Notebookcheck Logo

Breve análisis del Asus X555DA (A10-8700P, FHD)

Lento y anticuado. La plataforma Carrizo de AMD no ha envejecido bien. Su rendimiento es inferior al de los procesadores de la gama U de Intel y ofrecen peor experiencia y duración de batería.
Asus X555DA-BB11 (X555 Serie)
Procesador
AMD A10-8700P 4 x 1.8 - 3.2 GHz, Carrizo
Adaptador gráfico
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo) - 512 MB VRAM, Núcleo: 626 MHz, Memoría: 667 MHz, DDR3, 15.201.1101.1002
Memoría
8 GB 
, 4 GB soldered + 4 GB DDR3 SODIMM, Dual-Channel, 1066.7 MHz, 9-9-9-24
pantalla
15.60 pulgadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixels 141 PPI, TN LED, Name: AU Optronics B156HTN03.8, ID: AUO38ED, lustroso: no
Placa base
AMD CZ FCH
Disco duro
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB, 1000 GB 
, 5400 rpm
Tarjeta de sonido
AMD Kabini - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexiones
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Conexiones: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD reader
Equipamento de red
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit/s), Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC (ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.0
Unidad óptica
TSSTcorp CDDVDW SU-228HB
Tamaño
Alto x ancho x profundidad (en mm): 25.8 x 382 x 256
Battería
37 Wh Litio-Polimero, 2-cell
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 0.3 MP
Características adicionales
Altavoces: Stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, Luz de Teclado: no, Avast SecureLine, Asus Smart Gesture, AMD Catalyst Control Center, 12 Meses Garantía
Peso
2.132 kg, Suministro de Electricidad: 242 g
Precio
420 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

378 mm 265 mm 30 mm 2.2 kg382 mm 258 mm 26 mm 2.3 kg382 mm 256 mm 25.8 mm 2.1 kg382 mm 258 mm 25.5 mm 2.3 kg382.5 mm 252.5 mm 24.4 mm 2.3 kg379 mm 258 mm 23.95 mm 2.1 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g
SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
 
71.2 MB/s +186%
Asus X555DA-BB11
 
24.9 MB/s
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
 
22.7 MB/s -9%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
 
90.4 MB/s +237%
Asus X555DA-BB11
 
26.8 MB/s
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
 
26.6 MB/s -1%
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
532 MBit/s +170%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
341 MBit/s +73%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
197 MBit/s
iperf3 receive AX12
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
635 MBit/s +86%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
341 MBit/s
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
310 MBit/s -9%
223.2
cd/m²
235.9
cd/m²
222.4
cd/m²
216.4
cd/m²
242.7
cd/m²
220.9
cd/m²
241.6
cd/m²
243.6
cd/m²
244.8
cd/m²
Temperatura del cuarto
tested with X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Máximo: 244.8 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 232.4 cd/m² Minimum: 10.74 cd/m²
iluminación: 88 %
Brillo con batería: 242.7 cd/m²
Contraste: 467:1 (Negro: 0.52 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
52.5% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
33.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
36.29% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
52.7% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
35.12% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.34
Asus X555DA-BB11
TN LED, 15.6", 1920x1080
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Toshiba, TN LED, 15.6", 1366x768
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
BOE NT156WHM-N32, TN LED, 15.6", 1366x768
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
AU Optronics AUO41ED, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080
Asus X555LN-XO112H
AU Optronics B156XW04 V6, TN LED, 15.6", 1366x768
Display
16%
6%
8%
41%
Display P3 Coverage
35.12
40.6
16%
37.39
6%
38.03
8%
49.95
42%
sRGB Coverage
52.7
61.2
16%
56.2
7%
56.5
7%
73.9
40%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
36.29
41.95
16%
38.63
6%
39.29
8%
51.7
42%
Response Times
-39%
-21%
-14%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
42 ?(23.6, 18.4)
68 ?(32, 36)
-62%
58
-38%
44.4 ?(15.2, 29.2)
-6%
Response Time Black / White *
22.4 ?(14.4, 8)
26 ?(20, 6)
-16%
23
-3%
27.2 ?(6.8, 20.4)
-21%
PWM Frequency
217 ?(90)
200 ?(90)
Screen
-40%
-32%
-7%
-86%
Brightness middle
242.7
226
-7%
253
4%
209.7
-14%
189
-22%
Brightness
232
217
-6%
246
6%
193
-17%
184
-21%
Brightness Distribution
88
91
3%
86
-2%
75
-15%
92
5%
Black Level *
0.52
0.58
-12%
0.44
15%
0.19
63%
2.2
-323%
Contrast
467
390
-16%
575
23%
1104
136%
86
-82%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.9
9.84
-101%
9.2
-88%
7.8
-59%
7.77
-59%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
20.3
16.77
17%
17.68
13%
24.1
-19%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.7
11.1
-311%
11.05
-309%
7.3
-170%
8.82
-227%
Gamma
2.34 94%
2.35 94%
2.55 86%
2.39 92%
2.43 91%
CCT
6876 95%
11979 54%
11451 57%
5771 113%
9275 70%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
33.5
39
16%
36
7%
39.3
17%
48
43%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
52.5
61
16%
56
7%
56.5
8%
Media total (Programa/Opciones)
-21% / -29%
-16% / -23%
-4% / -5%
-23% / -51%

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Tiempos de respuesta del display

Los tiempos de respuesta del display muestran lo rápido que puede cambiar la pantalla de un color al siguiente. Tiempos lentos de respuesta pueden llevar a imágenes persistentes alrededor de objetos en movimiento o a displays borrosos. Particularmente los aficionados a los juegos 3D frenéticos deberían usar una pantalla con tiempos de respuesta rápidos.
       Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco
22.4 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada↗ 14.4 ms subida
↘ 8 ms bajada
La pantalla mostró buenos tiempos de respuesta en nuestros tests pero podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones competitivos.
En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 46 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores.
Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es similar al dispositivo testado medio (20.9 ms).
       Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris
42 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada↗ 23.6 ms subida
↘ 18.4 ms bajada
La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta lentos en nuestros tests y podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones.
En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 64 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores.
Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.8 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados.

Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Para atenuar el brillo de pantalla algunos portátiles están encendiendo y apagando la retroiluminación muy rápidamente. Esto se hace a una frecuencia que no debiera detectarse a simple vista. Si la frecuencia es demasiado lenta, la gente sensible podría experimentar problemas visuales, dolores de cabeza e incluso ver parpadeos.
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM no detectado

Comparación: 53 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 8715 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
119 Points +86%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
115 Points +80%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
108 Points +69%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
99 Points +55%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
88 Points +38%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
64 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
35 Points -45%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
27 Points -58%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
288 Points +60%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
257 Points +43%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
234 Points +30%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
223 Points +24%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
206 Points +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
180 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
118 Points -34%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
94 Points -48%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
1.33 Points +60%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
1.28 Points +54%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
1.14 Points +37%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
1.08 Points +30%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
0.98 Points +18%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
0.83 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
0.43 Points -48%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
0.35 Points -58%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
3.19 Points +39%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
2.81 Points +22%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
2.62 Points +14%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
2.49 Points +8%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
2.3 Points
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
2.27 Points -1%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
1.42 Points -38%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
1.17 Points -49%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
9852 Points +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
8672 Points +80%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
7580 Points +58%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
6994 Points +45%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
4808 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
3563 Points -26%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
2911 Points -39%
Rendering Single 32Bit
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel Core i5-6200U
4359 Points +99%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
Intel Core i5-5200U
4134 Points +89%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
3725 Points +70%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
3286 Points +50%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
2192 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel Atom x5-Z8500
1164 Points -47%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
948 Points -57%
wPrime 2.10 - 1024m
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
Intel Core i5-4200U
790 s * -56%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel Core m3-6Y30
788 s * -55%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel Core m7-6Y75
698 s * -38%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD A10-8700P
507 s *

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
4055
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
4808
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
2192
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
14.45 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
2.3 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
0.83 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
98 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
19.23 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
180 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
64 Points
ayuda
PCMark 8
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
4182 Points +79%
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
3178 Points +36%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
2937 Points +26%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
2335 Points
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
1956 Points -16%
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
4231 Points +30%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
3707 Points +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
3246 Points
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
2880 Points -11%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
5275 Points +85%
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
3343 Points +17%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
3234 Points +13%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
2856 Points
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2335 puntos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
2856 puntos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
3246 puntos
ayuda
Asus X555DA-BB11
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Asus X555LN-XO112H
Toshiba MQ01ABF050
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-12%
-13%
12908%
28%
Read Seq
106.9
96.5
-10%
92.1
-14%
522
388%
105.8
-1%
Write Seq
97.5
77.9
-20%
88.5
-9%
476.6
389%
104
7%
Read 512
32.28
20.82
-36%
32.94
2%
399.7
1138%
35.72
11%
Write 512
35.39
19.83
-44%
26.71
-25%
185.4
424%
44.85
27%
Read 4k
0.373
0.342
-8%
0.372
0%
33.12
8779%
0.47
26%
Write 4k
0.636
0.836
31%
0.283
-56%
89.8
14019%
1.044
64%
Read 4k QD32
0.694
0.595
-14%
0.921
33%
400.9
57667%
0.894
29%
Write 4k QD32
0.682
0.706
4%
0.473
-31%
140.2
20457%
1.099
61%
Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Tasa de Transferencia Mínima: 41.5 MB/s
Tasa de Transferencia Máxima: 111.6 MB/s
Tasa de Transferencia Promedio: 78.8 MB/s
Tiempo de Acceso: 18.7 ms
Velocidad de Ráfagas: 140.7 MB/s
Uso de CPU: 3.2 %
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance GPU
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
7564 Points +487%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
2341 Points +82%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1834 Points +42%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
1376 Points +7%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
1288 Points
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
1265 Points -2%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
1206 Points -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
1154 Points -10%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6006U
1090 Points -15%
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410
899 Points -30%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
411 Points -68%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
342 Points -73%
1280x720 Performance Combined
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
7270 Points +744%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
1769 Points +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1525 Points +77%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
1370 Points +59%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
1220 Points +42%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
1191 Points +38%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
1179 Points +37%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6006U
867 Points +1%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
861 Points
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410
850 Points -1%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
441 Points -49%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
361 Points -58%
3DMark
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
38748 Points +861%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
8744 Points +117%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
6597 Points +64%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
6426 Points +59%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
6106 Points +51%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
5769 Points +43%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
5592 Points +39%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
4033 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
1928 Points -52%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
1708 Points -58%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
6100 Points +698%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
1567 Points +105%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
1010 Points +32%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
897 Points +17%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
810 Points +6%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
770 Points +1%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
764 Points
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
762 Points 0%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
281 Points -63%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
225 Points -71%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Graphics
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ
116616 Points +209%
Asus X555LN-XO112H
NVIDIA GeForce 840M, 4210U
85402 Points +126%
Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614
NVIDIA GeForce 820M, 4200U
68464 Points +81%
HP 250 G4 T6P08ES
AMD Radeon R5 M330, 5200U
59371 Points +57%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y75
53318 Points +41%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
Intel HD Graphics 515, 6Y30
51362 Points +36%
HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET
Intel HD Graphics 520, 6200U
51015 Points +35%
Asus X555DA-BB11
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P
37735 Points
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500
23395 Points -38%
Toshiba Satellite Click 10 LX0W-C-104
Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8300
17603 Points -53%
3DMark 11 Performance
1297 puntos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
31586 puntos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
3248 puntos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
666 puntos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
337 puntos
ayuda
BioShock Infinite - 1280x720 Very Low Preset
Asus X555LD-XX283H
GeForce 820M, 4010U, Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 HTS545050A7E680
55.3 fps +52%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
52.4 fps +44%
Lenovo ThinkPad L470-20J5S00C00
HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, SanDisk X400 256GB, SATA (SD8SB8U-256G)
41.4 fps +14%
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
36.3 fps
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
34.6 fps -5%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
28.9 fps -20%
HP Split x2 13-m210eg
HD Graphics 4200, 4210Y, Micron RealSSD C400 MTFDDAT064MAM-1J2 64 GB
24 fps -34%
Dell Venue 10 Pro 5056
HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), Z8500, 128 GB eMMC Flash
20.1 fps -45%
bajomedioaltoultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 36.3
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 28.2
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 17

Ruido

Ocioso
31.6 / 32 / 32.4 dB(A)
Carga
33.3 / 35.5 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distancia)   environment noise: 28.9 dB(A)
Asus X555DA-BB11
Radeon R6 (Carrizo), A10-8700P, Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), A8-7410, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Asus X555LN-XO112H
GeForce 840M, 4210U, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
Asus Vivobook F556UQ-XO626D
GeForce 940MX, 6198DU, Toshiba MQ01ABF050
Noise
2%
3%
-13%
-8%
-6%
off / environment *
28.9
30.4
-5%
30.4
-5%
29.3
-1%
30.7
-6%
Idle Minimum *
31.6
31.8
-1%
30.9
2%
32.3
-2%
31.7
-0%
32
-1%
Idle Average *
32
31.8
1%
30.9
3%
32.3
-1%
31.7
1%
32
-0%
Idle Maximum *
32.4
31.8
2%
31
4%
32.4
-0%
31.8
2%
32.2
1%
Load Average *
33.3
31.9
4%
31.8
5%
44.4
-33%
40.8
-23%
37.3
-12%
Load Maximum *
35.5
31.8
10%
31.9
10%
49.2
-39%
43.2
-22%
42.6
-20%

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Carga Máx.
 32.6 °C31 °C26.4 °C 
 33 °C36.8 °C26.4 °C 
 26.8 °C26.8 °C30 °C 
Máximo: 36.8 °C
Médio: 30 °C
27.8 °C40 °C31.2 °C
27.8 °C36.4 °C45 °C
32.2 °C27.6 °C28.6 °C
Máximo: 45 °C
Médio: 33 °C
Conector de corriente  32.4 °C | Temperatura del cuarto 22 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30 °C / 86 F, compared to the average of 31.3 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.8 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 45 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30 °C / 86 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-1.2 °C / -2.2 F).
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.939.42534.534.83131.833.94031.6325032.632.96332.233.28033.33410031.731.512529.830.116029.230.820028.839.125027.748.431526.755.3400265650025.251.163024.957.180025.761.110002652.4125024.760.6160024.266200023.970250023.662.5315023.361.5400023.264.4500023.376.4630023.374.2800023.271.91000023.363.11250023.460.81600023.557.9SPL36.481.2N2.743.3median 24.7median 60.6Delta1.77.435.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.72.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus X555DA-BB11Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Asus X555DA-BB11 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (14.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (14.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 94% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 85% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 12% 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 corriente
Off / Standbydarklight 0.2 / 0.6 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 8.3 / 8.6 / 13.1 Watt
Carga midlight 31.2 / 43.9 Watt
 color bar
Clave: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus X555DA-BB11
A10-8700P, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), Seagate Momentus SpinPoint M8 ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6"
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
6006U, HD Graphics 520, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6"
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
A8-7410, Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6"
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6"
Asus X555LN-XO112H
4210U, GeForce 840M, Toshiba MQ01ABF050, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6"
Power Consumption
29%
35%
-68%
19%
Idle Minimum *
8.3
6
28%
5.4
35%
8.29
-0%
4.2
49%
Idle Average *
8.6
8.7
-1%
6.8
21%
8.9
-3%
6.3
27%
Idle Maximum *
13.1
9.2
30%
7.3
44%
10.2
22%
7.1
46%
Load Average *
31.2
18.6
40%
21.1
32%
77.1
-147%
35.2
-13%
Load Maximum *
43.9
23.8
46%
25.5
42%
136.6
-211%
49.2
-12%

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Tiempo de Ejecución de la Batería
Ocioso (sin WLAN, min brillo)
7h 15min
WiFi Websurfing
2h 56min
Carga (máximo brillo)
1h 12min
Asus X555DA-BB11
A10-8700P, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), 37 Wh
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 44 Wh
Lenovo Ideapad 110-15ACL 80TJ00H0GE
A8-7410, Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), 24 Wh
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 63.3 Wh
Asus X555LN-XO112H
4210U, GeForce 840M, 37 Wh
Duración de Batería
102%
14%
101%
Reader / Idle
435
961
121%
WiFi v1.3
176
356
102%
201
14%
389
121%
Load
72
115
60%
WiFi
256

Pro

+ Tonos grises precisos sin calibrar la pantalla
+ Diseño atractivo
+ Bajas temperaturas
+ La CPU no se ralentiza
+ HDMI y VGA
+ Barato

Contra

- Pantalla con colores poco precisos
- Teclado poco rígido
- Escaso rendimiento de CPU y GPU
- Regular iluminación de la pantalla
- El ventilador se mantiene activo todo el rato
- Mala duración de batería
- No tiene USB Type-C
Análisis: Asus X555DA-BB11-RD
Análisis: Asus X555DA-BB11-RD

Se nos hace difícil recomendar la compra del X555DA especialmente cuando las variantes X555LN o X555LD pueden rendir más y durante más tiempo que el equivalente AMD. Normalmente si el hardware es más lento y barato, los usuarios esperan mayor duración de batería y temperaturas inferiores para compensar. El X555DA es lo peor de ambos mundos, ya que el rendimiento y la duración de batería está por debajo de la media.

Aparte de la lenta APU AMD, el hardware sufre otra serie de problemas. La tapa y la base del teclado se doblan con demasiada facilidad para nuestro gusto y la pantalla 1080p TN reproduce muy mal los colores. Los usuarios interesados deberían echar un ojo a las variantes de este portátil con ULV Broadwell e incluso Haswell.

Este portátil falla como PC barato debido a su escasa duración de batería, mediocre pantalla y escaso rendimiento. Las alternativas con Intel de hace tres o cuatro años ofrecen mejores resultados en casi todos los aspectos.

 Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.

Asus X555DA-BB11 - 04/13/2017 v6 (old)
Allen Ngo

Acabado
72 / 98 → 74%
Teclado
70%
Ratón
81%
Conectividad
61 / 81 → 75%
Peso
62 / 20-67 → 90%
Battería
69%
Pantalla
73%
Rendimiento de juegos
54 / 85 → 63%
Rendimiento de la Aplicación
55 / 92 → 60%
Temperatura
92%
Ruido
89 / 95 → 93%
Audio
40%
Cámara
40 / 85 → 47%
Médio
66%
73%
Multimedia - media ponderada

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Análisis y pruebas de ordenadores portátiles y móviles teléfonos > Análisis > Breve análisis del Asus X555DA (A10-8700P, FHD)
Allen Ngo, 2017-04-16 (Update: 2017-04-16)