Breve Análise do Conversível Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 (i5-8350U)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 (Toshiba THN-M401S0640E2) | |
| Average of class Office (22.7 - 198.5, n=33, last 2 years) | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401 64 GB) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 (Toshiba THN-M401S0640E2) | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401 64 GB) | |
| Average of class Office (25 - 249, n=30, last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 86 %
iluminação com acumulador: 548 cd/m²
Contraste: 1075:1 (Preto: 0.51 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.65 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 1.81
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.1% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
65.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
71.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
98.6% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
70.5% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.154
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 SHP1479, IPS, 12.3", 1920x1280 | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 BOE06DC, IPS, 12.3", 1920x1280 | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 LG Display LP123WQ112604, IPS, 12.3", 2736x1824 | HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA Samsung SDC4A49, IPS, 12.3", 2716x1824 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 LSN120QL01L01, IPS, 12", 2160x1440 | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 Toshiba TOS508F, IPS, 12.5", 1920x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -9% | -4% | -3% | -38% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage | 70.5 | 62.8 -11% | 66.6 -6% | 66.7 -5% | 42.51 -40% | |
| sRGB Coverage | 98.6 | 94 -5% | 96.5 -2% | 98 -1% | 63.7 -35% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 71.5 | 64.7 -10% | 67.8 -5% | 68.7 -4% | 43.95 -39% | |
| Response Times | -17% | 387% | 25% | -0% | -4% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 56.8 ? | 42.4 ? 25% | 37 ? 35% | 45.6 ? 20% | 28.4 ? 50% | 61 ? -7% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 36 ? | 30.8 ? 14% | 25 ? 31% | 21.6 ? 40% | 22.8 ? 37% | 36 ? -0% |
| PWM Frequency | 1852 ? | 210.1 ? -89% | 22130 ? 1095% | 2119 ? 14% | 221.2 ? -88% | |
| Screen | -1% | -1% | 10% | -14% | -49% | |
| Brightness middle | 548 | 523.2 -5% | 482 -12% | 443 -19% | 388.1 -29% | 354 -35% |
| Brightness | 545 | 522 -4% | 466 -14% | 446 -18% | 344 -37% | 330 -39% |
| Brightness Distribution | 86 | 88 2% | 92 7% | 88 2% | 78 -9% | 86 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.51 | 0.42 18% | 0.395 23% | 0.41 20% | 0.39 24% | 0.63 -24% |
| Contrast | 1075 | 1246 16% | 1220 13% | 1080 0% | 995 -7% | 562 -48% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.65 | 4 -10% | 4 -10% | 2.6 29% | 4.6 -26% | 8.28 -127% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.15 | 8.6 -20% | 7.2 -1% | 4 44% | 9.1 -27% | 12.71 -78% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.81 | |||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.5 | 5.5 -0% | 5.7 -4% | 3 45% | 6.1 -11% | 9.15 -66% |
| Gamma | 2.154 102% | 2.16 102% | 2.28 96% | 2.38 92% | 2.07 106% | 2.73 81% |
| CCT | 7052 92% | 7546 86% | 7950 82% | 6780 96% | 7104 91% | 5953 109% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 65.2 | 64.86 -1% | 62 -5% | 62.6 -4% | 59 -10% | 40 -39% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.1 | 93.97 -5% | 96 -3% | 98 -1% | 91 -8% | 63 -36% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -9% /
-5% | 127% /
71% | 11% /
10% | -7% /
-11% | -30% /
-41% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16.4 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. » 93 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 56.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 26.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 30 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 93 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 1852 Hz | ≤ 98 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 1852 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 98 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 1852 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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3776 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4961 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4764 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3737 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 Samsung PM971 KUS040202M | HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Average Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -239% | -1002% | 108% | -24% | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 317.3 | 585 84% | 582 83% | 379.9 20% | 354 ? 12% |
| Copy Program MB/s | 226.9 | 286.5 26% | 386 70% | 198.2 -13% | 224 ? -1% |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 512 | 1146 124% | 1036 102% | 791 54% | 506 ? -1% |
| Score Total | 1469 | 2760 88% | 1774 21% | 4653 217% | 1404 ? -4% |
| Score Write | 544 | 150 -72% | 52 -90% | 879 62% | 479 ? -12% |
| Score Read | 642 | 1768 175% | 1164 81% | 2545 296% | 650 ? 1% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.053 | 2.08 -3825% | 7.6 -14240% | 0.027 49% | 0.2029 ? -283% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.082 | 0.06 27% | 0.04 51% | 0.041 50% | 0.1329 ? -62% |
| 4K-64 Write | 411.2 | 126.1 -69% | 34 -92% | 657 60% | 351 ? -15% |
| 4K-64 Read | 472.7 | 1607 240% | 1015 115% | 2280 382% | 445 ? -6% |
| 4K Write | 102.7 | 1.23 -99% | 0.2 -100% | 132.2 29% | 91 ? -11% |
| 4K Read | 30.97 | 27.6 -11% | 41 32% | 45.24 46% | 28.1 ? -9% |
| Seq Write | 302.1 | 223.1 -26% | 171 -43% | 897 197% | 369 ? 22% |
| Seq Read | 1385 | 1328 -4% | 1070 -23% | 2197 59% | 1768 ? 28% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 10387 pontos | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1847 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 66347 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 8236 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 1086 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 517 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 398 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 60 | 34 | 28 | 9 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.5 / 28.5 / 28.5 dB |
| Carga |
| 28.5 / 41.6 dB |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 28.5 dB(A) | ||
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8350U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 Iris Plus Graphics 640, i7-7660U, Samsung PM971 KUS040202M | HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 3% | -3% | -0% | |
| off / environment * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.6 -4% | 29.5 -4% |
| Idle Minimum * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.6 -4% | 29.5 -4% |
| Idle Average * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.6 -4% | 29.5 -4% |
| Idle Maximum * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.6 -4% | 29.5 -4% |
| Load Average * | 28.5 | 30.4 -7% | 33.4 -17% | 30.6 -7% |
| Load Maximum * | 41.6 | 34 18% | 34.1 18% | 32.5 22% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 33.4 |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.4 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 52 °C / 126 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.3 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29 °C / 84.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-1.3 °C / -2.3 F).
Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (75.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 50% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (71 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.9% higher than median
(-) | highs are not linear (16.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (35.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 93% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 6% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.29 / 0.57 Watt |
| Ocioso | 3 / 7.2 / 10 Watt |
| Carga |
37.1 / 38.2 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 i5-8350U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS, 1920x1280, 12.3" | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1280, 12.3" | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 i7-7660U, Iris Plus Graphics 640, Samsung PM971 KUS040202M, IPS, 2736x1824, 12.3" | HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 2716x1824, 12.3" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 i5-7Y54, HD Graphics 615, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 2160x1440, 12" | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN512HCJH, IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 11% | -22% | -19% | 13% | 18% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3 | 2.85 5% | 4.2 -40% | 4.1 -37% | 5 -67% | 4.3 -43% |
| Idle Average * | 7.2 | 6.76 6% | 10.1 -40% | 9.2 -28% | 6.3 12% | 6.1 15% |
| Idle Maximum * | 10 | 6.91 31% | 14 -40% | 11.1 -11% | 7.8 22% | 8.9 11% |
| Load Average * | 37.1 | 32.88 11% | 37.4 -1% | 33.8 9% | 19.5 47% | 16.3 56% |
| Load Maximum * | 38.2 | 37.41 2% | 34 11% | 49.2 -29% | 19.6 49% | 18.6 51% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 38.1 |
* ... smaller is better
| Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1 i5-8350U, UHD Graphics 620, 42 Wh | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, 42 Wh | Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7 i7-7660U, Iris Plus Graphics 640, 45 Wh | HP Elite x2 1012 G2-1LV76EA i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 47 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 i5-7Y54, HD Graphics 615, 37 Wh | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, 72 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 44% | 48% | 45% | 54% | 168% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 300 | 486 62% | 489 63% | 378 26% | 441 47% | 804 168% |
| Load | 84 | 105 25% | 112 33% | 138 64% | 134 60% | |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 115 |
Pro
Contra
De muitas maneiras, o 2-em-um Latitude 5290 é o Surface Pro para o mundo dos negócios. Tudo, desde sua aparência discreta, manutenção relativamente conveniente, opções de segurança robustas, operação silenciosa e seleção de portas acima da média se ajusta perfeitamente aos requisitos diários do escritório. Além de tudo isso, ainda colhemos os benefícios de uma construção de liga de magnésio extremamente robusta, uma tela extremamente brilhante e vívida, desempenho de CPU muito veloz e um bom teclado/touchpad (no acessório Teclado de Viagem de US $ 150, vendido separadamente). Finalmente, o Active Pen ($60) opcional da Dell satisfaz as demandas de um subconjunto exclusivo de usuários que precisam de uma entrada precisa da caneta ativa sensível à pressão da Wacom.
De muitas maneiras, o 2-em-1 Latitude 5290 é o Surface Pro para o mundo dos negócios; sua combinação cuidadosa de luxo de nível de consumidor e sensibilidade de nível empresarial contribuem a um conversível exclusivo que atende a um conjunto muito específico de requisitos.
Mas não há dispositivos perfeitos e o Latitude 5290 vem com sua parcela de compromissos notáveis. A principal delas é a duração da bateria, em que o Latitude cai drasticamente atrás de alguns concorrentes recentes que usam SoCs Kaby Lake. Ele também é sobrecarregado por altas temperaturas de operação (superficiais e internas) sob uso intenso, embora o calor tenha sido redistribuído um pouco para longe das bordas do dispositivo (onde as mãos normalmente descansariam). A garantia padrão é decepcionantemente curta para um dispositivo com um preço tão significativo. A falta de Thunderbolt provavelmente irritará alguns usuários que desejam soluções docking versáteis. E, finalmente, voltando ao preço alto mencionado: $1.932 para a configuração atual (que, para ser justo, inclui pelo menos a capa do Travel Keyboard e o Active Pen).
Os principais concorrentes continuam sendo o Latitude 5285 do ano passado (que, pelo menos oferece uma melhor duração de bateria que o 5290), o Microsoft Surface Pro 2017 (que é muito bom no geral, mas impossível de atualizar e manter desde uma perspectiva de hardware), o HP Elite x2 1012 G2 (que é um dispositivo muito completo, mas notavelmente mais difícil de manter), e o Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 (que é um bom concorrente, mas prejudicado pelas restrições do resfriamento passivo e outros aborrecimentos, como o PWM). Todos esses dispositivos apresentam seus próprios conjuntos de pontos fortes e fracos, por isso, antes de decidir sobre um conversível empresarial, sugerimos fortemente que você analise todos eles. No entanto, desde que a funcionalidade 2-em-1 (e talvez as entradas da caneta sensível à pressão) seja uma necessidade absoluta, há poucos dispositivos que gerenciam um desempenho geral tão forte quanto o Latitude 5290.
Dell Latitude 5290 2-in-1
- 03/30/2018 v6 (old)
Steve Schardein
Price comparison
