Breve Análise do Conversível Topjoy Falcon (Modelo de Pré Produção)
Os Top 10
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros
Size Comparison
|
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 266 cd/m²
Contraste: 782:1 (Preto: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 2.7
ΔE Greyscale 3.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.19
Topjoy Falcon AUO17D8, , 1920x1200, 8" | Toshiba Satellite Click Mini L9W-B-102 PVO, , 1920x1200, 8.9" | Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 Sharp SHP14A6, , 1800x1200, 10" | Chuwi LapBook SE 1920x1080, 13.3" | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Display | ||||
Display P3 Coverage | 42.94 | 66.5 | 65 | |
sRGB Coverage | 64.4 | 97.5 | 94.8 | |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 44.4 | 67.5 | 66.5 | |
Response Times | 138% | 4% | ||
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 37 ? | 44 ? -19% | 39.2 ? -6% | |
Response Time Black / White * | 33.6 ? | 25.6 ? 24% | 27.7 ? 18% | |
PWM Frequency | 200 ? | 1020 ? 410% | 200 ? 0% | |
Screen | -22% | 53% | -36% | |
Brightness middle | 266 | 207 -22% | 456 71% | 227 -15% |
Brightness | 269 | 205 -24% | 426 58% | 210 -22% |
Brightness Distribution | 88 | 89 1% | 88 0% | 89 1% |
Black Level * | 0.34 | 0.14 59% | 0.31 9% | 0.44 -29% |
Contrast | 782 | 1479 89% | 1471 88% | 516 -34% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.6 | 7.98 -122% | 1.3 64% | 6.6 -83% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.2 | 3 63% | 12.2 -49% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.7 | 1.1 59% | 1.9 30% | |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.6 | 8.36 -132% | 1.4 61% | 7.9 -119% |
Gamma | 2.19 100% | 2.21 100% | 2.24 98% | 2.16 102% |
CCT | 6442 101% | 7768 84% | 6687 97% | 8879 73% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 41 | 62.3 | ||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 64 | 96.8 | ||
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -22% /
-22% | 96% /
74% | -16% /
-26% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise | |
↘ 13.6 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. » 89 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
37 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17 ms rise | |
↘ 20 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. » 49 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 200 Hz | ≤ 100 % brightness setting | |
≤ 266 cd/m² brightness | |||
The display backlight flickers at 200 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % (266 cd/m²) 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. Flickering occurs even at high brightness setting and may have an effect on the user during everyday use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 2216 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 2672 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 3122 pontos | |
PCMark 10 Score | 1990 pontos | |
Ajuda |
Topjoy Falcon FORESEE 256GB | Average FORESEE 256GB | |
---|---|---|
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | ||
Sequential Read | ||
Sequential Write | ||
512K Read | ||
512K Write | ||
4K Read | ||
4K Write | ||
4K QD32 Read | ||
4K QD32 Write |
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
Average of class Convertible (471 - 40768, n=61, last 2 years) | |
Eve-Tech Eve V m3 | |
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 | |
Lenovo Ideapad D330-10IGM | |
Topjoy Falcon | |
Average Intel UHD Graphics 605 (588 - 902, n=13) | |
Lenovo Yoga 330-11IGM | |
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG | |
Chuwi LapBook SE |
3DMark - 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
Average of class Convertible (2965 - 154219, n=44, last 2 years) | |
Eve-Tech Eve V m3 | |
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 | |
Topjoy Falcon | |
Lenovo Ideapad D330-10IGM | |
Average Intel UHD Graphics 605 (2874 - 4485, n=10) | |
Lenovo Yoga 330-11IGM | |
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG | |
Chuwi LapBook SE |
3DMark 06 Standard Score | 4171 pontos | |
3DMark 11 Performance | 824 pontos | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 3723 pontos | |
Ajuda |
World of Warships - 1366x768 Low Preset AF:Trilinear | |
HP 15-da0405ng | |
Acer Aspire 3 A315-41-R7BM | |
Acer Spin 5 SP513-52N-566U | |
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE | |
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y | |
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE | |
Topjoy Falcon | |
Average Intel UHD Graphics 605 (22.7 - 24.7, n=2) | |
Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG | |
Lenovo Tablet 10-20L3000KGE |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | QHD | 4K | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTA V (2015) | 11.7 | 9.29 | ||||
World of Warships (2015) | 24.7 | |||||
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 5.15 | |||||
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 9.1 | 6 | 5.5 | |||
World of Tanks enCore (2018) | 53 | 8.9 | ||||
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) | 11 (too slow) | |||||
Total War: Three Kingdoms (2019) | 6.5 | |||||
League of Legends (2019) | 49.8 | 39 | 26.6 | 24.9 | 23.6 | 15 |
F1 2019 (2019) | 8.2 | |||||
Hearthstone (2020) | 31.1 |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 19.6 to 60 °C for the class Convertible.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30 °C / 86 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28 °C / 82.4 F (-2 °C / -3.6 F).
Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.6 / 1.73 Watt |
Ocioso | 2.5 / 4 / 4.1 Watt |
Carga |
8.1 / 19.6 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Topjoy Falcon Pentium N5000, UHD Graphics 605, FORESEE 256GB, IPS, 1920x1200, 8" | Toshiba Satellite Click Mini L9W-B-102 Z3735F, HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 32 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1200, 8.9" | Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 Pentium 4415Y, UHD Graphics 615, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1800x1200, 10" | Fujitsu Stylistic V535 Z3795, HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 128 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 8.3" | Chuwi LapBook SE Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, SanDisk DF4032, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Average Intel UHD Graphics 605 | Average of class Convertible | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 11% | -50% | -51% | -47% | -26% | -221% | |
Idle Minimum * | 2.5 | 1.8 28% | 2.88 -15% | 4.9 -96% | 2.7 -8% | 2.8 ? -12% | 5.18 ? -107% |
Idle Average * | 4 | 3.2 20% | 4.8 -20% | 7.4 -85% | 6.3 -58% | 5.01 ? -25% | 8.18 ? -105% |
Idle Maximum * | 4.1 | 4.4 -7% | 7.5 -83% | 7.5 -83% | 7.6 -85% | 5.65 ? -38% | 11.1 ? -171% |
Load Average * | 8.1 | 10.8 -33% | 16.9 -109% | 11.8 -46% | 12.6 -56% | 13.3 ? -64% | 46.8 ? -478% |
Load Maximum * | 19.6 | 10.6 46% | 23.8 -21% | 8.9 55% | 24.6 -26% | 17.5 ? 11% | 67.2 ? -243% |
* ... smaller is better
Topjoy Falcon Pentium N5000, UHD Graphics 605, 22 Wh | Toshiba Satellite Click Mini L9W-B-102 Z3735F, HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 39 Wh | Apple MacBook 12 2017 m3-7Y32, HD Graphics 615, 41.4 Wh | Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 Pentium 4415Y, UHD Graphics 615, 28 Wh | Fujitsu Stylistic V535 Z3795, HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 17.7 Wh | Chuwi LapBook SE Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, 37 Wh | Lenovo Ideapad D330-10IGM Pentium N5000, UHD Graphics 605, 39 Wh | Acer Swift 1 SF114-32-P8GG Pentium N5000, UHD Graphics 605, 53.9 Wh | Eve-Tech Eve V m3 m3-7Y30, HD Graphics 615, 48 Wh | Average of class Convertible | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 78% | 60% | 33% | -25% | 32% | 103% | 120% | 78% | ||
WiFi v1.3 | 337 | 600 78% | 540 60% | 448 33% | 252 -25% | 444 32% | 684 103% | 740 120% | 599 ? 78% | |
Reader / Idle | 1066 | 771 | 1330 ? | |||||||
Load | 251 | 180 | 347 | 113.1 ? | ||||||
H.264 | 384 | 564 | 607 | 770 ? |
Pro
Contra
O Topjoy Falcon é um pequeno conversível com uma carcaça de alta qualidade. Enquanto em termos de dispositivos de entrada, você precisa fazer algumas concessões significativas em partes, o desempenho do quad-core Gemini-Lake permanece sem culpa, graças também ao ventilador integrado. Em termos de tela, a Topjoy ainda pretende fazer algumas melhorias e usar um modelo com maior brilho. Essa seria nossa principal reclamação sobre o painel AUO embutido (além do uso de PWM até 100% de brilho). Nós realmente recomendamos a caneta ativa opcional, uma vez que ajuda consideravelmente na operação da tela pequena.
No geral, o Falcon é um conceito muito interessante, mas ainda precisa de algum ajuste em seu estado atual. Para o reduzido Preço Kickstarter a partir de $399 (~350 Euros), você poderia obter um segundo portátil prático para a estrada a um preço acessível. No entanto, você precisaria confiar em que a Topjoy ainda fará sua lição de casa.