Breve Análise do Portátil Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH (N4200, HD)

Name: Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T
Brand: Asus

Nada surpreendente. O conversível Asus possui um processador Apollo Lake a bordo e oferece muito espaço de armazenamento. A duração da bateria pode ser chamada de média, na melhor das hipóteses. A um preço de quase 500 Euros (~ $560), o dispositivo não é um dos modelos mais acessíveis.

Sascha Mölck, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 06/18/2017 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Convertible / 2-in-1 Touchscreen Windows

Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T (VivoBook Flip 12 Serie)

Processador

Intel Pentium N4200 4 x 1.1 - 2.5 GHz, Apollo Lake

Placa gráfica

Intel HD Graphics 505, Análises do: 750 MHz, 21.20.16.4678

Memória

4 GB

, DDR3-1866

Pantalha

11.60 polegadas 16:9, 1366 x 768 pixel 135 PPI, capacitivA, 10 pontos de toque, AU Optronics B116XAN04.3, IPS, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, 1024 GB

, 900 GB livre

Placa de Som

Realtek ALC256 @ Intel Apollo Lake SoC - High Definition Audio Controller

Conexões

3 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, Conexões Audio: Áudio combinado, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, Sensores: Sensor de aceleração, TPM 2.0

Funcionamento em rede

Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.1

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 21.35 x 293.4 x 198

Bateria

42 Wh Lítio-Ion

Sistema Operativo

Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit

Camera

Webcam: HD

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Estéreo, Teclado: chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: não, McAfee LiveSafe (versão de teste), Ms Office 365 (versão de teste), Team Viewer 11, WPS Office for Asus, 12 Meses Garantia, fanless

peso

1.3 kg, Suprimento de energia: 132 g

Preço

499 Euro

Links

Asus página inicial
Asus Seção de notebook

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Size Comparison

HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Dell Latitude 3189 Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T ODYS Vario Pro 12 Medion Akoya E2215T DIN A4 ❌

Left side: USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Type A), audio combo, fingerprint reader, volume rocker, power button

Right side: card reader (microSD), 2x USB 3.1 Gen 1 (1x Type C, 1x Type A), HDMI, power

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265	548 MBit/s +62%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter	338 MBit/s
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Realtek RTL8723BS	46 MBit/s -86%
iperf3 receive AX12
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265	657 MBit/s +91%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter	344 MBit/s
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Realtek RTL8723BS	52 MBit/s -85%


260 cd/m²	253 cd/m²	266 cd/m²
234 cd/m²	253 cd/m²	277 cd/m²
179 cd/m²	221 cd/m²	266 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

AU Optronics B116XAN04.3 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 277 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 245.4 cd/m² Minimum: 16 cd/m²
iluminação: 65 %
iluminação com acumulador: 253 cd/m²
Contraste: 1488:1 (Preto: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.17 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
66% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
42% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
45.73% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
66.3% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
44.23% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.43

Download Arquivo ICC (X-Rite i1Pro 2)

	Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T IPS, 1366x768, 11.6"	Dell Latitude 3189 IPS, 1366x768, 11.6"	ODYS Vario Pro 12 IPS, 1366x768, 11.6"	Medion Akoya E2215T IPS, 1920x1080, 11.6"	HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 IPS, 1366x768, 11.6"
Display		2%	2%	9%	2%
Display P3 Coverage	44.23	44.96 2%	45.16 2%	48.12 9%	45.21 2%
sRGB Coverage	66.3	67.3 2%	67.5 2%	71.7 8%	67.8 2%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage	45.73	46.49 2%	46.71 2%	49.78 9%	46.73 2%
Response Times		-13%	-49%	9%	30%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *	39 ?(18, 21)	40 ?(18.8, 21.2) -3%	60 ?(31, 29) -54%	31 ?(13, 18) 21%	18.8 ?(6.8, 12) 52%
Response Time Black / White *	25 ?(13, 12)	30.4 ?(16.4, 14) -22%	36 ?(22, 14) -44%	26 ?(6, 20) -4%	23.2 ?(10, 13.2) 7%
PWM Frequency				50 ?(20)
Screen		9%	-41%	-15%	-6%
Brightness middle	253	291 15%	282 11%	338 34%	194 -23%
Brightness	245	284 16%	250 2%	309 26%	186 -24%
Brightness Distribution	65	92 42%	74 14%	76 17%	86 32%
Black Level *	0.17	0.16 6%	0.37 -118%	0.39 -129%	0.22 -29%
Contrast	1488	1819 22%	762 -49%	867 -42%	882 -41%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	3.17	3.4 -7%	5.63 -78%	3.94 -24%	3.06 3%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	8.13	9.6 -18%	11.28 -39%	9.96 -23%	8.81 -8%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	2	1.8 10%	5.04 -152%	2.54 -27%	1.42 29%
Gamma	2.43 ^91%	2.14 ^103%	2.19 ^100%	2.38 ^92%	2.34 ^94%
CCT	6850 ^95%	6544 ^99%	7254 ^90%	6902 ^94%	6432 ^101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)	42	42.8 2%	43 2%	46 10%	42.98 2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)	66	67 2%	67 2%	71 8%	67.56 2%
Total Average (Program / Settings)		-1% / 5%	-29% / -33%	1% / -7%	9% / 1%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM not detected

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.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
25 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 13 ms rise
25 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 12 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. » 55 % 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
39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 18 ms rise
39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 21 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. » 55 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit

Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit

1680

Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit

4673

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit

3331

Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit

53 Points

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit

167 Points

Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit

17.82 fps

Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit

97.8 %

Ajuda

... comparado com

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	53 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	51 Points -4%
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Pentium N4200	50 Points -6%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Intel Celeron N3050	35 Points -34%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	175 Points +5%
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Pentium N4200	174 Points +4%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	167 Points
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Intel Celeron N3050	65 Points -61%

Cinebench R10
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	5440 Points +16%
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Pentium N4200	5346 Points +14%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	4673 Points
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel Atom x5-Z8350	3076 Points -34%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel Atom x5-Z8350	2897 Points -38%
Rendering Single 32Bit
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	1680 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	1638 Points -2%
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Pentium N4200	1633 Points -3%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel Atom x5-Z8350	938 Points -44%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel Atom x5-Z8350	921 Points -45%

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	4736 Points +1%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	4682 Points
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel Atom x5-Z8350	2289 Points -51%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel Atom x5-Z8350	2130 Points -55%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	1430 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	1400 Points -2%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel Atom x5-Z8350	760 Points -47%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel Atom x5-Z8350	726 Points -49%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	4558 Points +1%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	4491 Points
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	1609 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	1541 Points -4%

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	4729 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	4719 Points 0%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	1616 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	1571 Points -3%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel Pentium N4200	91.5 Points
Dell Latitude 3180 Intel Pentium N4200	87.5 Points -4%
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel Pentium N4200	84.6 Points -8%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel Atom x5-Z8350	44.1 Points -52%
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Intel Celeron N3050	43.31 Points -53%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel Atom x5-Z8350	42.55 Points -53%

PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2		2094 pontos
Ajuda

PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Dell Latitude 3189 HD Graphics 505, Pentium N4200, Liteonit CV3-8D128	2273 Points +9%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T HD Graphics 505, Pentium N4200, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035	2094 Points
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 HD Graphics (Braswell), N3050, Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680	1545 Points -26%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8350, 32 GB eMMC Flash	1437 Points -31%
Medion Akoya E2215T HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash	1282 Points -39%

HD Tune

CrystalDiskMark 3.0

Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035

Velocidade de Transferência Mínima: 26.5 MB/s

Velocidade de Transferência Máxima: 135 MB/s

Velocidade de Transferência Média: 100.6 MB/s

Tempo de Acesso: 19.9 ms

Índice de Explosão: 78.7 MB/s

Uso da CPU: 5.9 %

	Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035	Dell Latitude 3189 Liteonit CV3-8D128	ODYS Vario Pro 12 32 GB eMMC Flash	Medion Akoya E2215T 64 GB eMMC Flash	HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680
CrystalDiskMark 3.0		7181%	1851%	1279%	68%
Read Seq	53.9	408.4 658%	168.3 212%	169.6 215%	106 97%
Write Seq	66.4	214.3 223%	43.13 -35%	39.77 -40%	106.1 60%
Read 512	22.62	243.7 977%	155 585%	155.3 587%	33.53 48%
Write 512	67.3	170.6 153%	33.71 -50%	27.45 -59%	39.03 -42%
Read 4k	0.378	8.864 2245%	15.91 4109%	13.09 3363%	0.407 8%
Write 4k	0.263	49.14 18584%	11.64 4326%	7.915 2910%	1.026 290%
Read 4k QD32	0.998	132.2 13146%	32.2 3126%	15.11 1414%	0.898 -10%
Write 4k QD32	0.518	111.7 21464%	13.65 2535%	10.05 1840%	1.003 94%

3DMark 11 Performance		672 pontos
Ajuda

... comparado com

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Dell Latitude 3189 Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200	804 Points +31%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200	616 Points
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 Intel HD Graphics (Braswell), Intel Celeron N3050	377 Points -39%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Intel Atom x5-Z8350	297 Points -52%
Medion Akoya E2215T Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Intel Atom x5-Z8350	297 Points -52%

	baixo	média	alto
World of Warcraft (2005)	62.3	25.2
BioShock Infinite (2013)	25.4	14.4	11.5
Risen 3: Titan Lords (2014)	14.2	9.3
GTA V (2015)	9.5	4.3
Far Cry Primal (2016)	3
Civilization VI (2016)	9.7
Titanfall 2 (2016)	2.3
Prey (2017)	5.4
Rocket League (2017)	26.6
Dirt 4 (2017)	14.7

Barulho

Ocioso		31.7 / 31.7 / 31.7 dB
HDD		32.3 dB
Carga		31.7 / 31.7 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: 30.8 dB(A)

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


30.9 °C	42 °C	45.2 °C
30.1 °C	39.4 °C	44.6 °C
26.7 °C	30.6 °C	33.8 °C

Máximo: 45.2 °C
Médio: 35.9 °C


42 °C	50.4 °C	28.4 °C
39.8 °C	39.4 °C	27.8 °C
33.9 °C	33 °C	26.8 °C

Máximo: 50.4 °C
Médio: 35.7 °C

alimentação elétrica 39.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 23 °C | FIRT 550-Pocket

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 30.3 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Convertible.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.2 °C / 113 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 50.4 °C / 123 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.4 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 30.3 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (33.8 °C / 92.8 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-5.7 °C / -10.2 F).

Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 44% 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%

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.46 / 0.47 Watt
Ocioso	5.7 / 7.8 / 8.7 Watt
Carga	21 / 19 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

Tempo de Execução da Bateria


WiFi Websurfing (Edge 40)		6h 05min

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing
Dell Latitude 3189 Pentium N4200, HD Graphics 505, 42 Wh	607 min +66%
Medion Akoya E2215T Z8350, HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 38 Wh	474 min +30%
ODYS Vario Pro 12 Z8350, HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Wh	453 min +24%
Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T Pentium N4200, HD Graphics 505, 42 Wh	365 min
HP Pavilion 11-k103ng x360 N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 32 Wh	286 min -22%

Pro

+ Tela IPS

+ Muito espaço de armazenamento

+ USB Tipo C

Contra

- Duração média da bateria

- Caro

The Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T, provided by notebooksbilliger.de.

Com o VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH, a Asus oferece um conversível no formato de 11,6 polegadas. O processador incorporado do Apollo Lake oferece desempenho suficiente para aplicativos do escritório e áreas da Internet. Dado que o decodificador integrado na GPU permite reproduzir todos os formatos de vídeo habituais, o computador pode ser usado como um reprodutor de vídeo silencioso para a TV em casa.

A tela deixa uma boa impressão confusa. A Asus oferece uma tela de alto contraste com ângulos de visão estáveis, cujo brilho resulta ser um pouco baixo.

O VivoBook Flip 12 é destinado principalmente para uso em casa.

Graças ao disco rígido de 1 TB, o pequeno computador não é escasso de espaço de armazenamento. No entanto, um SSD de pouca capacidade teria sido a melhor escolha. Especialmente em computadores que possuem CPUs fracos, a diferença entre um SSD e HDD é considerável no uso diário. Os usuários que desejem mudar para um SSD devem fazê-lo sozinhos. No entanto, esta troca não é tão fácil. Infelizmente, a Asus não possui variantes do VivoBook equipadas com SSDs em suas ofertas.

A duração da bateria é média no melhor dos casos: Em nosso teste WLAN, o dispositivo atinge uma autonomia de 6:05 h. Se o aparelho é usado exclusivamente na sala de estar em casa, a duração da bateria é completamente suficiente. Mas se o aparelho deve ser usado longe de casa, como na escola ou na faculdade, você sempre precisa levar a fonte de alimentação. O Dell Latitude 3189, que está equipado com a mesma plataforma de hardware e capacidade da bateria, dura boas quatro horas a mais.

E, finalmente, devemos mencionar o preço da compra. A Asus pede 500 Euros (~ $560) pelo VivoBook, que é um preço bastante elevado para um conversível simples. No entanto, a este respeito, a concorrência não parece ser muito melhor e os modelos comparativos da concorrência estão no mesmo nível de preços.

Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH-BP049T - 06/16/2017 v6 ^(old)
Sascha Mölck

Acabamento

74 / 98 → 75%

Teclado

69%

Mouse

88%

Conectividade

42 / 80 → 52%

Peso

71 / 35-78 → 85%

Bateria

88%

Pantalha

82%

Desempenho do jogos

48 / 68 → 71%

Desempenho da aplicação

46 / 87 → 52%

Temperatura

88%

Ruído

92%

Audio

50 / 91 → 55%

Camera

40 / 85 → 47%

Médio

68%

79%

Convertible - Médio equilibrado

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Asus VivoBook Flip 12 TP203NAH (N4200, HD)

Sascha Mölck, 2017-06-18 (Update: 2017-06-21)