Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Conversível Microsoft Surface Pro 2017 (i5-7300U, 256 GB)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 417 cd/m²
Contraste: 1438:1 (Preto: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.63 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 2.18 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
63% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
69.1% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.6% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 3.09
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 LG Display LP123WQ112604, , 2736x1824, 12.3" | Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core i5, 128GB Samsung 123YL01-001 ID: SDC3853, , 2736x1824, 12.3" | Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB AUO B120YAN01 / AUO106F, , 2880x1920, 12" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 LSN120QL01L01, , 2160x1440, 12" | Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA-GN050T BOE BOE06AC (NV126A1M-N51), , 2880x1920, 12.6" | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 Toshiba TOS508F, , 1920x1080, 12.5" | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 BOE06DC, , 1920x1280, 12.3" | HP Elite x2 1012 G1 LG Philips, , 1920x1280, 12.1" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -3% | -5% | 13% | -36% | -6% | -23% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage | 67.6 | 65 -4% | 65.2 -4% | 81.8 21% | 42.51 -37% | 62.8 -7% | 53.8 -20% | |
| sRGB Coverage | 99 | 96.5 -3% | 91 -8% | 98.3 -1% | 63.7 -36% | 94 -5% | 73.7 -26% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 69.1 | 67 -3% | 66.1 -4% | 82.2 19% | 43.95 -36% | 64.7 -6% | 53.8 -22% | |
| Response Times | -39% | 5% | -15% | -23% | -35% | -35% | 21% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 42 ? | 46 ? -10% | 45 ? -7% | 28.4 ? 32% | 30 ? 29% | 61 ? -45% | 42.4 ? -1% | 33.2 ? 21% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 29 ? | 31.2 ? -8% | 24 ? 17% | 22.8 ? 21% | 29 ? -0% | 36 ? -24% | 30.8 ? -6% | 22.8 ? 21% |
| PWM Frequency | 21000 | 50 ? -100% | 221.2 ? -99% | 200 ? -99% | 210.1 ? -99% | |||
| Screen | -13% | -33% | -35% | -23% | -82% | -20% | -48% | |
| Brightness middle | 417 | 413 -1% | 406 -3% | 388.1 -7% | 316 -24% | 354 -15% | 523.2 25% | 322 -23% |
| Brightness | 401 | 396 -1% | 396 -1% | 344 -14% | 307 -23% | 330 -18% | 522 30% | 319 -20% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 87 -1% | 88 0% | 78 -11% | 91 3% | 86 -2% | 88 0% | 97 10% |
| Black Level * | 0.29 | 0.36 -24% | 0.3 -3% | 0.39 -34% | 0.29 -0% | 0.63 -117% | 0.42 -45% | 0.42 -45% |
| Contrast | 1438 | 1147 -20% | 1353 -6% | 995 -31% | 1090 -24% | 562 -61% | 1246 -13% | 767 -47% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.63 | 3.09 15% | 5.28 -45% | 4.6 -27% | 3.91 -8% | 8.28 -128% | 4 -10% | 6.02 -66% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.74 | 9.83 -46% | 9.1 -35% | 7.9 -17% | 12.71 -89% | 8.6 -28% | 10.06 -49% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.18 | 3.92 -80% | 6.71 -208% | 6.1 -180% | 5.37 -146% | 9.15 -320% | 5.5 -152% | 6.29 -189% |
| Gamma | 3.09 71% | 2.3 96% | 2.29 96% | 2.07 106% | 2.36 93% | 2.73 81% | 2.16 102% | 2.4 92% |
| CCT | 6767 96% | 7333 89% | 6532 100% | 7104 91% | 7812 83% | 5953 109% | 7546 86% | 7712 84% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 63 | 61 -3% | 59 -6% | 59 -6% | 72 14% | 40 -37% | 64.86 3% | 47.8 -24% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99 | 97 -2% | 91 -8% | 91 -8% | 98 -1% | 63 -36% | 93.97 -5% | 73.2 -26% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -18% /
-16% | -11% /
-22% | -25% /
-31% | -11% /
-16% | -51% /
-67% | -20% /
-20% | -17% /
-34% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 29 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 75 % 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 | ||
| 42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 22 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. » 64 % 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 | 21000 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 21000 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 21000 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 2936 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 3983 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 2957 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 Samsung PM971 KUS030202M | Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core i5, 128GB Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe | Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA-GN050T SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND) | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN512HCJH | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP Elite x2 1012 G1 Liteon L8H-256V2G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -33% | 135% | 54% | -33% | -10% | 19% | -25% | |
| Read Seq | 723 | 666 -8% | 2408 233% | 1739 141% | 398.9 -45% | 505 -30% | 1294 79% | 501 -31% |
| Write Seq | 853 | 154.2 -82% | 1702 100% | 1259 48% | 402 -53% | 501 -41% | 865 1% | 297.2 -65% |
| Read 512 | 225 | 266.3 18% | 1301 478% | 698 210% | 303.1 35% | 412.6 83% | 406 80% | 351.7 56% |
| Write 512 | 445 | 154.2 -65% | 1288 189% | 869 95% | 320.3 -28% | 422.4 -5% | 589 32% | 295.7 -34% |
| Read 4k | 46 | 28.51 -38% | 53.6 17% | 52.3 14% | 26.11 -43% | 32.87 -29% | 31.75 -31% | 28.31 -38% |
| Write 4k | 125 | 101.5 -19% | 162.2 30% | 120 -4% | 57.7 -54% | 89.7 -28% | 72.2 -42% | 90.3 -28% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 423 | 368.3 -13% | 504 19% | 247.9 -41% | 245.8 -42% | 352.4 -17% | 493.3 17% | 285 -33% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 373 | 153.6 -59% | 420.8 13% | 259 -31% | 253.8 -32% | 316.9 -15% | 434.5 16% | 268.4 -28% |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5420 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 805 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| The Witcher 3 - 1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing | |
| HP Elite x2 1012 G1 | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1024x768 Lowest Preset | |
| Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA-GN050T | |
| Acer Aspire Switch Alpha 12 SA5-271-56HM | |
| Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro S W700N | |
| Thief - 1024x768 Very Low Preset | |
| Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 42.9 | 32.15 | 28.3 | |
| Thief (2014) | 21.3 | 13.8 | 11.4 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 9.5 | 7 | ||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 14.7 | 9.7 |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.2 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 19.6 to 60 °C for the class Convertible.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.3 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.2 °C / 90 F, compared to the device average of 30.3 °C / 87 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 39.2 °C / 102.6 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-11.1 °C / -20 F).
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (68 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 36% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (64 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.9% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (13.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 74% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 74% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.19 / 0.6 Watt |
| Ocioso |  3.6 / 8.1 / 8.7 Watt |
| Carga |
25.5 / 23.5 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 i5-7300U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM971 KUS030202M, IPS, 2736x1824, 12.3" | Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core i5, 128GB 6300U, HD Graphics 520, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe, IPS, 2736x1824, 12.3" | Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 2880x1920, 12" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 i5-7Y54, HD Graphics 615, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 2160x1440, 12" | Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA-GN050T 6500U, HD Graphics 520, SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND), IPS, 2880x1920, 12.6" | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN512HCJH, IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5" | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1280, 12.3" | HP Elite x2 1012 G1 6Y54, HD Graphics 515, Liteon L8H-256V2G, IPS, 1920x1280, 12.1" | Acer Aspire Switch Alpha 12 SA5-271-56HM 6200U, HD Graphics 520, Kingston RBU-SNS8152S3256GG2, IPS, 2160x1440, 12" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -4% | -5% | 7% | -39% | 12% | -6% | -2% | -33% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.6 | 4.4 -22% | 3.5 3% | 5 -39% | 6.7 -86% | 4.3 -19% | 2.85 21% | 3.7 -3% | 7.3 -103% |
| Idle Average * | 8.1 | 9 -11% | 7.2 11% | 6.3 22% | 10.3 -27% | 6.1 25% | 6.76 17% | 6.8 16% | 10 -23% |
| Idle Maximum * | 8.7 | 10.7 -23% | 7.9 9% | 7.8 10% | 13.5 -55% | 8.9 -2% | 6.91 21% | 7.6 13% | 10.15 -17% |
| Load Average * | 25.5 | 19.6 23% | 29.6 -16% | 19.5 24% | 26 -2% | 16.3 36% | 32.88 -29% | 22.5 12% | 25.2 1% |
| Load Maximum * | 23.5 | 19.9 15% | 30.8 -31% | 19.6 17% | 28.8 -23% | 18.6 21% | 37.41 -59% | 34.5 -47% | 29.3 -25% |
* ... smaller is better
| Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5 i5-7300U, HD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core i5, 128GB 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 38 Wh | Lenovo Ideapad Miix 720-12IKB i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 41 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet Gen 2 i5-7Y54, HD Graphics 615, 37 Wh | Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA-GN050T 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 39 Wh | Toshiba Portege Z20t-C-121 6Y75, HD Graphics 515, 72 Wh | Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, 42 Wh | HP Elite x2 1012 G1 6Y54, HD Graphics 515, 37 Wh | Acer Aspire Switch Alpha 12 SA5-271-56HM 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 37 Wh | HP Spectre x2 12-a001ng 6Y30, HD Graphics 515, 43 Wh | Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro S W700N 6Y30, HD Graphics 515, 39.5 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -31% | -40% | -33% | -56% | 8% | -23% | -31% | -43% | -30% | -12% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1054 | 899 -15% | 713 -32% | 662 -37% | 426 -60% | 1075 2% | 732 -31% | 640 -39% | 681 -35% | 1110 5% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 744 | 427 -43% | 345 -54% | 441 -41% | 223 -70% | 804 8% | 486 -35% | 443 -40% | 321 -57% | 364 -51% | 525 -29% |
| Load | 168 | 111 -34% | 111 -34% | 134 -20% | 102 -39% | 105 -37% | 130 -23% | 112 -33% | 161 -4% | ||
| H.264 | 206 | 432 | 468 | 515 |
Pro
Contra
A diferença mais notável entre o antigo Surface Pro 4 e o novo Surface Pro 2017 é a duração melhorada da bateria deste último: mais de 12 em vez de 7 horas em nosso teste Wi-Fi. Nenhum outro concorrente conseguiu chegar perto.
O Core i5-7300U sem ventoinha é capaz de funcionar no máximo desempenho durante rajadas curtas graças ao resfriamento da câmara de vapor. Depois de um curto período de tempo, a CPU começa a se afogar. Os usuários avançados podem estar melhor com o Dell Latitude 12 5285 (i7-7600U, 10% de perda de desempenho em nosso Cinebench loop) ou o IdeaPad Miix 720 (i7-7500U, 9% de perda de desempenho). Embora eles também sofram de afogamentos, não é tão ruim quanto no Surface Pro 2017 (33%)
Isso significa que um dos principais benefícios do Surface Pro 2017 - portátil de desempenho sem ventoinha - desapareceu no ar. O desempenho não é ruim, mas não é permanente. Além disso, não conseguimos verificar o ganho de desempenho de 50% em relação ao seu antecessor imediato, que a Microsoft prometeu. Também não possui USB Type-C e Thunderbolt 3, o que teria feito que o Surface Pro esteja muito mais preparado para o futuro.
No lado positivo, ele tem câmeras decentes que suportam Windows Hello, um microfone muito bom e uma tela brilhante com cobertura sRGB decente. Pode obter tudo isso por $1299. Consideramos que o tablet é muito caro, especialmente porque o preço não inclui nada além do tablet e um carregador.
Alternativas
Os seguintes três tablets vêm à mente ao procurar alternativas ao Surface Pro. Todos os três são impulsionados por SoCs de 15 W SoCs, foram avaliados de forma similar por nós (Dell), e não se afogam tão massivamente quanto o Surface Pro faz, graças a suas ventoinhas. Eles também são mais baratos.
·Dell Latitude 12 5285 2-in-1 (1275 Euros/~$1458, 88%)
·Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 720-12IKB 1 (1145 Euros/~$1309, 85%)
·Asus Transformer 3 Pro T303UA (1100 Euros/~$1258, 86%)
O Latitude 12 possui apenas uma tela FHD, mas é mais brilhante. Todos os três possuem portas USB Type-C, os tablets da Lenovo e da Asus ainda suportam Thunderbolt 3. Infelizmente, o último apenas durou 3:43 horas em nosso teste Wi-Fi e a CPU é incapaz de utilizar todo o seu potencial.
Isso deixa o IdeaPad Miix 720 como a única alternativa real. Apesar das escassas 5:45 horas que durou no nosso teste Wi-Fi, ele também tem os seus pontos fortes: limitou-se a uma perda de apenas 10%, tem um bom teclado com resposta decente e uma ótima tela de 2880x1920.
Caso você realmente não precise da duração da bateria Surface Pro, o Miix 720 e o Transformer 3 Pro oferecem uma melhor razão de preço-desempenho. Afinal, teríamos que adicionar a base do teclado, uma caneta e uma base externa de USB para obter um dispositivo totalmente equipado com mais do que o mínimo de portas.
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i5
- 06/26/2017 v6 (old)
Sebastian Jentsch
Price comparison
