Breve Análise do Portátil Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA: Também causa uma boa impressão com Ryzen
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 81.2 % v7 (old) | 02/2020 | Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T R7 3700U, Vega 10 | 1.4 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 88.4 % v6 (old) | 10/2024 | Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE R7 3700U, Vega 10 | 1.9 kg | 19.9 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
| 79.7 % v6 (old) | 08/2019 | Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 R7 3700U, Vega 10 | 1.8 kg | 19.5 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
| 80.9 % v7 (old) | 01/2020 | MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US i5-10210U, GeForce MX250 | 1.2 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 77.8 % v7 (old) | 01/2020 | HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng i7-1065G7, GeForce MX250 | 1.6 kg | 18 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 |
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (18.4 - 142, n=14, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (22.5 - 207, n=14, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 78 %
iluminação com acumulador: 263 cd/m²
Contraste: 1124:1 (Preto: 0.225 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.89 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.9
ΔE Greyscale 6.33 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
91% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
67.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
92.3% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
66.7% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.52
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T CEC PA LM140LF-3L03, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE NV156FHM-N49, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 LG Philips 156WFC, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng AUO543D, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -39% | -42% | -1% | 3% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 66.7 | 39.88 -40% | 37.31 -44% | 64.2 -4% | 66.5 0% |
| sRGB Coverage | 92.3 | 58.6 -37% | 56.2 -39% | 94.8 3% | 98.4 7% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 67.5 | 41.2 -39% | 38.55 -43% | 65.4 -3% | 68.2 1% |
| Response Times | 878% | 8% | 18891% | -42% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 36 ? | 41.2 ? -14% | 28.4 ? 21% | 39.2 ? -9% | 60.8 ? -69% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 26 ? | 32.8 ? -26% | 27.2 ? -5% | 35.6 ? -37% | 29.6 ? -14% |
| PWM Frequency | 44 ? | 1220 ? 2673% | 25000 ? 56718% | ||
| Screen | -16% | -22% | 30% | 14% | |
| Brightness middle | 253 | 318 26% | 253.6 0% | 324.1 28% | 395 56% |
| Brightness | 245 | 297 21% | 227 -7% | 301 23% | 375 53% |
| Brightness Distribution | 78 | 89 14% | 84 8% | 87 12% | 91 17% |
| Black Level * | 0.225 | 0.17 24% | 0.27 -20% | 0.22 2% | 0.26 -16% |
| Contrast | 1124 | 1871 66% | 939 -16% | 1473 31% | 1519 35% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 8.89 | 5.5 38% | 6.05 32% | 1.63 82% | 5.92 33% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.56 | 21 -361% | 14.03 -208% | 4.25 7% | 9.79 -115% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.9 | 5.1 -4% | 4.97 -1% | 1.42 71% | 0.91 81% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.33 | 1.8 72% | 3.2 49% | 2.2 65% | 6.69 -6% |
| Gamma | 2.52 87% | 2.12 104% | 2 110% | 2.26 97% | 2.78 79% |
| CCT | 6745 96% | 6257 104% | 6820 95% | 6887 94% | 7596 86% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 60 | 37.6 -37% | 35.5 -41% | 60.2 0% | 63 5% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 91 | 58.2 -36% | 55.6 -39% | 95 4% | 98 8% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 274% /
138% | -19% /
-22% | 6307% /
3353% | -8% /
5% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 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. » 59 % 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 | ||
| 36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17 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. » 46 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 44 Hz | ≤ 20 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 44 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 20 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 44 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3604 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4842 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3851 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A | Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG | Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G | MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ | HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02 | Average SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 11% | -3% | 15% | 108% | 10% | |
| Write 4K | 118.8 | 129.5 9% | 105.9 -11% | 107.7 -9% | 181.6 53% | 110 ? -7% |
| Read 4K | 41.62 | 41.23 -1% | 36.56 -12% | 39.73 -5% | 57.4 38% | 40.6 ? -2% |
| Write Seq | 796 | 811 2% | 1165 46% | 926 16% | 1982 149% | 677 ? -15% |
| Read Seq | 1101 | 1145 4% | 423.2 -62% | 1014 -8% | 1899 72% | 1104 ? 0% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 234.7 | 314.1 34% | 332.1 41% | 343.6 46% | 509 117% | 438 ? 87% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 313.8 | 356.2 14% | 229.3 -27% | 499.1 59% | 545 74% | 338 ? 8% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 842 | 839 0% | 1460 73% | 1033 23% | 3072 265% | 860 ? 2% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 1645 | 2042 24% | 472.5 -71% | 1604 -2% | 3281 99% | 1786 ? 9% |
| AS SSD | 5% | -9% | -25% | 79% | 6% | |
| Seq Read | 1417 | 1698 20% | 398.9 -72% | 1061 -25% | 2762 95% | 1471 ? 4% |
| Seq Write | 781 | 740 -5% | 884 13% | 953 22% | 2493 219% | 612 ? -22% |
| 4K Read | 37.03 | 39.18 6% | 34.54 -7% | 35.59 -4% | 52.1 41% | 40.2 ? 9% |
| 4K Write | 80.1 | 87.7 9% | 82.1 2% | 87 9% | 147.5 84% | 108.8 ? 36% |
| 4K-64 Read | 740 | 764 3% | 647 -13% | 769 4% | 1473 99% | 794 ? 7% |
| 4K-64 Write | 748 | 669 -11% | 985 32% | 733 -2% | 1456 95% | 764 ? 2% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.047 | 0.04 15% | 0.072 -53% | 0.084 -79% | 0.094 -100% | 0.046 ? 2% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.045 | 0.036 20% | 0.047 -4% | 0.136 -202% | 0.03 33% | 0.03533 ? 21% |
| Score Read | 918 | 973 6% | 721 -21% | 911 -1% | 1801 96% | 981 ? 7% |
| Score Write | 906 | 831 -8% | 1155 27% | 916 1% | 1853 105% | 867 ? -4% |
| Score Total | 2270 | 2261 0% | 2279 0% | 2294 1% | 4568 101% | 2315 ? 2% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 8% /
7% | -6% /
-6% | -5% /
-8% | 94% /
91% | 8% /
8% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 3449 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 11126 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2028 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 93.8 | 60.7 | 49.72 | 17.4 |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 68.7 | 58.6 | 36 | 30.2 |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 16.1 | 8.1 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28 / 28 / 28 dB |
| Carga |
| 36.8 / 39 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: 29.8 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37 °C / 99 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 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.4 °C / 74 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 29.4 °C / 84.9 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 (-1.1 °C / -2 F).
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (69.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 37% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 55% 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 | 0.32 / 0.36 Watt |
| Ocioso | 3.6 / 7.2 / 10.8 Watt |
| Carga |
38 / 45.2 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T R7 3700U, Vega 10, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE R7 3700U, Vega 10, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 R7 3700U, Vega 10, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US i5-10210U, GeForce MX250, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng i7-1065G7, GeForce MX250, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 6% | 6% | -16% | -21% | -3% | -18% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.6 | 4.2 -17% | 4.2 -17% | 4.2 -17% | 4 -11% | 4.73 ? -31% | 4.44 ? -23% |
| Idle Average * | 7.2 | 7.92 -10% | 6.8 6% | 5.9 18% | 7 3% | 7.61 ? -6% | 7.55 ? -5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 10.8 | 8.16 24% | 7 35% | 7.2 33% | 10 7% | 9.63 ? 11% | 9.45 ? 12% |
| Load Average * | 38 | 29 24% | 36.5 4% | 63.4 -67% | 62 -63% | 33.3 ? 12% | 45.8 ? -21% |
| Load Maximum * | 45.2 | 42.2 7% | 44 3% | 67.4 -49% | 64 -42% | 45.1 ? -0% | 68.4 ? -51% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 37.9 | 53.5 | 58 |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T R7 3700U, Vega 10, 47 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad E595-20NF0000GE R7 3700U, Vega 10, 45 Wh | Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585 R7 3700U, Vega 10, 42 Wh | MSI Modern 14 A10RB-459US i5-10210U, GeForce MX250, 50 Wh | HP Pavilion 14-ce3040ng i7-1065G7, GeForce MX250, 41 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -8% | -17% | 1% | -30% | 45% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1068 | 941 -12% | 856 -20% | 986 -8% | 694 -35% | 1750 ? 64% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 404 | 460 14% | 421 4% | 515 27% | 368 -9% | 726 ? 80% |
| Load | 125 | 92 -26% | 81 -35% | 105 -16% | 69 -45% | 115.4 ? -8% |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto - Design bonito com CPU mais lenta
Com o Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA, os compradores adquirem um portátil com um ótimo design e fácil de transportar por um preço comparativamente baixo. A carcaça parece de alta qualidade e vários elementos decorativos dão a impressão de que é mais caro. Além disso, há o recurso do teclado numérico integrado, que acabou sendo uma adição útil ao teclado. A configuração de portas é sólida e, embora o Wi-Fi 5 não seja um grande salto, as conexões sem fio ainda são rápidas e atualizadas.
O ZenBook 14 é um portátil sólido com um design atraente. Infelizmente, ele só pode explorar o poder de sua CPU moderadamente.
No entanto, os possíveis compradores não devem se limitar a esse modelo com a Ryzen 7 3700U, mas podem optar com confiança pela próxima CPU mais fraca. Como o sistema de resfriamento pode suportar o desempenho pleno apenas durante um curto período, o desempenho a longo prazo está bem abaixo das expectativas que estabelecemos para este processador. Como a memória não pode ser atualizada, seu tamanho também precisa ser levado em consideração na determinação de um modelo adequado antes da compra. Se você está interessado principalmente no design e nos números, e não necessariamente no desempenho real, ainda pode comprar este portátil sem hesitar.
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
- 02/11/2020 v7 (old)
Mike Wobker
Price comparison
