Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo Flex 14 (2019, Core i5-8265U) - Um conversível médio a um bom preço
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Average of class Convertible (17.7 - 209, n=29, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Average of class Convertible (22.6 - 263, n=28, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 89 %
iluminação com acumulador: 284.2 cd/m²
Contraste: 580:1 (Preto: 0.49 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.59 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.57
ΔE Greyscale 3.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
59% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
38% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
41.32% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
59% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
40% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.123
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL BOE BOE06F2, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng InfoVision, M133NVF3 R2, IPS, 120 Hz, 13.3", 1920x1080 | Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 NV14N4H, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T AUO B140HAN04.0, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 AUO, B156HAN06.1, a-Si TFT-LCD, LCM, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 55% | 0% | -1% | -2% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 40 | 63 58% | 40.57 1% | 39.42 -1% | 38.73 -3% |
| sRGB Coverage | 59 | 90.8 54% | 58.6 -1% | 59.2 0% | 58.3 -1% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 41.32 | 63.8 54% | 41.91 1% | 40.73 -1% | 40.02 -3% |
| Response Times | 358% | -46% | -10% | -13% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 30.4 ? | 35 ? -15% | 58.8 ? -93% | 38 ? -25% | 42 ? -38% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 32.8 ? | 22 ? 33% | 33.2 ? -1% | 30.8 ? 6% | 29 ? 12% |
| PWM Frequency | 352.1 ? | 4065 ? 1055% | 198.4 ? -44% | ||
| Screen | 55% | -5% | 12% | 34% | |
| Brightness middle | 284.2 | 633 123% | 193.6 -32% | 255.5 -10% | 221 -22% |
| Brightness | 271 | 675 149% | 181 -33% | 242 -11% | 224 -17% |
| Brightness Distribution | 89 | 75 -16% | 78 -12% | 87 -2% | 89 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.49 | 0.55 -12% | 0.17 65% | 0.29 41% | 0.12 76% |
| Contrast | 580 | 1151 98% | 1139 96% | 881 52% | 1842 218% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.59 | 3.12 32% | 6.99 -52% | 4.18 9% | 4.12 10% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 18.03 | 6.37 65% | 23.58 -31% | 19.15 -6% | 6.41 64% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.57 | 1.83 60% | 4.86 -6% | 3.8 17% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.9 | 3.89 -0% | 5.7 -46% | 2.2 44% | 3.4 13% |
| Gamma | 2.123 104% | 2.39 92% | 2.12 104% | 2.05 107% | 2.54 87% |
| CCT | 6679 97% | 6476 100% | 5845 111% | 6599 98% | 6893 94% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 38 | 59 55% | 37.6 -1% | 37.5 -1% | 37 -3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 59 | 91 54% | 59.1 0% | 58 -2% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 156% /
109% | -17% /
-12% | 0% /
7% | 6% /
20% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 32.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 21.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 87 % 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 | ||
| 30.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18.4 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. » 37 % 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 | 352.1 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 352.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 352.1 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. 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. | |||
| wPrime 2.10 - 1024m | |
| Dell Latitude 7400 2-in-1 | |
| Average of class Convertible (84.3 - 1260, n=5, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i5-8265U (371 - 433, n=2) | |
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3438 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4852 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3896 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ | HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG | Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 SK Hynix BC501 NVMe 256 GB | Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN | Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -36% | -36% | -67% | -45% | |
| Seq Read | 2533 | 1412 -44% | 576 -77% | 437.9 -83% | 1402 -45% |
| Seq Write | 1438 | 540 -62% | 471.6 -67% | 350.3 -76% | 577 -60% |
| 4K Read | 51.7 | 32.24 -38% | 39.48 -24% | 23.31 -55% | 31.89 -38% |
| 4K Write | 109.4 | 74.7 -32% | 112.4 3% | 64.7 -41% | 117.6 7% |
| 4K-64 Read | 771 | 567 -26% | 522 -32% | 234.3 -70% | 278.1 -64% |
| 4K-64 Write | 1268 | 700 -45% | 416.5 -67% | 279.4 -78% | 331.9 -74% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.053 | 0.049 8% | 0.046 13% | 0.079 -49% | 0.079 -49% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.034 | 0.048 -41% | 0.032 6% | 0.056 -65% | 0.03 12% |
| Score Read | 1076 | 741 -31% | 619 -42% | 301 -72% | 450 -58% |
| Score Write | 1521 | 829 -45% | 576 -62% | 379 -75% | 507 -67% |
| Score Total | 3106 | 1913 -38% | 1520 -51% | 839 -73% | 1157 -63% |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 521 | 773 | 414.4 | 607 | |
| Copy Program MB/s | 253.1 | 344.4 | 364.3 | 228.5 | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 392.9 | 536 | 354 | 420.5 | |
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | -34% | -22% | -58% | -32% | |
| Write 4K | 136.5 | 88.3 -35% | 111.8 -18% | 66.5 -51% | 132.3 -3% |
| Read 4K | 45.74 | 34.84 -24% | 42.6 -7% | 24.65 -46% | 35.38 -23% |
| Write Seq | 740 | 716 | 413.2 | 592 | |
| Read Seq | 985 | 1107 | 465.2 | 1186 | |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 380.5 | 313.7 -18% | 451.5 19% | 227 -40% | 323 -15% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 437.5 | 243.1 -44% | 316.8 -28% | 188.4 -57% | 289.2 -34% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1502 | 846 -44% | 809 -46% | 439.9 -71% | 593 -61% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 3357 | 1783 -47% | 1610 -52% | 533 -84% | 1569 -53% |
| Write 4K Q8T8 | 1435 | 305.7 -79% | |||
| Read 4K Q8T8 | 572 | 698 22% | |||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -35% /
-35% | -29% /
-31% | -63% /
-64% | -39% /
-40% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1832 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 7359 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 991 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| The Witcher 3 | |
| 1024x768 The Witcher 3 low | |
| Average of class Convertible (22 - 354, n=46, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel UHD Graphics 620 (8.8 - 50.9, n=64) | |
| 1366x768 The Witcher 3 medium | |
| Average of class Convertible (28 - 257, n=40, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel UHD Graphics 620 (8 - 27.9, n=29) | |
| 1920x1080 The Witcher 3 high | |
| Average of class Convertible (16 - 155.3, n=44, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel UHD Graphics 620 (4.2 - 13.5, n=17) | |
| 1920x1080 The Witcher 3 ultra | |
| Average of class Convertible (10 - 123.3, n=47, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel UHD Graphics 620 (2.97 - 5.2, n=7) | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 40 | 27 | 19 | 7 |
| Farming Simulator 17 (2016) | 52 | 41 | 23 | 13 |
| Rocket League (2017) | 42 | 30 | 23 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.4 / 28.4 / 29.1 dB |
| Carga |
| 33.8 / 37.7 dB |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 28.4 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.6 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 19.6 to 60 °C for the class Convertible.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 45.8 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.5 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 30.3 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 25.6 °C / 78.1 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(+) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28 °C / 82.4 F (+2.4 °C / 4.3 F).
Lenovo Flex 14IWL audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 28% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
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%
| desligado | 5.3 / 4.8 Watt |
| Ocioso | 9.4 / 13.3 / 13.9 Watt |
| Carga |
39.7 / 46.5 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng R7 3700U, Vega 10, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG, IPS, 120 Hz, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, SK Hynix BC501 NVMe 256 GB, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 i5-8550U, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7, a-Si TFT-LCD, LCM, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 37% | 32% | 45% | -2% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 9.4 | 3.2 66% | 3.4 64% | 3.3 65% | 3.9 59% |
| Idle Average * | 13.3 | 2.8 79% | 6.4 52% | 5.2 61% | 6.7 50% |
| Idle Maximum * | 13.9 | 12.4 11% | 7.8 44% | 5.6 60% | 8.7 37% |
| Load Average * | 39.7 | 24.2 39% | 36.7 8% | 32.9 17% | 74 -86% |
| Load Maximum * | 46.5 | 50 -8% | 49.3 -6% | 35.2 24% | 79 -70% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Flex 14IWL i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | HP Envy x360 13-ar0601ng R7 3700U, Vega 10, 53 Wh | Dell Inspiron 14 5000 5482 2-in-1 i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, 42 Wh | Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP412UA-DB51T i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 42 Wh | Acer Spin 5 SP515-51GN-80A3 i5-8550U, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 48 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 10% | -6% | -7% | -8% | |
| Reader / Idle | 813 | 632 -22% | 742 -9% | 759 -7% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 623 | 437 -30% | 429 -31% | 578 -7% | 373 -40% |
| Load | 72 | 130 81% | 87 21% | 88 22% |
Pro
Contra
Verdict - Good, but there are better options
O Lenovo Flex 14 deixa uma impressão confusa. Suas áreas mais fortes estão na duração da bateria e na velocidade de armazenamento. É difícil encontrar um portátil com uma unidade NVMe no preço de US$800, e o fato de o Flex 14 durar o dia inteiro com uma carga é a cereja no topo do bolo. No entanto, o Flex 14 compromete o teclado, um corpo de plástico e uma tela medíocre.
O Flex 14 talvez seja mais adequado para estudantes em busca de um conversível de baixo custo que não se importe em sacrificar no teclado, qualidade de construção e brilho da tela. Existem opções semelhantes disponíveis a um preço mais baixo (como o Asus VivoBook Flip 14). Gastar um pouco mais pode render o superior Yoga 730 ou ThinkPad X390 Yoga, ambos os quais superam o Flex 14 em todas as áreas. O HP Envy x360 13 também é uma opção viável; por US$ 100 a 200 a mais, o Envy x360 garante uma tela mais brilhante, teclado melhor e melhor desempenho gráfico, apesar de sacrificar algumas horas de duração da bateria.
É difícil pegar o Flex 14. Embora não falhe em nenhuma categoria, ele também não se destaca em nenhuma. O Flex 14 é um tipo de portátil "poli funcional, mestre de nenhum" e não se destaca de nenhuma maneira significativa.
Lenovo Flex 14IWL
- 07/10/2019 v6 (old)
Sam Medley
Price comparison
