Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Portátil Acer Swift 3 SF314 (i7-8565U, MX250)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (18.4 - 142, n=13, last 2 years) | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (22.5 - 207, n=13, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 87 %
iluminação com acumulador: 317 cd/m²
Contraste: 923:1 (Preto: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.13 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 0.9
ΔE Greyscale 4.32 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
64% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
69.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
98.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.3% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.29
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V Chi Mei CMN14D5, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE NV140FHM-N46, , 1920x1080, 14" | Huawei MateBook 14 KLV-W29 Chi Mei CMN8C02, , 2160x1440, 14" | Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD N140HCA-EAC, , 1920x1080, 14" | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T AU Optronics B140HAN03.2, , 1920x1080, 14" | Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2, , 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -40% | -1% | -37% | -7% | -2% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 67.3 | 40.24 -40% | 66.6 -1% | 41.96 -38% | 63.5 -6% | 66.2 -2% |
| sRGB Coverage | 98.9 | 60 -39% | 97.8 -1% | 63 -36% | 90.9 -8% | 98.3 -1% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 69.5 | 41.57 -40% | 68.1 -2% | 43.37 -38% | 64.6 -7% | 67.8 -2% |
| Response Times | 87% | 4% | 3229% | -3% | 3297% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 40 ? | 44.8 ? -12% | 38 ? 5% | 42 ? -5% | 42 ? -5% | 41 ? -3% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 28 ? | 35.2 ? -26% | 27.2 ? 3% | 30 ? -7% | 28 ? -0% | 30 ? -7% |
| PWM Frequency | 250 | 1000 ? 300% | 24500 ? 9700% | 25000 ? 9900% | ||
| Screen | -70% | -10% | -32% | -27% | -4% | |
| Brightness middle | 323 | 275 -15% | 401.7 24% | 255 -21% | 321 -1% | 291 -10% |
| Brightness | 299 | 272 -9% | 386 29% | 218 -27% | 282 -6% | 276 -8% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 85 -2% | 95 9% | 72 -17% | 77 -11% | 90 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.35 | 0.26 26% | 0.42 -20% | 0.08 77% | 0.2 43% | 0.27 23% |
| Contrast | 923 | 1058 15% | 956 4% | 3188 245% | 1605 74% | 1078 17% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.13 | 5.9 -88% | 4.11 -31% | 5.01 -60% | 6.35 -103% | 3.86 -23% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.96 | 20 -187% | 8.93 -28% | 17.44 -151% | 12.2 -75% | 8.26 -19% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 0.9 | 4.9 -444% | 1.36 -51% | 4.06 -351% | 1.88 -109% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.32 | 3.6 17% | 6.1 -41% | 3 31% | 8.35 -93% | 5.33 -23% |
| Gamma | 2.29 96% | 2.36 93% | 2.19 100% | 2.26 97% | 2.51 88% | 2.25 98% |
| CCT | 7436 87% | 6798 96% | 7222 90% | 6185 105% | 8227 79% | 7426 88% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 64 | 38.1 -40% | 62.7 -2% | 40 -37% | 59 -8% | 62 -3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99 | 59.6 -40% | 98.6 0% | 63 -36% | 91 -8% | 98 -1% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -8% /
-37% | -2% /
-6% | 1053% /
543% | -12% /
-20% | 1097% /
615% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 13 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. » 68 % 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 | ||
| 40 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18 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. » 57 % 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 | 250 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. 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 | 3581 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 5174 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4061 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G | Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ | Huawei MateBook 14 KLV-W29 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G | Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 Kingston RBUSNS8154P3128GJ | Average WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | -20% | -6% | -62% | -21% | -41% | -8% | |
| Write 4K | 185.5 | 114.8 -38% | 165.9 -11% | 85.4 -54% | 99.9 -46% | 96.8 -48% | 138.5 ? -25% |
| Read 4K | 50.2 | 41.33 -18% | 28.04 -44% | 26.4 -47% | 40.03 -20% | 36.99 -26% | 44.2 ? -12% |
| Write Seq | 1175 | 1271 8% | 1009 -14% | 402.5 -66% | 973 -17% | 463.1 -61% | 1265 ? 8% |
| Read Seq | 1132 | 1171 3% | 962 -15% | 461.2 -59% | 1111 -2% | 794 -30% | 1237 ? 9% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 472.6 | 218.4 -54% | 572 21% | 175.8 -63% | 424.6 -10% | 291.7 -38% | 404 ? -15% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 642 | 308.5 -52% | 611 -5% | 228.8 -64% | 255.9 -60% | 352 -45% | 421 ? -34% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1453 | 1460 0% | 1720 18% | 442.9 -70% | 1300 -11% | 468.1 -68% | 1491 ? 3% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 1738 | 1529 -12% | 1775 2% | 522 -70% | 1723 -1% | 1489 -14% | 1741 ? 0% |
| Write 4K Q8T8 | 1208 | 309 | 715 ? | ||||
| Read 4K Q8T8 | 983 | 247.1 | 1027 ? | ||||
| AS SSD | -43% | 6% | -68% | -29% | -51% | -13% | |
| Seq Read | 1438 | 1224 -15% | 1225 -15% | 492.9 -66% | 1389 -3% | 1201 -16% | 1363 ? -5% |
| Seq Write | 1352 | 1118 -17% | 1386 3% | 462.2 -66% | 795 -41% | 434.5 -68% | 1227 ? -9% |
| 4K Read | 47.35 | 42.46 -10% | 56.4 19% | 26.89 -43% | 37.3 -21% | 40.9 -14% | 40.8 ? -14% |
| 4K Write | 167.9 | 77.4 -54% | 137.6 -18% | 85.1 -49% | 130.8 -22% | 90 -46% | 127.3 ? -24% |
| 4K-64 Read | 1051 | 559 -47% | 1190 13% | 234.2 -78% | 653 -38% | 425.5 -60% | 957 ? -9% |
| 4K-64 Write | 1211 | 378.1 -69% | 1377 14% | 312.8 -74% | 605 -50% | 390.9 -68% | 1081 ? -11% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.081 | 0.046 | 0.114 | 0.184 | 0.07744 ? | ||
| Access Time Write * | 0.03 | 0.049 -63% | 0.026 13% | 0.056 -87% | 0.028 7% | 0.048 -60% | 0.03671 ? -22% |
| Score Read | 1242 | 724 -42% | 1369 10% | 310 -75% | 829 -33% | 586 -53% | 1134 ? -9% |
| Score Write | 1514 | 567 -63% | 1653 9% | 444 -71% | 815 -46% | 524 -65% | 1331 ? -12% |
| Score Total | 3397 | 1669 -51% | 3743 10% | 922 -73% | 2048 -40% | 1386 -59% | 3046 ? -10% |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 812 | 1837 | 923 | 601 | 310.1 | 1169 ? | |
| Copy Program MB/s | 209.4 | 473.6 | 453.6 | 246.8 | 88.4 | 446 ? | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 356.1 | 1216 | 523 | 549 | 166.4 | 874 ? | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -32% /
-33% | 0% /
1% | -65% /
-65% | -25% /
-25% | -46% /
-47% | -11% /
-11% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 3942 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 14136 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2762 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 175.5 | 98.4 | 84 | 32.27 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 58 | 33 | 18 | |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 118 | 98.7 | 60.7 | 54.7 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 31.5 / 31.5 / 31.5 dB |
| Carga |
| 33.4 / 33.6 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: 30.4 dB(A) | ||
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48.6 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49.2 °C / 121 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.5 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30.9 °C / 87.6 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (-2.6 °C / -4.7 F).
Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 74% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
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 | 0.3 / 0.62 Watt |
| Ocioso | 7.4 / 9.9 / 11.7 Watt |
| Carga |
29 / 52 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE R5 PRO 2500U, Vega 8, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | Huawei MateBook 14 KLV-W29 i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2160x1440, 14" | Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD i5-8550U, GeForce MX130, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 i3-8145U, UHD Graphics 620, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3128GJ, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 2% | -16% | -5% | 26% | 37% | -12% | -3% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 7.4 | 5.3 28% | 3.7 50% | 4.6 38% | 2.7 64% | 2.9 61% | 4.1 ? 45% | 4.49 ? 39% |
| Idle Average * | 9.9 | 8.3 16% | 9.3 6% | 6.5 34% | 5.8 41% | 5.6 43% | 7.91 ? 20% | 7.66 ? 23% |
| Idle Maximum * | 11.7 | 11.4 3% | 12.8 -9% | 8.5 27% | 10.2 13% | 6.1 48% | 10.4 ? 11% | 9.56 ? 18% |
| Load Average * | 29 | 42 -45% | 58.8 -103% | 56 -93% | 34.9 -20% | 29 -0% | 58.6 ? -102% | 46.6 ? -61% |
| Load Maximum * | 52 | 48.8 6% | 65 -25% | 67 -29% | 35 33% | 35.3 32% | 68.9 ? -33% | 68.6 ? -32% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 55.8 |
* ... smaller is better
| Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, 50.7 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad A485-20MU000CGE R5 PRO 2500U, Vega 8, 48 Wh | Huawei MateBook 14 KLV-W29 i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, 57.4 Wh | Acer TravelMate X3410-M-50DD i5-8550U, GeForce MX130, 57 Wh | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | Acer Swift 3 SF314-55-31N8 i3-8145U, UHD Graphics 620, 50.7 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -33% | 19% | 23% | 16% | 27% | 47% | |
| Reader / Idle | 968 | 671 -31% | 1435 48% | 1041 8% | 1750 ? 81% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 484 | 330 -32% | 503 4% | 651 35% | 563 16% | 614 27% | 719 ? 49% |
| Load | 104 | 68 -35% | 109 5% | 131 26% | 116.6 ? 12% | ||
| H.264 | 368 | 695 | 896 ? |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto - Mais desempenho em troca de menos duração da bateria
Em nosso teste, o Acer Swift 3 mostra um bom desempenho para aplicativos de escritório mais exigentes e para jogos ocasionais com configurações gráficas baixas. Enquanto o desempenho do i7-8565U cai ligeiramente após um curto período de tempo, pode então manter um nível ligeiramente acima do Core i7-8550U ou do Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. Com cerca de oito horas, a duração da bateria também é boa, o que, em combinação com suas dimensões compactas, torna o Swift 3 um bom companheiro móvel.
Com hardware mais potente, o Acer Swift 3 também oferece um melhor desempenho. No entanto, isso é compensado com uma duração mais curta da bateria e maior consumo de energia.
Em termos de tela, a Acer dá um passo para trás em comparação com o nosso teste do Swift 3 de janeiro de 2019. Embora o brilho seja um pouco mais alto, o PWM é usado a uma frequência significativamente menor. Enquanto a Nvidia GeForce MX250 dedicada também oferece um melhor desempenho gráfico, isso é acompanhado por maior consumo de energia e menor duração da bateria. Para usuários que podem viver sem uma duração de bateria mais longa em troca do aumento de desempenho, vale a pena dar uma olhada no Swift 3.
Acer Swift 3 SF314-55G-768V
- 05/27/2019 v6 (old)
Mike Wobker
Price comparison
