Deutsch
English
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve análisis del Tablet Amazon Fire 7 (2017)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 88 %
Brillo con batería: 328 cd/m²
Contraste: 937:1 (Negro: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 3.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.25
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 IPS, 1024x600, 7" | Amazon Fire Tablet IPS, 1024x600, 7" | Acer Iconia One 8 IPS, 1280x800, 8" | Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 IPS, 1280x800, 7" | Xiaomi MiPad 2 IPS, 2048x1536, 7.9" | Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Super AMOLED, 2048x1526, 9.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -30% | 6% | -4% | 9% | 46% | |
| Brightness middle | 328 | 323 -2% | 367 12% | 358 9% | 425 30% | 452 38% |
| Brightness | 337 | 299 -11% | 338 0% | 344 2% | 402 19% | 468 39% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 83 -6% | 83 -6% | 92 5% | 91 3% | 82 -7% |
| Black Level * | 0.35 | 0.38 -9% | 0.31 11% | 0.37 -6% | 0.4 -14% | |
| Contrast | 937 | 850 -9% | 1184 26% | 968 3% | 1063 13% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.6 | 9.3 -102% | 4.1 11% | 5.3 -15% | 4.98 -8% | 1.8 61% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 18.6 | 17.6 5% | 20.2 -9% | 6.61 64% | 4 78% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.8 | 7.8 -105% | 4.38 -15% | 4.7 -24% | 5.2 -37% | 1.2 68% |
| Gamma | 2.25 98% | 1.99 111% | 2.33 94% | 2.44 90% | 2.65 83% | 2.11 104% |
| CCT | 7338 89% | 7736 84% | 6394 102% | 7222 90% | 7249 90% | 6500 100% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 82.32 | |||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.06 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM detectado | 12500 Hz | ≤ 17 % de brillo |  |
La retroiluminación del display parpadea a 12500 Hz (seguramente usa PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) a un brillo del 17 % e inferior. Sobre este nivel de brillo no debería darse parpadeo / PWM. La frecuencia de 12500 Hz es bastante alta, por lo que la mayoría de gente sensible al parpadeo no debería ver parpadeo o tener fatiga visual. Comparación: 53 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 8774 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. | |||
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28.4 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 16 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 12.4 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta relativamente lentos en nuestros tests pero podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 73 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (21 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 39.2 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 20.4 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 18.8 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. » 56 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Compute RenderScript Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | |
| Amazon Fire Tablet | |
| Acer Iconia One 8 | |
| Xiaomi MiPad 2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 | Amazon Fire Tablet | Acer Iconia One 8 | Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 | Xiaomi MiPad 2 | Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 22% | -12% | -14% | 60% | 120% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 113.7 | 147 29% | 126 11% | 65.9 -42% | 147.9 30% | 288.6 154% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 34.1 | 37 9% | 40 17% | 28.95 -15% | 56.4 65% | 87.6 157% |
| Random Read 4KB | 21.97 | 22 0% | 17 -23% | 21.95 0% | 24.42 11% | 45.82 109% |
| Random Write 4KB | 6.03 | 11 82% | 2.9 -52% | 9.55 58% | 13.96 132% | 13.13 118% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 45.54 | 49.4 8% | 21.41 -53% | 76.4 68% | ||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 27.74 | 29.19 5% | 18.4 -34% | 58.6 111% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.3 °C / 103 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 43.3 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.6 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
Amazon Fire 7 2017 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 81% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 81% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 35.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 70% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi MiPad 2 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (95.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.3% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.05 / 0.19 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.97 / 2.68 / 2.69 Watt |
| Carga |
4.26 / 4.64 Watt |
    
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 2980 mAh | Amazon Fire Tablet 2980 mAh | Acer Iconia One 8 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 4000 mAh | Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -13% | -16% | -35% | -124% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.97 | 1.12 -15% | 0.8 18% | 1.91 -97% | 3.33 -243% |
| Idle Average * | 2.68 | 3.06 -14% | 3.1 -16% | 3.59 -34% | 5.01 -87% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.69 | 3.31 -23% | 3.3 -23% | 4.06 -51% | 5.19 -93% |
| Load Average * | 4.26 | 4.44 -4% | 5.1 -20% | 4.29 -1% | 8.32 -95% |
| Load Maximum * | 4.64 | 5.09 -10% | 6.5 -40% | 4.31 7% | 9.33 -101% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Amazon Fire 7 2017 2980 mAh | Amazon Fire Tablet 2980 mAh | Acer Iconia One 8 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 4000 mAh | Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -17% | 31% | 36% | -18% | |
| Reader / Idle | 941 | 1257 34% | 1353 44% | ||
| H.264 | 511 | 795 56% | 513 0% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 516 | 428 -17% | 742 44% | 619 20% | 421 -18% |
| Load | 209 | 185 -11% | 379 81% |
Pro
Contra
Visto el bajo precio de sólo $49, el Fire 7 (2017) es una buena oferta y está bien rematada. Preferiríamos haber visto una mejora más importante pero por desgracia los lentos SoC y almacenamiento interno, el display de baja resolución, y sólo 1 GB de RAM siguen aquí. Por ello, a pesar de que el aguante de batería y la precisión del color hayan mejorado, el rendimiento de sistema general del tablet sigue siendo bastante malo.
La pregunta en la mente de todos es: ¿ para qué vale el Fire 7 (2017)? El display de baja resolución de 170 ppi ciertamente no está hecho para largos periodos de lectura. Le falta potencia para ejecutar juegos con fluidez o incluso para navegar por internet. Ver películas habría sido mucho más disfrutable si no fuera por la mala calidad del único altavoz trasero. Obviamente, todo lo de la lista se puede hacer con el Fire 7 (2017), pero implica serios sacrificios.
El último tablet Amazon Fire 7 bastará de nuevo sólo para los usuarios más modestos. Por desgracia, Amazon no ha logrado poner al día el hardware del tablet. Así, el gancho comercial más convincente del Fire 7 (2017) sigue siendo su bajo precio.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Amazon Fire 7 2017
-
07/10/2017 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
