Deutsch
English
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve análisis del smartphone Asus ZenFone AR (ZS571KL)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| LG G6 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 90 %
Brillo con batería: 338 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Negro: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 4.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.25
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7" | Lenovo Phab 2 Pro IPS, 2560x1440, 6.4" | Apple iPhone 8 IPS True Tone, 1334x750, 4.7" | LG G6 IPS LCD, 2880x1440, 5.7" | Samsung Galaxy S8 Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8" | OnePlus 5 AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -18% | 59% | 20% | 39% | 38% | |
| Brightness middle | 338 | 472.4 40% | 604 79% | 646 91% | 566 67% | 426 26% |
| Brightness | 341 | 479 40% | 580 70% | 611 79% | 564 65% | 431 26% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 93 3% | 91 1% | 89 -1% | 94 4% | 93 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.482 | 0.44 | 0.23 | |||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.7 | 7 -89% | 1.2 68% | 4.5 -22% | 2.7 27% | 1.6 57% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.9 | 11 -39% | 2.3 71% | 8.3 -5% | 5.4 32% | 4.1 48% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.9 | 7.9 -61% | 1.6 67% | 6 -22% | 3.1 37% | 1.7 65% |
| Gamma | 2.25 98% | 2.34 94% | 2.25 98% | 2.27 97% | 2.15 102% | 2.25 98% |
| CCT | 7286 89% | 7826 83% | 6688 97% | 7996 81% | 6335 103% | 6329 103% |
| Contrast | 980 | 1373 | 2809 | |||
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 67.74 | 81.57 | ||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.05 | 99.87 |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM detectado | 231.5 Hz |  | |
La retroiluminación del display parpadea a 231.5 Hz (seguramente usa PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) . La frecuencia de 231.5 Hz es relativamente baja, por lo que la gente sensible debería ver parpadeos y padecer fatiga visual por la pantalla (usado al brillo indicado a continuación). 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 4.8 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 2.8 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 2 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta muy rápidos en nuestros tests y debería ser adecuada para juegos frenéticos. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 13 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (21 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 4.8 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 2 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 2.8 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta muy rápidos en nuestros tests y debería ser adecuada para juegos frenéticos. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 13 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (32.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| Compute RenderScript Score (ordenar por valor) | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| GFXBench | |
| on screen Car Chase Onscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (ordenar por valor) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
| LG G6 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 | |
| OnePlus 5 | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| LG G6 (Chrome 57) | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro (Chrome 54.0.2840.85) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2) | |
| OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| LG G6 (Chrome 57) | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro (Chrome 54.0.2840.85) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro (Chrome 54.0.2840.85) | |
| OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59) | |
| LG G6 (Chrome 57) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2) | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Apple iPhone 8 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2) | |
| OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59) | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| LG G6 (Chrome 57) | |
| Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL | Lenovo Phab 2 Pro | LG G6 | Samsung Galaxy S8 | OnePlus 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -22% | -2% | 21% | 52% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 458.9 | 255 -44% | 428.7 -7% | 793 73% | 748 63% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 142.8 | 138 -3% | 122.8 -14% | 193.2 35% | 201.5 41% |
| Random Read 4KB | 88.4 | 38.53 -56% | 95.2 8% | 127.2 44% | 141 60% |
| Random Write 4KB | 13.51 | 12.92 -4% | 16.58 23% | 15.25 13% | 19.3 43% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 83.4 ? | 71.9 ? -14% | 77.6 ? -7% | 63.9 ? -23% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 62.6 ? | 54.8 ? -12% | 53.3 ? -15% | 53.5 ? -15% |
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 56 fps | ||
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configuraciones | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
| very low | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.9 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.8 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 38% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone 8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.04 / 0.31 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.88 / 1.24 / 1.26 Watt |
| Carga |
7.71 / 8.64 Watt |
    
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL 3300 mAh | Lenovo Phab 2 Pro 4050 mAh | Apple iPhone 8 1821 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S8 3000 mAh | OnePlus 5 3300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -147% | 10% | 1% | 23% | -1% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.88 | 3 -241% | 0.54 39% | 0.62 30% | 0.78 11% | 0.73 17% |
| Idle Average * | 1.24 | 4.1 -231% | 1.63 -31% | 1.43 -15% | 1.1 11% | 1.44 -16% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.26 | 4.2 -233% | 1.67 -33% | 1.48 -17% | 1.16 8% | 1.5 -19% |
| Load Average * | 7.71 | 10.4 -35% | 2.74 64% | 5.52 28% | 4.15 46% | 6.91 10% |
| Load Maximum * | 8.64 | 8.1 6% | 7.78 10% | 10.47 -21% | 5.12 41% | 8.51 2% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL 3300 mAh | Lenovo Phab 2 Pro 4050 mAh | Apple iPhone 8 1821 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S8 3000 mAh | OnePlus 5 3300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -9% | 11% | 28% | 29% | 8% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1476 | 1119 -24% | 1629 10% | 1789 21% | 1667 13% | 1534 4% |
| H.264 | 636 | 567 -11% | 698 10% | 779 22% | 771 21% | 623 -2% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 444 | 508 14% | 585 32% | 692 56% | 719 62% | 518 17% |
| Load | 221 | 190 -14% | 202 -9% | 252 14% | 264 19% | 247 12% |
Pro
Contra
Sin dudas: ZenFone RA es el primer smartphone que ejecuta sin problemas las aplicaciones Tango de realidad aumentada de Google. Sin embargo, dada la relativamente baja selección de aplicaciones (alrededor de 30) - la mayoría de las cuales encima son trucos - en su estado actual Tango está lejos de ser una característica imprescindible. La pregunta es: ¿estás dispuesto a gastar casi $800 más impuestos por esta experiencia de RA bastante pobre? Sospechamos que para la mayoría de los usuarios, Tango no será un factor importante al considerar el ZenFone AR, especialmente porque las gafas Daydream RV de Google no están incluidas y deben comprarse por separado.
Comprar el ZenFone RA solo por Google Tango no vale la pena. La realidad aumentada aparte, lo que queda es un smartphone decente pero caro.
A casi la mitad de precio, el LG G6 es tan rápido como el ZenFone AR. Incluso el Asus TriCam fue incapaz de impresionarnos. Sí, las fotos resultantes son ciertamente decentes, pero están lejos de ser las mejores. Además, el aguante de la batería es muy bajo y el ZenFone RA se queda sin batería de forma comparativamente rápida.
Al final, el Asus ZenFone RA es un smartphone de alta calidad bien hecho con pantalla OLED WQHD, un rendimiento más que adecuado para aplicaciones y juegos de uso diario y módulos de comunicación muy rápidos.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Asus ZenFone AR ZS571KL
-
11/02/2017 v6 (old)
Manuel Masiero
Price comparison
