Breve análisis del Convertible Acer Aspire R13 R7-371T-779K
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sharp LQ133T1JW02 tested with X-Rite i1 Basic Pro 2
Máximo: 320 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 305.2 cd/m²iluminación: 90 %
Brillo con batería: 316 cd/m²
Contraste: 1374:1 (Negro: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.21 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 5.16 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.58
| Acer Aspire R13 HD Graphics 4400, 4510U | Sony Vaio Fit 13A multi-flip HD Graphics 4400, 4200U, Samsung MZNTD128HAGM | Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro HD Graphics 5300, 5Y70, Samsung SSD PM851 256 GB MZNTE256HMHP | HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 HD Graphics 4400, 4030U, Seagate ST500LM000 Solid State Hybrid Drive | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | ||||
| Display P3 Coverage | 61 | |||
| sRGB Coverage | 84.1 | |||
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 61 | |||
| Screen | -30% | -39% | -66% | |
| Brightness middle | 316 | 368 16% | 287 -9% | 168 -47% |
| Brightness | 305 | 372 22% | 280 -8% | 156 -49% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 88 -2% | 88 -2% | 88 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.63 -174% | 0.792 -244% | 0.39 -70% |
| Contrast | 1374 | 584 -57% | 362 -74% | 431 -69% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.21 | 4.56 -8% | 3.08 27% | 9.65 -129% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.16 | 5.36 -4% | 3.36 35% | 10.03 -94% |
| Gamma | 2.58 85% | 2.31 95% | 2.5 88% | 2.09 105% |
| CCT | 6934 94% | 6342 102% | 6087 107% | 11308 57% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 60 | |||
| Media total (Programa/Opciones) | -30% /
-30% | -39% /
-39% | -66% /
-66% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Single 64Bit (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| Sony Vaio Fit 13A multi-flip | |
| HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 | |
| Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Multi 64Bit (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| Sony Vaio Fit 13A multi-filp | |
| HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 | |
| PCMark 7 Score | 5187 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 2419 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 3339 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| PCMark 8 | |
| Work Score Accelerated v2 (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 | |
| Home Score Accelerated v2 (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 | |
Sequential Read:
823 MB/s
Sequential Write:
661 MB/s
512K Read:
546 MB/s
512K Write:
653 MB/s
4K Read:
28.79 MB/s
4K Write:
76.5 MB/s
4K QD32 Read:
320.6 MB/s
4K QD32 Write:
377.1 MB/s
| Acer Aspire R13 2x Kingston SSD u00e1 256 GB RAID 0 | Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro Samsung SSD 256 GB | Sony Vaio 13A multi-flip Samsung SSD 128GB | HP Pavilion 13-aooong x360 Seagate SSHD 500GB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -20% | -41% | -93% | |
| Read Seq | 823 | 529 -36% | 509 -38% | 94.2 -89% |
| Write Seq | 661 | 242.1 -63% | 131.8 -80% | 92 -86% |
| Read 512 | 546 | 430.9 -21% | 422.5 -23% | 34.04 -94% |
| Write 512 | 653 | 242.4 -63% | 67.5 -90% | 52.7 -92% |
| Read 4k | 28.79 | 35.95 25% | 28.04 -3% | 0.408 -99% |
| Write 4k | 76.5 | 104.5 37% | 67.3 -12% | 0.799 -99% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 929 puntos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 28889 puntos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 4506 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| 3DMark - 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| Sony Vaio 13A multi-flip | |
| HP Pavilion 13-a000ng x360 | |
| bajo | medio | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 51.3 | 25.3 | 15.1 | |
| Metro: Last Light (2013) | 22 | 15 | 12 | |
| Battlefield 4 (2013) | 23 | 16 |
Ruido
| Ocioso |
| 30.9 / 30.9 / 32 dB(A) |
| Carga |
| 37.6 / 37.6 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Voltcraft sl-320 (15 cm de distancia) | ||
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.4 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 30.3 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Convertible.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46 °C / 115 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 51.8 °C / 125 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.3 °C / 78 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 27.5 °C / 81.5 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28 °C / 82.4 F (+0.5 °C / 0.9 F).
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46 °C / 115 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 51.8 °C / 125 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.3 °C / 78 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 27.5 °C / 81.5 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28 °C / 82.4 F (+0.5 °C / 0.9 F).
Consumo de corriente
| Off / Standby | 0.1 / 0.1 Watt |
| Ocioso | 4.8 / 8.2 / 8.3 Watt |
| Carga |
27 / 28.3 Watt |
   
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: VC 960 | |
| Duración de Batería | |
| Reader / Idle (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| Sony Vaio Fit 13A multi-flip | |
| WiFi (ordenar por valor) | |
| Acer Aspire R13 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro | |
| Sony Vaio Fit 13A multi-flip | |
Acer logró combinar casi todos los modos de funcionamiento posibles en un solo dispositivo sin tener que hacer sacrificios importantes en el manejo. Si no te importa las dimensiones relativamente aumentadas para un dispositivo de 13" y estás dispuesto a pagar el alto precio, el Acer R13 es una buena elección de convertible.
Manejo y características casi nos impresionan por completo; el display de alta resolución en particular es una alegría al usar Windows 8.1. La calidad de construcción está a un nivel muy alto a pesar del plástico.
Está, empero, la cuestión de si el sobrecoste por el procesador Intel i7 realmente merece la pena o si un precio más bajo con un potente i5 habría sido un compromiso mejor. Ambos chips son muy similares salvo por las frecuencias nominales y Turbo ligeramente superiores así como la caché 1 MB superior. El fabricante posiblemente pensó que sólo debía usar los mejores componentes en este rango de precios para diferenciar al dispositivo de los competidores mainstream.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
