Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Tablet Lenovo Tab M10
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 86 %
iluminação com acumulador: 339 cd/m²
Contraste: 807:1 (Preto: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 8.6 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
97.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.16
| Lenovo Tab M10 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10 | Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10 | Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10 | Chuwi Hi9 Plus IPS, 2560x1600, 10.80 | Huawei MediaPad T5 10 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10 | Lenovo Tab P10 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10 | Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N IPS, 1920x1200, 10.50 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -4% | 25% | 10% | 22% | 17% | 50% | |
| Brightness middle | 339 | 340 0% | 426 26% | 308 -9% | 356 5% | 522 54% | 556 64% |
| Brightness | 327 | 320 -2% | 399 22% | 297 -9% | 340 4% | 495 51% | 514 57% |
| Brightness Distribution | 86 | 84 -2% | 91 6% | 92 7% | 92 7% | 84 -2% | 87 1% |
| Black Level * | 0.42 | 0.19 55% | 0.38 10% | 0.29 31% | 0.5 -19% | 0.41 2% | 0.42 -0% |
| Contrast | 807 | 1789 122% | 1121 39% | 1062 32% | 712 -12% | 1273 58% | 1324 64% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.8 | 15 -159% | 4.5 22% | 6.2 -7% | 2.3 60% | 6.7 -16% | 1.8 69% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11.6 | 22.8 -97% | 7.9 32% | 10.5 9% | 6.5 44% | 12.2 -5% | 3.2 72% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 8.6 | 4 53% | 5.2 40% | 6.6 23% | 1.4 84% | 9.1 -6% | 2.2 74% |
| Gamma | 2.16 102% | 2.09 105% | 2.23 99% | 2.19 100% | 2.16 102% | 2.14 103% | 2.26 97% |
| CCT | 8718 75% | 6940 94% | 6875 95% | 8216 79% | 6565 99% | 9417 69% | 6819 95% |
* ... smaller is better
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 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 42.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 21.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 20.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 98 % 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 | ||
| 77.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 39.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 38 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. » 99 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score | |
| Chuwi Hi9 Plus | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 | |
| Lenovo Tab P10 | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (56497 - 73468, n=11) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Tablet (57.3 - 135.7, n=5, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 (Browser: Chrome Version 63) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2) | |
| Chuwi Hi9 Plus (Google Chrome 70) | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 (Chrome 67) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (22 - 22.7, n=13) | |
| Lenovo Tab P10 (Chrome 71) | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Tablet (2672 - 74614, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 (Browser: Chrome Version 63) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2) | |
| Chuwi Hi9 Plus (Chrome 70) | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 (Chrome 67) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100) | |
| Lenovo Tab P10 (Chrome 71) | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (3470 - 4115, n=14) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (11012 - 11863, n=14) | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99) | |
| Lenovo Tab P10 (Chrome 71) | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 (Chrome 67) | |
| Chuwi Hi9 Plus (Chrome 70) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2) | |
| Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 (Browser: Chrome Version 63) | |
| Average of class Tablet (451 - 34733, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Tablet (34 - 342, n=42, last 2 years) | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 (Chrome 67) | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (28 - 34, n=8) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2) | |
| Huawei MediaPad T5 10 (Chrome 67) | |
| Lenovo Tab P10 (Chrome 71) | |
| Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 450 (90 - 103, n=7) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Tab M10 | Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 | Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 | Chuwi Hi9 Plus | Huawei MediaPad T5 10 | Lenovo Tab P10 | Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N | Average 16 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Tablet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -12% | 4% | -7% | 118% | 56% | 25% | -35% | 641% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 279.9 | 173.7 -38% | 262.2 -6% | 145 -48% | 312.2 12% | 276.7 -1% | 285.6 2% | 164.5 ? -41% | 850 ? 204% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 52.6 | 92.4 76% | 147.7 181% | 132.5 152% | 83.8 59% | 205.7 291% | 103.3 96% | 43 ? -18% | 532 ? 911% |
| Random Read 4KB | 52.5 | 13.7 -74% | 27.72 -47% | 42.2 -20% | 76.7 46% | 53.9 3% | 71.1 35% | 21.7 ? -59% | 167 ? 218% |
| Random Write 4KB | 11.32 | 8.77 -23% | 9.37 -17% | 13.01 15% | 76.1 572% | 15.75 39% | 13.39 18% | 8.08 ? -29% | 150.8 ? 1232% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 83.5 ? | 80.4 ? -4% | 55.5 ? -34% | 21.16 -75% | 83.9 ? 0% | 84.3 ? 1% | 80.6 ? -3% | 59.1 ? -29% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 61.2 ? | 56.8 ? -7% | 30.14 ? -51% | 20.44 -67% | 72.5 ? 18% | 61 ? 0% | 60.4 ? -1% | 39.8 ? -35% |
Dead Trigger 2
Asphalt 9: Legends (Graphics: High)
Asphalt 9: Legends (Graphics: Normal)
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.8 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 29.4 °C / 85 F, compared to the average of 33.3 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.3 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
Lenovo Tab M10 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Tab P10 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.02 / 0.25 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.98 / 4.45 / 4.51 Watt |
| Carga |
5.78 / 7.18 Watt |
    
| |
| Lenovo Tab M10 4850 mAh | Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 6100 mAh | Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 6300 mAh | Chuwi Hi9 Plus 7000 mAh | Huawei MediaPad T5 10 5100 mAh | Lenovo Tab P10 7000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N 7300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -81% | -21% | -57% | -96% | 4% | -1% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.98 | 3.21 -228% | 1.55 -58% | 2.18 -122% | 2.33 -138% | 1.01 -3% | 1.26 -29% |
| Idle Average * | 4.45 | 5.97 -34% | 4.17 6% | 5.29 -19% | 8.46 -90% | 4.16 7% | 4.22 5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 4.51 | 6.19 -37% | 4.25 6% | 5.37 -19% | 8.49 -88% | 4.17 8% | 4.29 5% |
| Load Average * | 5.78 | 9.72 -68% | 7.13 -23% | 8.56 -48% | 11.14 -93% | 5.45 6% | 5.48 5% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.18 | 9.97 -39% | 9.63 -34% | 12.86 -79% | 12.3 -71% | 6.9 4% | 6.57 8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Tab M10 4850 mAh | Acer Iconia Tab 10 A3-A50 6100 mAh | Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 6300 mAh | Chuwi Hi9 Plus 7000 mAh | Huawei MediaPad T5 10 5100 mAh | Lenovo Tab P10 7000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N 7300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -34% | -5% | -19% | 37% | 37% | 59% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1290 | 735 -43% | 960 -26% | 1241 -4% | 3329 158% | 1315 2% | 1960 52% |
| H.264 | 596 | 585 -2% | 580 -3% | 910 53% | 963 62% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 580 | 387 -33% | 542 -7% | 634 9% | 525 -9% | 992 71% | 938 62% |
| Load | 240 | 175 -27% | 274 14% | 93 -61% | 241 0% | 289 20% | 385 60% |
Pro
Contra
O Lenovo Tab M10 é um tablet de gama média decente. O tablet é acessível e possui recursos amigáveis para crianças, o que deve atrair algumas pessoas a comprá-lo. Seu SoC Snapdragon 450 é poderoso o suficiente para a maioria das tarefas, enquanto seus alto-falantes estéreo são melhores que os da maioria.
O Lenovo Smart Dock também é uma adição útil, desde que você o compre junto com o Tab M10 em sua região, pois atualmente não é possível comprá-lo separadamente. A funcionalidade do Amazon Alexa permite que o tablet funcione como um alto-falante quase inteligente, o que dá ao utilitário Tab M10 uma utilidade adicional.
O Lenovo Tab M10 é um tablet para toda a família que está a partir de £179,99 (~$237). No entanto, seu preço acessível também vem com compromissos como sua tela escura e a duração da bateria decepcionante.
No entanto, o Tab M10 também tem seus problemas. O modelo básico está equipado com 2 GB de RAM e 16 GB de armazenamento. Além disso, suas câmeras são terríveis, e tem uma duração de bateria decepcionante em comparação com o Tab P10. Além disso, sua tela é muito escura para nosso gosto, e é uma pena que a Lenovo não tenha incluído nenhum perfil de cores ou opções de balanço de branco que possam retificar a alta temperatura de cor da tela.
Embora o Tab M10 recebe uma recomendação nossa, sugerimos considerar o Tab P10 sobre seu irmão mais barato. O Tab P10 custa cerca de $100 a mais do que o Tab M10, mas você obtém mais RAM, armazenamento adicional, o dobro de alto-falantes e uma tela mais brilhante com uma bateria muito maior. Além disso, o Tab P10 tem um sensor de digitai, melhores câmeras e um design mais elegante do que o Tab M10. Ele também tem um sensor de luz ambiente que o Tab M10 estranhamente não tem. Em suma, o Tab P10 vale o custo extra se puder esticar o seu orçamento.
Lenovo Tab M10
-
11/05/2019 v7
Manuel Masiero
Pricecompare
