Courte critique du PC portable Asus VivoBook 14 (i5-8265U, MX230, FHD)
Top 10
» Le Top 10 des PC portables multimédia
» Le Top 10 des PC portables de jeu
» Le Top 10 des PC portables de jeu légers
» Le Top 10 des ordinateurs portables bureautiques
» Le Top 10 des PC portables bureautiques premium/professionnels
» Le Top 10 des Stations de travail mobiles
» Le Top 10 des Ultraportables
» Le Top 10 des Ultrabooks
» Le Top 10 des Convertibles
» Le Top 10 des Tablettes
» Le Top 10 des Tablettes Windows
» Le Top 10 des Smartphones
» Le Top 10 des PC Portables á moins de 300 euros
» Le Top 10 des PC Portables á moins de 500 euros
» Le Top 25 des meilleurs écrans d'ordinateurs
| SDCardreader Transfer Speed | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell Latitude 14 5495 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (11.2 - 204, n=203) | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell Latitude 14 5495 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (10.2 - 253, n=199) | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10 | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Honor Magicbook | |
| Dell Latitude 14 5495 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10 | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| Honor Magicbook | |
| Dell Latitude 14 5495 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 91 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 267 cd/m²
Contraste: 1335:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0.2 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.79 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8, calibrated: 4.71
ΔE Greyscale 1.49 | 0.64-98 Ø6
59% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 38% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.48
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T AU Optronics AUO403D B140HAN04.0, , 1920x1080, 14 | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T AU Optronics B140HAN03.2, , 1920x1080, 14 | HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA CMN1375, , 1920x1080, 13.3 | Dell Latitude 14 5495 CMN14C9, , 1920x1080, 14 | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T AU Optronics B140HAN03.2, , 1920x1080, 14 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | -9% | -4% | -3% | -1% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 40 (19, 21) | 44 (24, 20) -10% | 40.8 (22.8, 18) -2% | 41 (24, 17) -3% | 42 (21, 21) -5% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 29 (17, 12) | 31 (18, 13) -7% | 30.4 (16.4, 14) -5% | 30 (19, 11) -3% | 28 (16, 12) 3% |
| PWM Frequency | 26040 (40) | 25000 (30) | |||
| Screen | -32% | -28% | -20% | -34% | |
| Brightness middle | 267 | 330 24% | 255 -4% | 212 -21% | 321 20% |
| Brightness | 257 | 285 11% | 238 -7% | 200 -22% | 282 10% |
| Brightness Distribution | 91 | 78 -14% | 88 -3% | 89 -2% | 77 -15% |
| Black Level * | 0.2 | 0.23 -15% | 0.18 10% | 0.23 -15% | 0.2 -0% |
| Contrast | 1335 | 1435 7% | 1417 6% | 922 -31% | 1605 20% |
| Colorchecker DeltaE2000 * | 3.79 | 5.77 -52% | 5.4 -42% | 4.34 -15% | 6.35 -68% |
| Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. * | 8.18 | 10.46 -28% | 19.5 -138% | 9.01 -10% | 12.2 -49% |
| Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated * | 4.71 | 3.18 32% | 4.1 13% | 1.88 60% | |
| Greyscale DeltaE2000 * | 1.49 | 7.61 -411% | 3.8 -155% | 2.81 -89% | 8.35 -460% |
| Gamma | 2.48 89% | 2.46 89% | 2.41 91% | 2.22 99% | 2.51 88% |
| CCT | 6659 98% | 7485 87% | 7100 92% | 6286 103% | 8227 79% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 38 | 57 50% | 39.4 4% | 39 3% | 59 55% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 59 | 88 49% | 62.5 6% | 61 3% | 91 54% |
| Moyenne finale (programmes/paramètres) | -21% /
-28% | -16% /
-24% | -12% /
-17% | -18% /
-29% |
* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances
Temps de réponse de l'écran
| ↔ Temps de réponse noir à blanc | ||
|---|---|---|
| 29 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées | ↗ 17 ms hausse |  |
| ↘ 12 ms chute | ||
| L'écran souffre de latences relativement élevées, insuffisant pour le jeu. En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 68 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances. Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont moins bonnes que la moyenne (24.5 ms) de tous les appareils testés. | ||
| ↔ Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80% | ||
| 40 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées | ↗ 19 ms hausse |  |
| ↘ 21 ms chute | ||
| L'écran souffre de latences très élevées, à éviter pour le jeu. En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 45 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances. Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont similaires à la moyenne (39 ms) de tous les appareils testés. | ||
Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion)
| Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) non décelé |  | ||
En comparaison, 51 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 17893 (minimum : 5 - maximum : 2500000) Hz dans le cas où une MDI était active. | |||
| PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2 | |
| Honor Magicbook | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (3609 - 3639, n=2) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (1371 - 4900, n=328) | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T Kingston RBU-SNS8180DS3512GJ | Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G | HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G | Dell Latitude 14 5495 Intel SSDSCKKF256G8 | Average Kingston RBU-SNS8180DS3512GJ | Average of class Multimedia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 148% | 160% | 7% | 9% | 134% | |
| Write 4K | 55.04 | 99.9 82% | 101.8 85% | 48.45 -12% | 59.8 (55 - 64.5, n=2) 9% | 99.1 (0.76 - 213, n=141) 80% |
| Read 4K | 28.79 | 40.03 39% | 41.35 44% | 25.11 -13% | 26.9 (24.9 - 28.8, n=2) -7% | 35.6 (0.29 - 148, n=141) 24% |
| Write Seq | 307.5 | 973.1 216% | 928.5 202% | 341.2 11% | 380 (308 - 453, n=2) 24% | 925 (64.8 - 2910, n=140) 201% |
| Read Seq | 430 | 1111 158% | 1388 223% | 520.6 21% | 427 (425 - 430, n=2) -1% | 1071 (65.9 - 2820, n=140) 149% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 149.5 | 424.6 184% | 453.5 203% | 202 35% | 204 (150 - 258, n=2) 36% | 310 (0.84 - 1707, n=141) 107% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 207.2 | 255.9 24% | 286.2 38% | 243.5 18% | 204 (200 - 207, n=2) -2% | 342 (0.417 - 1015, n=141) 65% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 389.2 | 1300 234% | 1302 235% | 320.8 -18% | 447 (389 - 504, n=2) 15% | 1127 (65.6 - 3349, n=141) 190% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 497.1 | 1723 247% | 1751 252% | 555.2 12% | 478 (460 - 497, n=2) -4% | 1785 (65.7 - 3550, n=141) 259% |
| Write 4K Q8T8 | 572.3 | 247.5 | 284 | 919 (98 - 1814, n=8) | ||
| Read 4K Q8T8 | 825.8 | 253.4 | 301 | 713 (209 - 1023, n=8) | ||
| AS SSD | 204% | 157% | 27% | 43% | 35% | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 549.22 | 796.19 | 260.04 | 151 | 427 (12 - 1824, n=188) | |
| Copy Program MB/s | 246.84 | 376.43 | 152.14 | 106 | 247 (8.81 - 984, n=188) | |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 600.52 | 1116.67 | 441.25 | 546 | 668 (10 - 3182, n=189) | |
| Score Total | 782 | 2048 162% | 1706 118% | 751 -4% | 966 (782 - 1150, n=2) 24% | 1586 (20 - 5355, n=253) 103% |
| Score Write | 153 | 815 433% | 600 292% | 288 88% | 345 (153 - 537, n=2) 125% | 600 (7 - 2992, n=253) 292% |
| Score Read | 411 | 829 102% | 745 81% | 309 -25% | 407 (403 - 411, n=2) -1% | 669 (8 - 2132, n=253) 63% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.4 | 0.028 93% | 0.03 92% | 0.101 75% | 0.287 (0.174 - 0.4, n=2) 28% | 1.844 (0.019 - 34, n=281) -361% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.432 | 0.114 74% | 0.107 75% | 0.128 70% | 0.27 (0.108 - 0.432, n=2) 37% | 2.26 (0.031 - 33, n=279) -423% |
| 4K-64 Write | 87.19 | 605.06 594% | 408.2 368% | 225.18 158% | 264 (87.2 - 440, n=2) 203% | 411 (0.27 - 2716, n=287) 371% |
| 4K-64 Read | 325.38 | 652.98 101% | 567.08 74% | 238.42 -27% | 325 (324 - 325, n=2) 0% | 485 (0.36 - 1823, n=287) 49% |
| 4K Write | 26.46 | 130.83 394% | 119.73 352% | 34.58 31% | 44 (26.5 - 61.6, n=2) 66% | 70.3 (0.24 - 195, n=287) 166% |
| 4K Read | 36.4 | 37.3 2% | 40.67 12% | 19.76 -46% | 33.7 (30.9 - 36.4, n=2) -7% | 28.6 (0.23 - 69.1, n=287) -21% |
| Seq Write | 392.72 | 794.94 102% | 725.53 85% | 286.49 -27% | 372 (351 - 393, n=2) -5% | 603 (29.7 - 2604, n=287) 54% |
| Seq Read | 487.61 | 1388.77 185% | 1373.07 182% | 507.15 4% | 487 (485 - 488, n=2) 0% | 953 (48.7 - 2890, n=287) 95% |
| Moyenne finale (programmes/paramètres) | 176% /
180% | 159% /
159% | 17% /
18% | 26% /
28% | 85% /
77% |
* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances
| 3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 330-17IKB 81DM | |
| Huawei MateBook 13 i7 | |
| Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (3180 - 3582, n=6) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (352 - 26292, n=670) | |
| HP ProBook 450 G6-5TJ93EA | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 520s-14IKB 80X200C1GE | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| 3DMark | |
| 2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics | |
| Average of class Multimedia (142 - 7372, n=91) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (698 - 837, n=4) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 330-17IKB 81DM | |
| Huawei MateBook 13 i7 | |
| Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (337 - 19655, n=447) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (2168 - 2755, n=6) | |
| HP ProBook 450 G6-5TJ93EA | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 520s-14IKB 80X200C1GE | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Huawei MateBook 13 i7 | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 330-17IKB 81DM | |
| Asus Zenbook UX3430UN-GV174T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (2468 - 77755, n=443) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (13376 - 17999, n=6) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| HP ProBook 450 G6-5TJ93EA | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 520s-14IKB 80X200C1GE | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 3570 points | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 61160 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 10178 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2202 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 797 points | |
Aide | ||
| BioShock Infinite | |
| 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (3.62 - 149, n=236) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (26.2 - 31.2, n=5) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| 1366x768 High Preset | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (61.8 - 79.8, n=5) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (9.3 - 277, n=266) | |
| Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| Bas | Moyen | Élevé | Ultra | ||
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 151.46 | 82.8 | 70.18 | 27.96 | fps |
| GTA V (2015) | 71.51 | 64.5 | 26.9 | 10.6 | fps |
| Overwatch (2016) | 90 | 78.3 | 35.9 | 16.6 | fps |
| Rocket League (2017) | 152.6 | 77.7 | 72.7 | fps | |
| Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017) | 58.5 | 23.8 | 21 | 17.3 | fps |
| Destiny 2 (2017) | 44.9 | 23.9 | 22 | 17.5 | fps |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 26 | 11.4 | 7.4 | fps | |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 31.5 | 13.8 | 11.6 | 7 | fps |
| Monster Hunter World (2018) | 34.1 | 12.9 | 10.9 | 8.3 | fps |
| F1 2018 (2018) | 48 | 23 | 18 | 12 | fps |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) | 32 | 10 | 10 (DirectX11) | 7 (DirectX11) | fps |
| FIFA 19 (2018) | 80.5 | 58.6 | 52.6 | 52.2 | fps |
| Forza Horizon 4 (2018) | 46 | 21 | 16 | 12 | fps |
| Assassin´s Creed Odyssey (2018) | 26 | 13 | 10 | 6 | fps |
| Call of Duty Black Ops 4 (2018) | 36.8 | 18.9 | 13.8 | 11.7 | fps |
| Hitman 2 (2018) | 29.3 | 13.4 | 10.7 | 9.9 | fps |
| Battlefield V (2018) | 38.3 | 20.2 | 16 | 12 | fps |
| Farming Simulator 19 (2018) | 122.3 | 48.6 | 23.8 | 17.6 | fps |
| Darksiders III (2018) | 69.3 | 19.8 | 15.9 | 13.4 | fps |
| Just Cause 4 (2018) | 30.9 | 17.4 | 12.7 | 10.9 | fps |
| Apex Legends (2019) | 45.8 | 17.8 | 14.4 | 12.4 | fps |
| Far Cry New Dawn (2019) | 32 | 15 | 13 | 12 | fps |
| Metro Exodus (2019) | 25.9 | 4.8 | 3.3 | 4.5 | fps |
| Anthem (2019) | 22.7 | 12.3 | 11.1 | 9.8 | fps |
| Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) | 71 | 22.9 | 17.5 | 10.4 | fps |
| The Division 2 (2019) | 43 | 13 | 10 | 6 | fps |
Degré de la nuisance sonore
| Au repos |
| 30 / 30 / 30 dB(A) |
| Fortement sollicité |
| 33.5 / 38 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silencieux 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) bruyant |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (à 15 cm de distance) environment noise: 29.9 dB(A) | ||
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.4 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 36.6 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44.4 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 38.9 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.2 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 31 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 27.9 °C / 82.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 29 °C / 84.2 F (+1.1 °C / 2 F).
Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.79 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 22% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%
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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%
| Éteint/en veille | 0.29 / 0.45 Watts |
| Au repos | 3.7 / 6.1 / 8.3 Watts |
| Fortement sollicité |
43 / 61.6 Watts |
   
| |
Légende:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing 1.3 | |
| HP ProBook 430 G6-5TJ89EA | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FA-A6018T | |
| Dell Latitude 14 5495 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T | |
| Average of class Multimedia (96 - 942, n=286) | |
| Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T | |
Points positifs
Points négatifs
Afin de répondre aux besoins classiques de bureautique, de multimédia et de jeu, Asus propose avec le VivoBook une machine polyvalente à 800 €. Le portable Asus paraît élégant tout en n’étant fait que de plastique. Le châssis est dans l’ensemble solide, et présente bien. Les périphériques d’entrée sont assez bons pour une utilisation bureautique légère. Le clavier semble un peu mou quand on tape rapidement. De même, l’écran n’est pas sans défaut. Même s’il possède de bons angles de vision, des couleurs fidèles et une finition matte, sa faible luminosité gâche tout à nos yeux.
En ce qui concerne les composants, leur combinaison est réussie. La valeur ajoutée de la Nvidia GeForce MX230 est notable. Le volume sonore et la chauffe restent également à des niveaux acceptables. C’est dommage que le throttling et qu’une réduction rapide du boost gênent l’expérience globale. Il y a plus de potentiel ici.
Il y a également une marge de progression concernant l’autonomie. Le VivoBook fait moins bien que les autres appareils de sa catégorie - les concurrents comme le HP ProBook 430 G6 font mieux.
Malgré certaines faiblesses, l’Asus VivoBook s’avère être un appareil polyvalent efficace pour un usage classique au quotidien.
Avant de se décider à acheter, il faut jeter un œil aux concurrents, tel le ProBook 430 G6.
L’intégralité de cette critique est disponible en anglais en suivant ce lien.
Asus VivoBook 14 F412FJ-EB084T - 04/28/2019 v6(old)
Nino Ricchizzi