Breve Análise do Portátil Huawei Matebook X Pro (i5-8250U, MX150)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 | |
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD | |
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 | |
| Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 | |
| Huawei MateBook X | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 84 %
iluminação com acumulador: 442.7 cd/m²
Contraste: 1428:1 (Preto: 0.31 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.24 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.11
ΔE Greyscale 9.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
61.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
67.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
95.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
65.9% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 1.42
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 Tianma XM, IPS, 13.9", 3000x2000 | Huawei MateBook X Chi Mei CMN8201 / P130ZDZ-EF1, , 13.3", 2160x1440 | Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD ID: Sharp SHP148B, Name: LQ133D1, Dell P/N: 8XDHY, IPS, 13.3", 3840x2160 | Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T Chi Mei CMN14D2 / N140HCE-EN1, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 APPA033, IPS, 13.3", 2560x1600 | Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 ID: MEI96A2, Name: Panasonic VVX14T092N00, IPS, 13.5", 2256x1504 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 0% | 4% | 1% | 28% | 2% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 65.9 | 65.8 0% | 68.9 5% | 65.6 0% | 99.2 51% | 67.8 3% |
| sRGB Coverage | 95.2 | 96.2 1% | 98.4 3% | 97.4 2% | 99.9 5% | 94.3 -1% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 67.6 | 66.8 -1% | 69.5 3% | 67.8 0% | 87.1 29% | 69.5 3% |
| Response Times | 12% | -72% | 14% | -10% | -36% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 40.4 ? | 33 ? 18% | 69.6 ? -72% | 30 ? 26% | 42.8 ? -6% | 50.8 ? -26% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 25.6 ? | 24 ? 6% | 44 ? -72% | 25 ? 2% | 28.8 ? -13% | 37.2 ? -45% |
| PWM Frequency | 3759 ? | |||||
| Screen | 9% | -5% | -30% | 21% | 9% | |
| Brightness middle | 442.7 | 408 -8% | 478.5 8% | 377 -15% | 588 33% | 384.2 -13% |
| Brightness | 428 | 395 -8% | 466 9% | 339 -21% | 561 31% | 378 -12% |
| Brightness Distribution | 84 | 88 5% | 86 2% | 76 -10% | 92 10% | 90 7% |
| Black Level * | 0.31 | 0.45 -45% | 0.43 -39% | 0.4 -29% | 0.45 -45% | 0.36 -16% |
| Contrast | 1428 | 907 -36% | 1113 -22% | 943 -34% | 1307 -8% | 1067 -25% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.24 | 1.55 31% | 3.09 -38% | 3.33 -49% | 1.7 24% | 1.8 20% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.19 | 2.19 70% | 5.94 17% | 8.02 -12% | 3.5 51% | 4.2 42% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.11 | 2.06 -86% | 3.5 -215% | |||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 9.7 | 1.91 80% | 2.4 75% | 4.89 50% | 1.9 80% | 1.2 88% |
| Gamma | 1.42 155% | 2.34 94% | 2.063 107% | 2.37 93% | 2.33 94% | 2.21 100% |
| CCT | 6227 104% | 6491 100% | 6883 94% | 7620 85% | 6738 96% | 6708 97% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 61.6 | 61 -1% | 69.47 13% | 62 1% | 77.92 26% | 63.7 3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 95 | 96 1% | 98.36 4% | 98 3% | 99.94 5% | 94.2 -1% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 7% /
8% | -24% /
-12% | -5% /
-19% | 13% /
18% | -8% /
2% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 11.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 14 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. » 58 % 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 | ||
| 40.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 21.2 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. » 60 % 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 not detected |  | ||
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. | |||
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 10 - Score | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD | |
| HP EliteBook x360 1020 G2 | |
| Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T | |
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3478 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4747 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4339 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3445 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Huawei MateBook X LITEON CB1-SD256 | HP EliteBook x360 1020 G2 Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Microsoft Surface Book 2 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 Apple SSD AP0128 | Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | -22% | 32% | 2% | 3% | 8% | |
| Write 4K | 116.5 | 68.1 -42% | 142.4 22% | 140.6 21% | 16.02 -86% | 121.4 4% |
| Read 4K | 42.18 | 28.95 -31% | 44.08 5% | 43.62 3% | 22.9 -46% | 33.42 -21% |
| Write Seq | 1079 | 529 -51% | 1520 41% | 343.3 -68% | 722 -33% | 385.3 -64% |
| Read Seq | 1030 | 711 -31% | 1351 31% | 1452 41% | 1807 75% | 1958 90% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 225.7 | 306.4 36% | 436.6 93% | 344.4 53% | 416.5 85% | 375.7 66% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 302.9 | 501 65% | 426.6 41% | 457.2 51% | 538 78% | 364.1 20% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1174 | 496.9 -58% | 1572 34% | 344.3 -71% | 733 -38% | 1069 -9% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 3394 | 1297 -62% | 3112 -8% | 2885 -15% | 3121 -8% | 2564 -24% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 3782 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 33063 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 9120 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2507 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 162 | 86.2 | 74.2 | 27.9 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 18 | |||
| Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) | 43 | 38 | 20 | 17 |
| Overwatch (2016) | 95.2 | 43 | 25.1 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 27.9 / 27.9 / 27.9 dB |
| Carga |
| 36.2 / 45.2 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: 27.9 dB(A) | ||
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | Dell XPS 13 9370 FHD i5 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 Iris Plus Graphics 640, i5-7360U, Apple SSD AP0128 | Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Toshiba THNSN0128GTYA | HP EliteBook x360 1020 G2 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -5% | 2% | -2% | 4% | 5% | |
| off / environment * | 27.9 | 30 -8% | 29.1 -4% | 30.2 -8% | 28.2 -1% | 28.3 -1% |
| Idle Minimum * | 27.9 | 30 -8% | 29.1 -4% | 30.2 -8% | 28.2 -1% | 28.3 -1% |
| Idle Average * | 27.9 | 30 -8% | 29.1 -4% | 30.2 -8% | 28.2 -1% | 28.3 -1% |
| Idle Maximum * | 27.9 | 33.1 -19% | 29.1 -4% | 30.2 -8% | 29 -4% | 29.3 -5% |
| Load Average * | 36.2 | 37.6 -4% | 32.2 11% | 32.9 9% | 30.3 16% | 32.2 11% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 45 | |||||
| Load Maximum * | 45.2 | 37.6 17% | 37.3 17% | 39.3 13% | 39.3 13% | 34.5 24% |
* ... smaller is better
(-) 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 47 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 3.2 °C / 38 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 5.3 °C / 42 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.4 °C / 93.9 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (-6.1 °C / -11 F).
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 46% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% 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 | 0.59 / 0.62 Watt |
| Ocioso | 3.5 / 8.9 / 12.3 Watt |
| Carga |
54.2 / 52.1 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 3000x2000, 13.9" | Huawei MateBook X i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, LITEON CB1-SD256, , 2160x1440, 13.3" | Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G, IPS, 3840x2160, 13.3" | Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba THNSN0128GTYA, IPS, 2256x1504, 13.5" | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 i5-7360U, Iris Plus Graphics 640, Apple SSD AP0128, IPS, 2560x1600, 13.3" | Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 2% | 3% | 32% | 20% | 2% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.5 | 4.6 -31% | 5 -43% | 3.2 9% | 3.7 -6% | 4.5 -29% |
| Idle Average * | 8.9 | 11 -24% | 8.3 7% | 6.5 27% | 5.2 42% | 7.8 12% |
| Idle Maximum * | 12.3 | 12 2% | 8.8 28% | 6.8 45% | 7.6 38% | 8.1 34% |
| Load Average * | 54.2 | 39.5 27% | 46.4 14% | 28.2 48% | 41.6 23% | 52 4% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 42.4 | |||||
| Load Maximum * | 52.1 | 34.6 34% | 48.6 7% | 36 31% | 50.5 3% | 59 -13% |
* ... smaller is better
| Huawei Matebook X Pro i5 i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, 57.4 Wh | Huawei MateBook X i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 40 Wh | Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 52 Wh | Microsoft Surface Laptop i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 i5-7360U, Iris Plus Graphics 640, 54.5 Wh | Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, 48 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -25% | -23% | 3% | -10% | -7% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1243 | 512 -59% | 819 -34% | 1351 9% | 1367 10% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 557 | 337 -39% | 465 -17% | 602 8% | 681 22% | 485 -13% |
| Load | 133 | 162 22% | 109 -18% | 124 -7% | 78 -41% | 108 -19% |
Pro
Contra
A Huawei conseguiu criar uma fatia significativa do mercado de smartphones com seus smartphones bem recebidos e estamos começando a ver esse mesmo nível de qualidade e cuidado com a segunda geração do MateBook X. Em vez de ir cegamente por um design mais fino somente pela aparência, o MateBook X Pro se atreve a ser um pouco mais grosso do que seu antecessor em troca de gráficos discretos, uma bateria maior e um desempenho mais rápido que os usuários realmente podem sentir. O resultado final é um sistema muito equilibrado em design e potência. A Huawei só recentemente entrou no mercado mundial de portáteis há apenas um ano, mas este dispositivo já parece um produto de um fabricante veterano a par das famílias XPS, Spectre e Zenbook.
É claro que a Huawei precisa fazer mais do que apenas ser comparável à concorrência. É aí que o preço muito agressivo entra em jogo, dado que o MateBook X Pro, de nível básico, com CPU i5-8250U e gráficos integrados é vendido por $1.200, mais um vale-presente de $300. Ao todo, os usuários estariam economizando centenas quando comparado ao XPS 13 ou Spectre 13. A faixa de $900 é preenchida por portáteis tradicionais como o IdeaPad, a série Yoga 700, VivoBook, Inspiron, ou Envy onde o MateBook X Pro é, sem dúvida, uma opção mai potente que todos os mencionados anteriormente, em termos de qualidade. Os usuários que desejam gráficos dedicados da Nvidia, no entanto, terão que gastar $1.500 para obter tudo o que o portátil carro-chefe oferece.
Ainda há muito espaço para melhorias no que esperamos que aconteça para um MateBook X teórico de terceira geração. Por um lado, os marcos estreitos, peso leve e tela de vidro Gorilla Glass estão apenas gritando por um formato de 360 graus, ao estilo XPS 2-em-1 ou Yoga 920. O posicionamento da webcam não é melhor do que na série XPS. Também houve alguns recortes ocultos em termos de desempenho, como mostram os testes de estresse do processador acima, e o uso astuto de uma GPU GeForce MX150 'Max-Q' mais lenta, em vez da GeForce MX150 totalmente equipada. A falta de leitores de cartão pode irritar os criadores de conteúdo, enquanto os botões do trackpad integrado são suaves e inferiores à mesma solução na série MacBook. Se a Huawei incluísse os recursos NFC, IR e SIM, o MateBook X Pro poderia ter atraído ainda mais os usuários corporativos que valorizam a segurança e conveniência adicionais.
Sólido design digno do título de carro-chefe e uma imensa melhoria em relação ao MateBook X original, em termos de potência. As promoções pesadas do fabricante tornam o MateBook X Pro muito atraente para qualquer um que esteja considerando um Ultrabook por menos de $1000 USD. É essencialmente um portátil de alta qualidade por um preço médio.
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
- 05/20/2018 v6 (old)
Allen Ngo
Price comparison
