Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Tablet Xplore Technologies XSLATE L10 (Pentium N4200, FHD)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 07/23/2018

Moderno e reforçado. Um tablet reforçado com todas as amenidades que se esperaria de um tablet de consumo e muito mais. O Xplore XSLATE L10 funciona com o mesmo processador dos últimos Ultrabooks com NFC, 4G LTE e até mesmo uma bateria removível e uma porta HDMI de tamanho normal.

Xploretech XSLATE L10
Placa gráfica
Intel HD Graphics 505, 24.20.100.6137
Memória
8192 MB 
, 1200 Hz, LPDDR3
Pantalha
10.1 polegadas 16:10, 1920 x 1200 pixel 224 PPI, Capacitiva de 10 pontos, IPS, Brilhante: não
Disco rígido
SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122, 256 GB 
Placa de Som
Realtek ALC298 @ High Definition Audio-Controller
Conexões
3 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Docking Station Port, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: MicroSD, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Acelerômetro
Funcionamento em rede
Intel I210 Gigabit Network Connection (10MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, Sierra Wireless EM7565, LTE
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 22 x 280.8 x 195.2
Bateria
36 Wh, removeable
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 2 MPSecondary Camera: 13 MPix
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Monaural, Teclado: Chiclet, 36 Meses Garantia, ruggedized
peso
1.3 kg, Suprimento de energia: 342 g

 

Right: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, Up-Down rocker, Screen lock, Power button, HDMI (exposed)
Right: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, Up-Down rocker, Screen lock, Power button, HDMI (exposed)
Left: MicroSD reader, USB Type-C + mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB 3.0 Type-A
Left: MicroSD reader, USB Type-C + mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB 3.0 Type-A
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
142.6 MB/s ∼100% +126%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
136.2 MB/s ∼96% +116%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
63.1 MB/s ∼44%
Dell Latitude 3490
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23.6 MB/s ∼17% -63%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
239 MB/s ∼100% +168%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
237.5 MB/s ∼99% +167%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
89.1 MB/s ∼37%
Dell Latitude 3490
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
24.4 MB/s ∼10% -73%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
664 MBit/s ∼100%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
528 MBit/s ∼80% -20%
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
514 MBit/s ∼77% -23%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
492 MBit/s ∼74% -26%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
670 MBit/s ∼100% +106%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
661 MBit/s ∼99% +103%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
497 MBit/s ∼74% +53%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
325 MBit/s ∼49%
1084.3
cd/m²
1108.5
cd/m²
1164.2
cd/m²
1069.8
cd/m²
1145.9
cd/m²
1129.4
cd/m²
1028.8
cd/m²
1044.5
cd/m²
1034.7
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 1164.2 cd/m² Médio: 1090 cd/m² Minimum: 8.46 cd/m²
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 1145.9 cd/m²
Contraste: 1014:1 (Preto: 1.13 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.14 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 5.06
ΔE Greyscale 4.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
67.2% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 42.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.25
Xploretech XSLATE L10
IPS, 10.1, 1920x1200
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
IPS, 10.5, 2224x1668
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Sharp SHP1417 LQ116K1, TN, 11.6, 1366x768
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Sharp LQ140K1, IPS, 14, 1366x768
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
Semi-Matte Beschichtung, IPS LED, 12, 2160x1440
Dell Latitude 3490
LP140WF6 / LGD059D, IPS LED, 14, 1920x1080
Response Times
-5%
-22%
59%
-16%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
32.8 (17.6, 15.2)
39.6 (19.2, 20.4)
-21%
43 (20, 23)
-31%
39 (21, 18)
-19%
36.4 (18.8, 17.6)
-11%
Response Time Black / White *
20 (10.8, 9.2)
17.6 (6, 11.6)
12%
27 (17, 10)
-35%
30 (18, 12)
-50%
24 (13.2, 10.8)
-20%
PWM Frequency
200 (99)
200 (20)
0%
694 (90)
247%
Screen
27%
-37%
-36%
3%
-8%
Brightness middle
1145.9
634
-45%
632
-45%
493
-57%
565
-51%
250
-78%
Brightness
1090
625
-43%
613
-44%
456
-58%
538
-51%
241
-78%
Brightness Distribution
88
87
-1%
90
2%
81
-8%
82
-7%
81
-8%
Black Level *
1.13
0.39
65%
0.47
58%
0.53
53%
0.4
65%
0.25
78%
Contrast
1014
1626
60%
1345
33%
930
-8%
1413
39%
1000
-1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.14
1.9
63%
11.22
-118%
11.08
-116%
5.06
2%
5.5
-7%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
23.66
3.9
84%
15.11
36%
8.1
66%
23.5
1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
5.06
4.8
5%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.4
2.8
36%
12.19
-177%
11.99
-173%
6.4
-45%
3.5
20%
Gamma
2.25 107%
2.26 106%
3.4 71%
4.03 60%
2.25 107%
2.27 106%
CCT
6847 95%
7027 93%
1256 518%
10872 60%
5794 112%
7049 92%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
42.8
35
-18%
36
-16%
44
3%
37.9
-11%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
67.2
54
-20%
56
-17%
70
4%
59.4
-12%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
11% / 21%
-37% / -37%
-29% / -33%
31% / 16%
-12% / -9%

* ... 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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.8 ms rise
↘ 9.2 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. » 17 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
32.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17.6 ms rise
↘ 15.2 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. » 19 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.4 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 detected 200 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 200 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 200 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8882 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

 
0102030405060708090100110120130140Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
178 Points ∼86% +279%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
168 Points ∼81% +257%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel Core i5-8250U
143 Points ∼69% +204%
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
96 Points ∼46% +104%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
77 Points ∼37% +64%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
73 Points ∼35% +55%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
62 Points ∼30% +32%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (47 - 53, n=12)
51.6 Points ∼25% +10%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel Pentium N4200
47 Points ∼23%
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
Intel Atom Z3795
38 Points ∼18% -19%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
27 Points ∼13% -43%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel Core i5-8250U
716 Points ∼24% +419%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
655 Points ∼22% +375%
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
651 Points ∼22% +372%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
236 Points ∼8% +71%
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
228 Points ∼8% +65%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (135 - 175, n=12)
160 Points ∼5% +16%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
144 Points ∼5% +4%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel Pentium N4200
138 Points ∼5%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
124 Points ∼4% -10%
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
Intel Atom Z3795
118 Points ∼4% -14%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
94 Points ∼3% -32%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
2.04 Points ∼87%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
1.94 Points ∼83%
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
1.13 Points ∼48%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
0.94 Points ∼40%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
0.85 Points ∼36%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
0.66 Points ∼28%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (0.64 - 0.66, n=3)
0.65 Points ∼28%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
0.35 Points ∼15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
6.97 Points ∼29%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
6.11 Points ∼26%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
2.8 Points ∼12%
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
2.48 Points ∼10%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (2.02 - 2.27, n=3)
2.13 Points ∼9%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
1.57 Points ∼7%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
1.39 Points ∼6%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
1.17 Points ∼5%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
3712 Points ∼34%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
2341 Points ∼22%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
2287 Points ∼21%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
2085 Points ∼19%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (1630 - 1680, n=7)
1657 Points ∼15%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
948 Points ∼9%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Acer Aspire V3-572PG-604M
Intel Core i5-4200U
7614 Points ∼15%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
6610 Points ∼13%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (4673 - 5440, n=7)
5092 Points ∼10%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel Core M-5Y71
4909 Points ∼10%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
3500 Points ∼7%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
2911 Points ∼6%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
1041.79 s * ∼12%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (704 - 724, n=2)
714 s * ∼8%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
644.597 s * ∼8%
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
334.6 s * ∼4%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
2252.64 Seconds * ∼10%
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
1319.49 Seconds * ∼6%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel Celeron J4005
1245.12 Seconds * ∼6%
Dell Latitude 5490
Intel Core i7-8650U
501 Seconds * ∼2%
Average Intel Pentium N4200
  (0.3 - 2636, n=28)
212 Seconds * ∼1%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
47 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
138 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
13.09 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Ajuda
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Dell Latitude 3490
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
4458 Points ∼73% +233%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Liteonit CV3-8D128
3655 Points ∼60% +173%
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
HD Graphics 620, 7300U, Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
3386 Points ∼56% +153%
Intel NUC7CJYH
UHD Graphics 600, J4005, SanDisk Ultra II
2084 Points ∼34% +56%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
HD Graphics 505, N4200, SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122
1337 Points ∼22%
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
HD Graphics (Bay Trail), Z3795, 128 GB eMMC Flash
1139 Points ∼19% -15%
PCMark 10 - Score
Dell Latitude 3490
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
3619 Points ∼47% +167%
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
HD Graphics 620, 7300U, Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
3226 Points ∼42% +138%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
HD Graphics 505, N4200, SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122
1355 Points ∼17%
Intel NUC7CJYH
UHD Graphics 600, J4005, SanDisk Ultra II
1136 Points ∼15% -16%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
1337 pontos
Ajuda
Xploretech XSLATE L10
SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Liteon L8H-128V2G M.2 2280
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Liteonit CV3-8D128
Dell Latitude 3490
SK hynix SC311 M.2
Intel NUC7CJYH
SanDisk Ultra II
AS SSD
-8%
9%
53%
9%
Copy Game MB/s
151.12
158.58
5%
168.56
12%
306.16
103%
175.51
16%
Copy Program MB/s
80.19
101.65
27%
115.45
44%
315.9
294%
102.04
27%
Copy ISO MB/s
275.88
164.77
-40%
302.39
10%
476.73
73%
197.01
-29%
Score Total
1362
643
-53%
762
-44%
1006
-26%
1025
-25%
Score Write
240
164
-32%
226
-6%
387
61%
268
12%
Score Read
746
323
-57%
349
-53%
409
-45%
498
-33%
Access Time Write *
0.119
0.095
20%
0.069
42%
0.052
56%
0.089
25%
Access Time Read *
0.154
0.091
41%
0.121
21%
0.097
37%
0.115
25%
4K-64 Write
170.08
85.79
-50%
124.67
-27%
286.06
68%
174.58
3%
4K-64 Read
682.87
246.63
-64%
267.49
-61%
332.74
-51%
420.47
-38%
4K Write
34.04
64.49
89%
54.73
61%
68.86
102%
47.43
39%
4K Read
16.17
25.41
57%
29.92
85%
27.67
71%
26.98
67%
Seq Write
362.01
139.25
-62%
464.37
28%
318.83
-12%
464.8
28%
Seq Read
465.96
512.79
10%
516.24
11%
484.68
4%
480.03
3%

* ... smaller is better

SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 554 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 523.7 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 107.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 72.99 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 434.3 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 415.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 28.32 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 52.52 MB/s
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
NVIDIA GeForce MX130, 8550U
2756 Points ∼16% +471%
Dell Latitude 3490
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1326 Points ∼8% +175%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6300U
1239 Points ∼7% +157%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel UHD Graphics 600, J4005
593 Points ∼3% +23%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71
569 Points ∼3% +18%
Average Intel HD Graphics 505
  (308 - 751, n=12)
562 Points ∼3% +16%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel HD Graphics 505, N4200
483 Points ∼3%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
361 Points ∼2% -25%
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), Z3795
196 Points ∼1% -59%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
NVIDIA GeForce MX130, 8550U
2802 Points ∼5% +439%
Dell Latitude 3490
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1634 Points ∼3% +214%
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6300U
1369 Points ∼3% +163%
Average Intel HD Graphics 505
  (473 - 825, n=12)
644 Points ∼1% +24%
Intel NUC7CJYH
Intel UHD Graphics 600, J4005
579 Points ∼1% +11%
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71
529 Points ∼1% +2%
Xploretech XSLATE L10
Intel HD Graphics 505, N4200
520 Points ∼1%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
342 Points ∼1% -34%
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), Z3795
191 Points ∼0% -63%
3DMark 11 Performance
577 pontos
Ajuda
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 21.310.2fps

Barulho

Ocioso
27.8 / 27.8 / 27.8 dB
Carga
27.8 / 29.9 dB
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 27.8 dB(A)
Xploretech XSLATE L10
HD Graphics 505, N4200, SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Liteon L8H-128V2G M.2 2280
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Liteonit CV3-8D128
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
HD Graphics 620, 7300U, Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
Dell Latitude 3490
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
HD Graphics (Bay Trail), Z3795, 128 GB eMMC Flash
Noise
-22%
-9%
-11%
-20%
off / environment *
27.8
30.2
-9%
30.5
-10%
29.8
-7%
Idle Minimum *
27.8
31
-12%
30.2
-9%
30.5
-10%
29.8
-7%
Idle Average *
27.8
31
-12%
30.2
-9%
30.5
-10%
29.8
-7%
Idle Maximum *
27.8
31
-12%
30.2
-9%
30.5
-10%
29.8
-7%
Load Average *
27.8
39.6
-42%
30.2
-9%
31.9
-15%
39.1
-41%
Load Maximum *
29.9
39.9
-33%
31.7
-6%
32.6
-9%
44.3
-48%

* ... smaller is better

Carga Máxima
 33.6 °C33.2 °C32.4 °C 
 35.4 °C35.6 °C33.8 °C 
 36.8 °C38.8 °C35.2 °C 
Máximo: 38.8 °C
Médio: 35 °C
33 °C36 °C31.6 °C
40.8 °C39.8 °C39 °C
35.2 °C41.2 °C37.8 °C
Máximo: 41.2 °C
Médio: 37.2 °C
alimentação elétrica  44.6 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.8 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.39 / 1.5 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 3.7 / 10.7 / 11 Watt
Carga midlight 17.8 / 17.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xploretech XSLATE L10
N4200, HD Graphics 505, SanDisk SD8SN8U256G1122, IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion, A10X Fusion GPU, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND , IPS, 2224x1668, 10.5
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
5Y71, HD Graphics 5300, Liteon L8H-128V2G M.2 2280, TN, 1366x768, 11.6
Panasonic Toughbook CF-XZ6
7300U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ, IPS LED, 2160x1440, 12
Dell Latitude 3490
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix SC311 M.2, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14
Apple MacBook 12 2017
7Y32, HD Graphics 615, Apple SSD AP0256, LED IPS, 2304x1440, 12
Power Consumption
48%
8%
11%
-64%
20%
Idle Minimum *
3.7
1.44
61%
3.8
-3%
3.15
15%
3.2
14%
2
46%
Idle Average *
10.7
6.12
43%
9.3
13%
6
44%
5.5
49%
5.4
50%
Idle Maximum *
11
6.14
44%
9.7
12%
6.3
43%
8.1
26%
6.6
40%
Load Average *
17.8
8.55
52%
16.3
8%
21
-18%
40.8
-129%
22
-24%
Load Maximum *
17.9
10.62
41%
15.9
11%
23
-28%
68.1
-280%
20
-12%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
7h 11min
Carga (máximo brilho)
2h 36min
Xploretech XSLATE L10
N4200, HD Graphics 505, 36 Wh
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion, A10X Fusion GPU, 30.8 Wh
Dell Latitude 12 Rugged Tablet
5Y71, HD Graphics 5300, 56 Wh
Dell Latitude 3490
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh
Fujitsu Stylistic V535
Z3795, HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 17.7 Wh
Dell Latitude 14 7414 Rugged Extreme
6300U, HD Graphics 520, 97 Wh
Battery Runtime
45%
9%
61%
-42%
46%
Reader / Idle
2036
WiFi v1.3
431
693
61%
471
9%
694
61%
252
-42%
628
46%
Load
156
199
28%

Pro

+ Muitas opções de conectividade, incluindo cartão inteligente, HDMI, 4G LTE e NFC
+ Tela muito brilhante; excelente visibilidade em exteriores
+ Bateria secundaria protuberante
+ Design forte e reforçado
+ Câmera frontal e traseira
+ SSD M.2 atualizável
+ Ruído baixo da ventoinha

Contra

- Reprodução pobre de graves; alto-falante poderia ser mais potente
- Cores imprecisas; espaço de cor limitado
- HDMI está escondido atrás de parafusos inconvenientes
- Stylus WACOM pequeno; deslocamento curto
- Desempenho médio da câmera com pouca luz
- Bleeding moderado a pesado da iluminação de fundo
- Desempenho gráfico fraco
- Sem carregamento via USB Tipo C
- O Pentium N4200 é lento
In review: Xplore Technologies XSLATE L10. Test unit provided by Xplore
In review: Xplore Technologies XSLATE L10. Test unit provided by Xplore

O L10 é focado para fornecer a melhor experiência para usuários industriais e atinge a marca. A precisão das cores, a reprodução de graves, o bleeding da luz de fundo e o desempenho gráfico são, na melhor das hipóteses, ruins ou medianos. Felizmente para o público-alvo, essas desvantagens provavelmente terão um impacto mínimo nas cargas de trabalho do dia-a-dia e provavelmente não serão prejudiciais. Em vez disso, é a rigidez, a conectividade e o brilho da tela que importam, e o L10 definitivamente cumpre nessa frente.

Há alguns detalhes que esperamos que a Xplore possa resolver em futuras revisões. Primeiro, o adaptador de CA proprietário é inconveniente quando o carregamento universal via USB tipo C está agora disponível na maioria dos portáteis e tablets. Em segundo lugar, o digitalizador da WACOM é muito pequeno e estreito para segurar confortavelmente quando comparado aos concorrentes. Em terceiro lugar, o volume máximo poderia ter sido mais alto para o trabalho em exteriores ou em ambientes industriais. Só podemos esperar que os nossos resultados de WiFi inconsistentes sejam específicos da nossa unidade e não sejam generalizados.

Um tablet industrial muito brilhante e versátil com quase todos os recursos de um tablet de consumo convencional. Se visibilidade ao ar livre é de extrema preocupação, então este é o tablet indicado. Alguns aborrecimentos de design menores significam muito espaço para melhorias em revisões futuras. 

Xploretech XSLATE L10 - 07/15/2018 v6
Allen Ngo

Acabamento
94%
Teclado
0 / 80 → 
Mouse
89%
Conectividade
67 / 65 → 100%
Peso
71 / 40-88 → 65%
Bateria
89%
Pantalha
85%
Desempenho do jogos
41 / 68 → 60%
Desempenho da aplicação
45 / 76 → 59%
Temperatura
90%
Ruído
99%
Audio
30 / 91 → 33%
Camera
45 / 85 → 53%
Médio
70%
79%
Tablet - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Tablet Xplore Technologies XSLATE L10 (Pentium N4200, FHD)
Allen Ngo, 2018-07-23 (Update: 2018-08- 1)