points ∼4% -91%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
53 Points ∼1% -98%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
15538 Points ∼20%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (14456 - 15341, n=6)
15019 Points ∼19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
12947 Points ∼16%
Average of class Tablet (3675 - 39393, n=137)
12935 Points ∼16%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
10458 Points ∼13%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
9274 Points ∼12%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (32243 - 38979, n=6)
35199 Points ∼7%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
22141 Points ∼4%
Average of class Tablet (2109 - 194856, n=137)
17880 Points ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
7720 Points ∼1%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
5496 Points ∼1%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
5435 Points ∼1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (25766 - 28883, n=6)
27083 Points ∼13%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
20230 Points ∼10%
Average of class Tablet (2411 - 103813, n=138)
14752 Points ∼7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
8481 Points ∼4%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
6144 Points ∼3%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
5986 Points ∼3%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
78 fps ∼1%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (43 - 93, n=7)
68.4 fps ∼1% -12%
Average of class Tablet (4.2 - 451, n=164)
29.6 fps ∼0% -62%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
29 fps ∼0% -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
12 fps ∼0% -85%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
9.9 fps ∼0% -87%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
7.8 fps ∼0% -90%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (40 - 60, n=7)
53.9 fps ∼2% +6%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
51 fps ∼2%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
23 fps ∼1% -55%
Average of class Tablet (3.7 - 120, n=168)
20.3 fps ∼1% -60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
19 fps ∼1% -63%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
17 fps ∼1% -67%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
14 fps ∼0% -73%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
39 fps ∼1%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (19 - 41, n=7)
31.7 fps ∼0% -19%
Average of class Tablet (1.8 - 220, n=102)
19.9 fps ∼0% -49%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
13 fps ∼0% -67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
5.1 fps ∼0% -87%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
3.6 fps ∼0% -91%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
2.8 fps ∼0% -93%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (20 - 37, n=7)
28.1 fps ∼1% +17%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
24 fps ∼1%
Average of class Tablet (2.9 - 110, n=105)
14.2 fps ∼0% -41%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
9.2 fps ∼0% -62%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
9 fps ∼0% -62%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
7.1 fps ∼0% -70%
Lenovo Tab 4 8
5.9 fps ∼0% -75%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
27 fps ∼1%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (21 - 28, n=7)
24 fps ∼1% -11%
Average of class Tablet (2 - 173, n=52)
21.1 fps ∼0% -22%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
7.7 fps ∼0% -71%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
3.2 fps ∼0% -88%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
2.3 fps ∼0% -91%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (12 - 28, n=7)
18.6 fps ∼1% +33%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
14 fps ∼0%
Average of class Tablet (4.3 - 95, n=52)
13 fps ∼0% -7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
6.7 fps ∼0% -52%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
5 fps ∼0% -64%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
4.2 fps ∼0% -70%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
16 fps ∼0%
Average of class Tablet (0 - 107, n=32)
14.9 fps ∼0% -7%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (15 - 16, n=7)
13.1 fps ∼0% -18%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
4.8 fps ∼0% -70%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
2 fps ∼0% -87%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (9.3 - 16, n=7)
12.2 fps ∼0% +31%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
9.3 fps ∼0%
Average of class Tablet (0 - 47, n=32)
8.25 fps ∼0% -11%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
3.7 fps ∼0% -60%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
3.1 fps ∼0% -67%

Legend

 
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017 MediaTek MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo Tab 4 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2 Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch HiSilicon Kirin 950, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch (Chrome 54)
11404 Points ∼100% +1%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 (Chrome 66)
11338 Points ∼99%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (10016 - 11897, n=7)
10823 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Tablet (1238 - 45734, n=155)
6345 Points ∼56% -44%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4768 Points ∼42% -58%
Lenovo Tab 4 8 (Chrome 61)
2903 Points ∼25% -74%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017 (Amazon Silk 58.2.3029.83.10)
2826 Points ∼25% -75%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 (Chrome 66)
184 Points ∼100%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (107 - 184, n=7)
148 Points ∼80% -20%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch (Chrome 54)
136 Points ∼74% -26%
Average of class Tablet (36 - 386, n=71)
109 Points ∼59% -41%
Lenovo Tab 4 8 (Chrome 61)
69 Points ∼38% -62%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
67 Points ∼36% -64%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017 (Amazon Silk 58.2.3029.83.10)
57 Points ∼31% -69%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (56.8 - 68.6, n=7)
59.3 Points ∼100% +4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 (Chrome 66)
56.76 Points ∼96%
Average of class Tablet (10.9 - 279, n=70)
55.7 Points ∼94% -2%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch (Chrome 54)
53.7 Points ∼91% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
26.099 Points ∼44% -54%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017 (Amazon Silk 58.2.3029.83.10)
19.519 Points ∼33% -66%
Lenovo Tab 4 8 (Chrome 61)
18.36 Points ∼31% -68%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Lenovo Tab 4 8 (Chrome 61)
12033 ms * ∼100% -222%
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017 (Amazon Silk 58.2.3029.83.10)
11817.6 ms * ∼98% -216%
Average of class Tablet (603 - 43092, n=166)
9352 ms * ∼78% -150%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
6785.6 ms * ∼56% -82%
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 (Chrome 66)
3734 ms * ∼31%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 960 (2734 - 3734, n=7)
3226 ms * ∼27% +14%
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch (Chrome 54)
2822.9 ms * ∼23% +24%

* ... smaller is better

Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4Amazon Fire HD 8 2017Lenovo Tab 4 8Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inchAverage 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
-58%
-30%
-39%
-36%
-35%
-61%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
70.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
34.15
-52%
61.1
-14%
64.3
-9%
23.52 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-67%
47.2 (3.4 - 87.1, n=112)
-33%
42.5 (14.6 - 73.8, n=41)
-40%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
84.95 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
51.06
-40%
84.8
0%
78.6
-7%
61.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-27%
66.4 (8.2 - 96.5, n=112)
-22%
60.8 (34.4 - 87.7, n=41)
-28%
Random Write 4KB
65.1
11.51
-82%
7.1
-89%
10.98
-83%
31.35
-52%
18.9 (0.75 - 77.3, n=151)
-71%
5.48 (0.13 - 77.9, n=191)
-92%
Random Read 4KB
62.8
21.55
-66%
44
-30%
25.96
-59%
32.04
-49%
36.3 (3.59 - 117, n=151)
-42%
17.4 (1.32 - 142, n=191)
-72%
Sequential Write 256KB
132.24
47.23
-64%
72.3
-45%
53.99
-59%
117.15
-11%
95 (14.8 - 189, n=151)
-28%
34.5 (2.04 - 208, n=191)
-74%
Sequential Read 256KB
268.62
159.08
-41%
265.1
-1%
218.05
-19%
249.68
-7%
230 (25.8 - 440, n=151)
-14%
104 (6.75 - 741, n=191)
-61%
Shadow Fight 3
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high58 fps
 minimal58 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 min58 fps
 high HD58 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Battle Bay
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 half resolution58 fps
 full resolution58 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Carga Máxima
 35.6 °C35 °C35.7 °C 
 38.2 °C35.1 °C36.4 °C 
 37.3 °C34.9 °C36 °C 
Máximo: 38.2 °C
Médio: 36 °C
34.7 °C35.3 °C35.5 °C
34.7 °C35.3 °C36.1 °C
35.4 °C35.3 °C36.4 °C
Máximo: 36.4 °C
Médio: 35.4 °C
alimentação elétrica  34.5 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22.8 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 30.8 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.2 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 34.8 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22.3 to 51.8 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.4 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34.4 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.8 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.630.92531.539.73136.135.84030.240.65033.842.76328.432.38026.628.310024.427.212521.934.416020.44620019.456.425020.463.431517.565.540018.16850017.369.46301669.680016.170.3100015.571125015.273.6160015.175.820001574.925001576.1315014.976.1400015.172.3500015.170.7630015.367.2800015.266.21000015.264.61250015.263.31600015.259.2SPL27.785N161.7median 15.3median 68Delta1.86.731.638.825.437.225.328.932.930.833.641.731.632.828.429.22722.620.828.62242.921.349.920.851.121.260.119.46719.570.417.771.417.972.617.875.517.375.317.475.516.775.317.277.818.281.717.979.317.670.917.765.917.867.717.962.718.151.918.247.730881.369.4median 17.9median 67.71.312.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHuawei MediaPad M5 8.4Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 36%
Compared to all devices tested
» 18% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 67% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 36%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 1.5 / 0.2 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 2.1 / 3.74 / 4.33 Watt
Carga midlight 6.32 / 9.13 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
5100 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
 mAh
Lenovo Tab 4 8
4850 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4450 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
5100 mAh
Power Consumption
36%
23%
35%
7%
Idle Minimum *
2.1
0.99
53%
1.1
48%
0.89
58%
1.51
28%
Idle Average *
3.74
2.74
27%
3.51
6%
3.13
16%
3.64
3%
Idle Maximum *
4.33
2.83
35%
4.14
4%
3.36
22%
3.68
15%
Load Average *
6.32
4.51
29%
4.86
23%
3.93
38%
6.95
-10%
Load Maximum *
9.13
5.69
38%
6.13
33%
5.45
40%
9.11
-0%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
19h 14min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
10h 27min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 41min
Carga (máximo brilho)
4h 58min
Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
5100 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 8 2017
 mAh
Lenovo Tab 4 8
4850 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4450 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch
5100 mAh
Battery Runtime
34%
-11%
16%
-11%
Reader / Idle
1154
2032
76%
1207
5%
1357
18%
1110
-4%
H.264
701
744
6%
603
-14%
493
-30%
583
-17%
WiFi v1.3
627
770
23%
452
-28%
895
43%
546
-13%
Load
298
393
32%
276
-7%
396
33%
268
-10%

Pro

+ Alto desempenho
+ Tela de alta resolução
+ Bom modem LTE com função de telefone
+ Capaz de oferecer uma experiência de jogo fluida
+ Boas câmeras
+ A duração da bateria é adequada para o uso diário
+ Carcaça robusta com bom acabamento

Contra

- A tela táctil é imprecisa nas bordas
- Sem porta de áudio de 3,5mm
- Forte tonalidade azul na tela
- Muito bloatware
- Armazenamento interno pequeno
- O consumo de energia é bastante alto
- Afogamento sob uso intenso
Testing the Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4. Test unit provided by Huawei Germany.
Testing the Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4. Test unit provided by Huawei Germany.

Com o MediaPad M5 8.4, a Huawei está oferecendo um tablet bastante elegante no mercado, que vale o seu preço um pouco mais alto. Isso é garantido pelas boas câmeras, pela tela de alta resolução, pelos poderosos alto-falantes e por alguns gimmicks como a capacidade de fazer chamadas telefônicas. Oferece um bom desempenho e a carcaça ergonômica de alta qualidade se sente bem nas mãos.

No entanto, você terá que se virar sem uma porta de áudio clássica no MediPad M5 8.4, às vezes a tela táctil é um pouco imprecisa perto das bordas, e a tela tem uma forte tonalidade azul, que você pode reduzir com ferramentas internas. Enquanto um cartão microSD adicional pode ajudar a expandir o armazenamento interno que é dimensionado um pouco pequeno, você dificilmente pode fazer algo com relação ao alto consumo de energia. Felizmente, ainda tem uma duração de bateria razoável, de modo que o alto consumo não importa muito. O pior é provavelmente o afogamento significativo sob usos intensos mais longos.

A boa relação preço-desempenho e muitas vantagens, como imagens de câmera ricas em detalhes e uma ótima carcaça, merecem uma recomendação de compra para o MediaPad M5 8.4.

No geral, o MediaPad M5 8.4 recebe nossa recomendação de compra, já que é um dispositivo com uma boa relação preço-desempenho que parece de alta qualidade e não tem fraquezas muito graves.

Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4 - 05/07/2018 v6
Florian Wimmer

Acabamento
90%
Teclado
69 / 80 → 87%
Mouse
82%
Conectividade
43 / 65 → 66%
Peso
86 / 40-88 → 96%
Bateria
93%
Pantalha
82%
Desempenho do jogos
52 / 68 → 77%
Desempenho da aplicação
63 / 76 → 82%
Temperatura
90%
Ruído
100%
Audio
72 / 91 → 79%
Camera
68 / 85 → 79%
Médio
76%
87%
Tablet - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Tablet Huawei MediaPad M5 8.4
Florian Wimmer, 2018-05-11 (Update: 2018-06- 2)