Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Portátil Acer Aspire E5-553G-109A
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 75 %
iluminação com acumulador: 224 cd/m²
Contraste: 487:1 (Preto: 0.46 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 10.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 11.23 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
59% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
38% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
41.07% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
59.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
39.72% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.12
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A Chi Mei CMN15C4 / N156HGE-EAB, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK LG Philips LGD04A7 / LG Display LP156WF6-SPK2 , , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D Chi Mei CMN15C4, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Medion Akoya P6670 LG Philips LP156WF6-SPK3, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -1% | -3% | -4% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 39.72 | 39.26 -1% | 38.57 -3% | 38.14 -4% |
| sRGB Coverage | 59.2 | 58.7 -1% | 57.4 -3% | 57.2 -3% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 41.07 | 40.59 -1% | 39.89 -3% | 39.43 -4% |
| Response Times | -53% | -28% | -50% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 42.4 ? | 40 ? 6% | 39 ? 8% | 42 ? 1% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 14.6 ? | 24 ? -64% | 24 ? -64% | 22 ? -51% |
| PWM Frequency | 28740 | 50 ? -100% | 50 -100% | |
| Screen | 25% | 1% | 15% | |
| Brightness middle | 224 | 284 27% | 176 -21% | 287 28% |
| Brightness | 201 | 276 37% | 169 -16% | 269 34% |
| Brightness Distribution | 75 | 80 7% | 91 21% | 74 -1% |
| Black Level * | 0.46 | 0.33 28% | 0.47 -2% | 0.65 -41% |
| Contrast | 487 | 861 77% | 374 -23% | 442 -9% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 10.5 | 7.21 31% | 8.83 16% | 5.42 48% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 16.8 | 15.12 10% | 14.01 17% | 9.54 43% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 11.23 | 6.86 39% | 8.97 20% | 5.14 54% |
| Gamma | 2.12 104% | 2.46 89% | 2.43 91% | 2.48 89% |
| CCT | 11096 59% | 6726 97% | 10234 64% | 6952 93% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 38 | 37 -3% | 36.8 -3% | 36 -5% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 59 | 58 -2% | 57.3 -3% | 57 -3% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -10% /
6% | -10% /
-4% | -13% /
-1% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 14.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 9.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5.2 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 32 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 42.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 20.4 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 67 % 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 | 28740 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 28740 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 28740 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. | |||
| Cinebench R15 | |
| CPU Single 64Bit | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| Acer TravelMate P249-M-3895 | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| CPU Multi 64Bit | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Acer TravelMate P249-M-3895 | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| PCMark 8 | |
| Home Score Accelerated v2 | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Work Score Accelerated v2 | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 2847 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 3844 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A Liteonit CV3-8D128 | Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB | Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D Toshiba MQ01ABD100 | Medion Akoya P6670 Phison S11-128G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -91% | -90% | 9% | |
| Read Seq | 348.6 | 84.5 -76% | 95.3 -73% | 441.8 27% |
| Write Seq | 311.8 | 69.9 -78% | 85.6 -73% | 398 28% |
| Read 512 | 295.9 | 28.87 -90% | 29.32 -90% | 295.5 0% |
| Write 512 | 185.8 | 28.08 -85% | 25.93 -86% | 75.5 -59% |
| Read 4k | 23.76 | 0.326 -99% | 0.366 -98% | 31.19 31% |
| Write 4k | 44.94 | 0.595 -99% | 0.726 -98% | 60 34% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 171.6 | 0.602 -100% | 0.647 -100% | 258 50% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 143.2 | 0.612 -100% | 0.722 -99% | 85.7 -40% |
| 3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Medion Akoya P6670 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 2992 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 6270 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 1644 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 24.3 | 15.3 | ||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 23.9 | 14.8 | ||
| Battlefield 1 (2016) | 31.2 | 7.9 | ||
| Civilization VI (2016) | 36.8 | 9.7 | ||
| Farming Simulator 17 (2016) | 63.8 | 21.6 | ||
| Dishonored 2 (2016) | 13.8 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 31.4 / 31.4 / 31.9 dB |
| DVD |
| 36.6 / dB |
| Carga |
| 33.7 / 33.8 dB |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 30.5 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.8 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 56.5 °C / 134 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 36.6 °C / 97.9 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-7.8 °C / -14.1 F).
Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 89% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 75% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 71% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 55% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.8% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 88% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
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%
Medion Akoya P6670 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 17% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 8% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.43 / 0.5 Watt |
| Ocioso | 7.2 / 10.3 / 11.9 Watt |
| Carga |
48.2 / 63 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A A12-9700P, Radeon R8 M445DX, Liteonit CV3-8D128, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK 6200U, GeForce 940MX, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D i5-7200U, GeForce GTX 950M, Toshiba MQ01ABD100, TN, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Medion Akoya P6670 6200U, GeForce 940MX, Phison S11-128G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 0% | 3% | 12% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 7.2 | 7.7 -7% | 6 17% | 6.7 7% |
| Idle Average * | 10.3 | 11.7 -14% | 8.1 21% | 9.2 11% |
| Idle Maximum * | 11.9 | 13.6 -14% | 9.8 18% | 9.7 18% |
| Load Average * | 48.2 | 48.3 -0% | 52.5 -9% | 40.6 16% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 51.8 | |||
| Load Maximum * | 63 | 41 35% | 81.6 -30% | 58 8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A A12-9700P, Radeon R8 M445DX, 40 Wh | Lenovo Ideapad 510-15ISK 6200U, GeForce 940MX, 30 Wh | Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D i5-7200U, GeForce GTX 950M, 62 Wh | Medion Akoya P6670 6200U, GeForce 940MX, 44 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 15% | 75% | 9% | |
| Reader / Idle | 358 | 443 24% | 767 114% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 257 | 225 -12% | 451 75% | 280 9% |
| Load | 55 | 73 33% | 75 36% | |
| H.264 | 460 |
Os recursos do Acer Aspire E5-553G-109A que gostamos mais são os bons a muito bons dispositivos de entrada (teclado e ClickPad) , bem como a sólida e bem construída carcaça. O processador AMD é mais adequado para aplicativos de escritório e luta com algumas desvantagens como o afogamento, subaproveitamento dos quatro núcleos, e desempenho fraco. Ele raramente supera o dual-core i3s sem Hyper-Threading quando se trata de multi tarefas. A construção dual graphics Radeon R8 M445DX sem sentido deve ser criticada. Na maior parte dos casos, ele não atinge FPS adicionais em comparação com a R7 M440 dedicada mas aumenta o perigo de pequenas quedas de fotogramas. No final, isto não interessa, dado que a solução dual-graphics pode ser desativada e o R7 M440 pode cumprir tarefas por si próprio, o qual recomendamos. Se você evitar uma carga de trabalho persistente, a tecnologia AMD se desempenha tão bem na prática que uma operação bastante fluente está garantida. O SSD, é claro, desempenha um papel de contribuição.
A maior fraqueza do Acer recém-chegado, sem dúvida é a tela TN inferior que dificulta encontrar um ponto positivo. Com uma tela como essa, uma recomendação de compra fica longe.
Especialmente a estabilidade inferior dos ângulos de visão, é nada menos que uma impertinência, apesar do fato de que a qualidade da tela ainda não é muito importante para os usuários de portáteis. Adicionalmente, há uma faixa de gradientes de cor, que não temos visto em um longo tempo, e isso provavelmente indica uma profundidade de cores reduzida.
a seleção de portas, incluindo o USB Type-C, por outro lado, é bom para esta faixa de preços, embora as portas não sejam bem posicionadas. O módulo WLAN também faz um bom trabalho, considerando que tem apenas uma antena. Que a Acer coloque uma escotilha de manutenção é uma exceção elogiável hoje em dia.
Sejamos francos: Desde nosso ponto de vista, quase não existem motivos para escolher o Acer E5-553G sobre qualquer outro portátil multimídia nesta análise. Especialmente o Lenovo IdeaPad 510-15ISK, que é, no máximo, um pouco mais caro, oferece muito mais pelo valor.
Pro
Contra
The Acer Aspire E5-553G-109A's features we like best are the decent (keyboard) to very good (ClickPad) input devices as well as the solid and well manufactured case. The AMD processor is better suited for office applications and struggles with some shortcomings such as throttling, suboptimal use of the four cores, and weak single-core performance. It rarely even pulls ahead of the dual-core i3s without Hyper-Threading when it comes to multitasking. The pointless Radeon R8 M445DX dual-graphics construction is to be criticized. For the most part, it does not achieve additional FPS in comparison with the dedicated R7 M440 but increases the danger of minor dropped frames. In the end, this does not matter, as the dual-graphics solution can be turned off and the R7 M440 can accomplish tasks on its own, which we recommend. If you avoid a persistent high load, the AMD technology performs so well in practice that a largely smooth operation is guaranteed. The SSD, of course, plays a contributing part.
The biggest weakness of the Acer newcomer is undoubtedly the subpar TN display that makes it difficult to find even one positive point. With a screen like that, a purchase recommendation is far away.
Especially the subpar viewing-angle stability is nothing more than an impertinence, despite the fact that the quality of the display is still not very important to many laptop users. Additionally, there is a banding of color gradients, which we have not seen in a long time, and this probably indicates a reduced color depth.
The port selection including USB Type-C, on the other hand, is good for this price range, even though the ports are not placed well. The WLAN module also does a good job, considering it has only one antenna. That Acer builds in a maintenance hatch is a praiseworthy exception these days.
Let us be frank: From our point of view, there is hardly any reason to choose the Acer E5-553G over any of the other multimedia notebooks in this review. Especially the Lenovo IdeaPad 510-15ISK, which is at best slightly more expensive, offers significantly more bang for the buck.
Acer Aspire E15 E5-553G-109A
- 01/18/2017 v6 (old)
Sven Kloevekorn
Price comparison
