Breve Análise do Tablet Samsung Galaxy View

Name: Samsung Galaxy View
Brand: Samsung

Gigante branco. Graças à sua tela de 18,4-polegadas, o Samsung Galaxy View se destaca entre a maioria dos tablets. Isto, no entanto, também afeta o peso e o tamanho. Onde você poderia usar esse tablet e será que consegue convencer em termos de tecnologia?

Andreas Kilian, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 08/05/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Tablet Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of Samsung Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Samsung Galaxy View

Processador

Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa 8 x 1.6 GHz, Cortex-A53

Placa gráfica

ARM Mali-T720 MP2

Memória

2048 MB

Pantalha

18.40 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 120 PPI, tela táctil capacitiva, IPS, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB

, 25.06 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector estéreo de 3,5 mm, Card Reader: microSD de até 128 GB, Brightness Sensor

Funcionamento em rede

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.1, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 11.9 x 451.8 x 275.8

Bateria

64.6 Wh, 5700 mAh

Sistema Operativo

Android 5.1 Lollipop

Camera

Webcam: Full-HD (foco fixo f/2.2, 1080p vídeo @ 30 fps)

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Alto falantes estéreo, Teclado: virtual, Adaptador de força, Microsoft Apps, Galaxy Apps, Smart Manager, SideSync, S Console, Family Square, 24 Meses Garantia, fanless

peso

2.65 kg, Suprimento de energia: 303 g

Preço

649 Euro

Links

Samsung página inicial
Samsung 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

Samsung Galaxy View Apple iPad Pro 12.9 Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3 Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo DIN A4 ❌

	Samsung Galaxy View	Chuwi Hi12	Wiko Lenny 3	Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge	OnePlus 3
Networking		-78%	-79%	32%	21%
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m	254		44.8 -82%	303 19%	286 13%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m	200	43 -78%	49.2 -75%	290 45%	256 28%


414 cd/m²	414 cd/m²	390 cd/m²
488 cd/m²	468 cd/m²	427 cd/m²
458 cd/m²	451 cd/m²	406 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 488 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 435.1 cd/m² Minimum: 6.74 cd/m²
iluminação: 80 %
iluminação com acumulador: 468 cd/m²
Contraste: 821:1 (Preto: 0.57 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 5.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.45

	Samsung Galaxy View IPS, 1920x1080, 18.4"	Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.1"	Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE Super AMOLED, 2048x1536, 9.7"	Apple iPad Pro 12.9 IPS, 2732x2048, 12.9"	Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L IPS, 2560x1600, 10.1"	Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3 IPS, 2736x1824, 12.3"
Screen		11%	21%	37%	6%	26%
Brightness middle	468	334 -29%	358 -24%	399 -15%	429 -8%	389.2 -17%
Brightness	435	341 -22%	357 -18%	393 -10%	434 0%	392 -10%
Brightness Distribution	80	91 14%	86 8%	92 15%	82 3%	92 15%
Black Level *	0.57			0.22 61%	0.35 39%	0.27 53%
Contrast	821			1814 121%	1226 49%	1441 76%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5	2.84 43%	1.78 64%	2.96 41%	4.61 8%	3.61 28%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	7.3				9.28 -27%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	5.8	2.91 50%	1.38 76%	3 48%	6.64 -14%	3.8 34%
Gamma	2.45 ^90%	2.01 ^109%	2.24 ^98%	2.21 ^100%	2.42 ^91%	2.16 ^102%
CCT	7676 ^85%	6432 ^101%	6366 ^102%	7049 ^92%	6929 ^94%	5969 ^109%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)				71.15		63
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)				97.87		97

* ... 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 8774 (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
22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 12 ms rise
22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 10 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 44 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 22 ms rise
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 20 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. » 64 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	4131 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4134 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	5565 Points +35%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	5152 Points +25%

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	42156 Points
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	184346 Points +337%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	70385 Points +67%

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	3754 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3330 Points -11%
32 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	732 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	721 Points -2%

BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	601 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	733 Points +22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	648 Points +8%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	1091 Points +82%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	872 Points +45%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	486 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	488 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	1385 Points +185%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	8422 Points +1633%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	1886 Points +288%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	1877 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	2095 Points +12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	2867 Points +53%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	6230 Points +232%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	1643 Points -12%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	803 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	808 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	1103 Points +37%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	3282 Points +309%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	1325 Points +65%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	14 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	14 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	29 fps +107%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	59.3 fps +324%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	20 fps +43%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	13 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	14 fps +8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	38 fps +192%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	163.2 fps +1155%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	34 fps +162%

GFXBench 3.0
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	4.7 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4.8 fps +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	17 fps +262%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	80.1 fps +1604%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	18 fps +283%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	4.9 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4.8 fps -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	12 fps +145%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	33.3 fps +580%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	8.5 fps +73%

GFXBench 3.1
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	3.1 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3.1 fps 0%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	83 fps +2577%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	11 fps +255%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	3.4 fps
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3.4 fps 0%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	54.3 fps +1497%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	5.8 fps +71%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	8072 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	8030 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	19867 Points +146%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	33812 Points +319%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	20081 Points +149%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	7457 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	7536 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	20482 Points +175%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	51124 Points +586%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	21327 Points +186%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	11358 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	10424 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	17981 Points +58%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	15473 Points +36%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	16673 Points +47%

Legend

Samsung Galaxy View Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE Samsung Exynos 5433 Octa, ARM Mali-T760 MP6, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Apple iPad Pro 12.9 Apple A9X, Apple A9X / PowerVR Series 7XT, Apple 128 GB (iPad Pro 12.9 NVMe)

Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L Intel Atom x5-Z8500, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 32 GB eMMC Flash

Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3 Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | Octane V2 | WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	11146 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	11603 ms * -4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	6483 ms * +42%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	1499 ms * +87%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	4472 ms * +60%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3	1556 ms * +86%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	4022 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3627 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	6885 Points +71%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	19852 Points +394%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	8197 Points +104%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	69 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	68 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	79 Points +14%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	215 Points +212%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	111 Points +61%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	24.4 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	23.1 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	41.12 Points +69%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	142 Points +482%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	41 Points +68%

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5 | BaseMark OS II

AndroBench 3-5
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	21.35 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	22.57 MB/s +6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	25.56 MB/s +20%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	23.7 MB/s +11%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	10.66 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	11.07 MB/s +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	9.82 MB/s -8%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	10.57 MB/s -1%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	49.97 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	57.9 MB/s +16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	49.37 MB/s -1%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	51 MB/s +2%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	218.8 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	215.9 MB/s -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	248.2 MB/s +13%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	153.7 MB/s -30%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	51 MB/s
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	15.93 MB/s -69%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	77.9 MB/s
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	56.4 MB/s -28%

BaseMark OS II - Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy View	760 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	569 Points -25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE	590 Points -22%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9	2027 Points +167%
Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L	1141 Points +50%

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Configurações	Valor
	high	29 fps
	very low	30 fps

Real Racing 3
	Configurações	Valor
	high	35 fps
	low	58 fps

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


35.1 °C	35.1 °C	36.2 °C
29.2 °C	32.9 °C	36.5 °C
31.4 °C	33.4 °C	35.5 °C

Máximo: 36.5 °C
Médio: 33.9 °C


33.9 °C	35.1 °C	35.8 °C
41.2 °C	33.9 °C	29.3 °C
40.3 °C	34.7 °C	31.4 °C

Máximo: 41.2 °C
Médio: 35.1 °C

alimentação elétrica 37.5 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.4 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 30 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.2 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.2 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.04 / 0.1 Watt
Ocioso	4.73 / 17.09 / 17.19 Watt
Carga	18.71 / 20.41 Watt


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

	Samsung Galaxy View 64.6 Wh	Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo 11 Wh	Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE 22 Wh	Apple iPad Pro 12.9 39 Wh	Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L 23 Wh
Power Consumption		77%	59%	38%	7%
Idle Minimum *	4.73	1.68 64%	2.3 51%	2.69 43%	8.6 -82%
Idle Average *	17.09	2.2 87%	4.5 74%	10.95 36%	11.26 34%
Idle Maximum *	17.19	2.33 86%	5 71%	11.14 35%	11.3 34%
Load Average *	18.71	4.09 78%	9.4 50%	11.54 38%	14.57 22%
Load Maximum *	20.41	5.92 71%	10.4 49%	12.8 37%	14.9 27%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria

Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)		17h 06min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 51)		8h 41min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		8h 54min
Carga (máximo brilho)		4h 49min

	Samsung Galaxy View 64.6 Wh	Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo 11 Wh	Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE 22 Wh	Apple iPad Pro 12.9 39 Wh	Lenovo Yoga Tab 3 Pro 10 YT3-X90L 23 Wh	Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3 38 Wh
Battery Runtime		37%	-3%	27%	16%	-27%
Reader / Idle	1026	1615 57%	918 -11%	1933 88%	1261 23%	791 -23%
H.264	534	773 45%	651 22%	630 18%	644 21%
WiFi v1.3	521	546 5%	393 -25%	695 33%	558 7%	488 -6%
Load	289	402 39%	291 1%	195 -33%	323 12%	138 -52%

Pro

+ Tela táctil muito grande

+ Slot Micro-SD veloz

+ USB-OTG e App2SD

+ WLAN veloz

+ Tela brilhante com amplos ângulos de visão

+ Boas durações da bateria

+ Stand integrado...

Contra

- ...que é fixo e somente oferece duas posições

- Carcaça feita de metal feita de plástico duro

- Sem suporte para Miracast ou MHL

- Apenas utilizável no modo paisagem (sem sensor de posição)

- Visão geral do aplicativo de vídeo não muito útil

- Webcam de apenas 2.1 MP

- Botões barulhentos

- Distribuição irregular do brilho

- Aplicativos remotos para modelos selecionados

In review: Samsung Galaxy View (SM-T670). Test model courtesy of Samsung Germany.

O Samsung Galaxy View é um tablet incomum com uma tela táctil singular e extremamente grande de 18,4 polegadas. Também é o aspecto dominante quando você repara na funcionalidade: A mobilidade é afetada pelo peso, dimensões massivas, bem como o stand, que não pode ser removido de forma simples, mas a funcionalidade também é limitada porque você está restrito no modo paisagem e não há uma câmera traseira. Apesar da boa estabilidade, a carcaça ainda não é muito conveniente devido aos materiais de plástico duro, bem como os botões folgados.

A Samsung também ajustou alguns aspectos do software para o Galaxy View, mas eles nem sempre são uma adição útil para a interface do usuário existente do Android. O teclado com um teclado numérico separado é, de fato, muito útil, mas a nova tela inicial com um design de telhas não parece muito sofisticado: os usuários não podem adicionar novos serviços, nem remover links defeituosos.

Os aspectos positivos são o veloz módulo WLAN, as rápidas conexões do slot microSD, bem como as boas durações da bateria, apesar da enorme tela. O aparelho é, portanto, primeiramente interessante para os fanáticos da multimídia à procura de um aparelho que transmita vídeos e que ainda consiga ser carregado até certo grau, é fácil de usar graças aos grandes controles e não precisa de uma tomada tão rápido assim – provavelmente um grupo alvo menor.

Por causa do peso e das grandes dimensões, o Samsung Galaxy View é feito principalmente para os usuários dispostos a sacrificar funcionalidade e mobilidade por uma teça táctil muito grande.

Se você puder viver com uma tela muito menor, deveria dar uma olhada no Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7. Ele é muito mais poderoso, muito mais leve, e também mais sofisticado com uma boa tela AMOLED por um preço muito menor.

Esta é uma versão reduzida da análise original. Você pode ler a análise completa em inglês aqui.

Samsung Galaxy View - 2016-07-20 07/20/2016 v5.1 ^(old)
Andreas Kilian

Acabamento

72%

Teclado

82 / 80 → 100%

Mouse

79%

Conectividade

31 / 65 → 47%

Peso

59 / 40-88 → 40%

Bateria

91%

Pantalha

81%

Desempenho do jogos

15 / 68 → 23%

Desempenho da aplicação

40 / 76 → 53%

Temperatura

89%

Ruído

100%

Audio

69 / 91 → 76%

Camera

55 / 85 → 65%

Médio

66%

71%

Tablet - Médio equilibrado

Price comparison

Editor of the original article: Andreas Osthoff - Managing Editor Business Laptops - 1692 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013

contact me via: LinkedIn

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Tablet Samsung Galaxy View

Andreas Kilian, 2016-08- 5 (Update: 2016-08- 7)