Deutsch
English
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve análisis del portátil Lenovo Ideapad 120s (14", HD)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR | |
| Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 | |
| Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 | |
| HP Stream 13-c102ng | |
| Jumper EZbook 3 | |
| Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 14 AO1-431-C6QM | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP | |
| Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 | |
| Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR | |
| Jumper EZbook 3 | |
| HP Stream 13-c102ng | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 87 %
Brillo con batería: 257.4 cd/m²
Contraste: 477:1 (Negro: 0.54 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 11.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 13.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
62% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
42.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
62% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
41.32% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.2
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP Chi Mei N140BGA-EA3, TN LED, 14.00, 1366x768 | Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR Chi Mei CMN1132, TN LED, 11.60, 1366x768 | Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 SDC8353, IPS, 12.30, 2736x1824 | Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 Name: BOE06A8, IPS, 14.10, 1920x1080 | Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 14 AO1-431-C6QM Chi Mei N140BGE-EA3, TN LED, 14.00, 1366x768 | HP Stream 13-c102ng AU Optronics B133XW03, TN, 13.30, 1366x768 | Jumper EZbook 3 MS_9003, TN LED, 14.10, 1920x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 4% | 62% | 3% | -2% | -2% | 25% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 41.32 | 42.77 4% | 68 65% | 42.53 3% | 40.68 -2% | 40.68 -2% | 51.6 25% |
| sRGB Coverage | 62 | 64.2 4% | 98.4 59% | 63.6 3% | 60.6 -2% | 59.8 -4% | 77.3 25% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 42.7 | 44.2 4% | 69.5 63% | 43.93 3% | 42.08 -1% | 42.32 -1% | 53 24% |
| Response Times | 1667% | -59% | -41% | -42% | -44% | -19% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 35.2 ? | 46 ? -31% | 48.4 ? -38% | 32.8 ? 7% | 49.6 ? -41% | 45 ? -28% | 46 ? -31% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 17.2 ? | 30 ? -74% | 30.8 ? -79% | 29.2 ? -70% | 21.6 ? -26% | 25 ? -45% | 11.6 ? 33% |
| PWM Frequency | 495 ? | 25770 ? 5106% | 200 ? -60% | 200 ? -60% | 201 ? -59% | 200 ? -60% | |
| Screen | 9% | 68% | 24% | 9% | 4% | -2% | |
| Brightness middle | 257.4 | 243 -6% | 224 -13% | 247.7 -4% | 231 -10% | 190 -26% | 384 49% |
| Brightness | 239 | 230 -4% | 219 -8% | 243 2% | 213 -11% | 179 -25% | 341 43% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 91 5% | 81 -7% | 92 6% | 87 0% | 85 -2% | 76 -13% |
| Black Level * | 0.54 | 0.4 26% | 0.13 76% | 0.32 41% | 0.47 13% | 0.33 39% | 1.28 -137% |
| Contrast | 477 | 608 27% | 1723 261% | 774 62% | 491 3% | 576 21% | 300 -37% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 11.8 | 11.24 5% | 2.4 80% | 6.4 46% | 9.1 23% | 9.84 17% | 8.7 26% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 28 | 19.82 29% | 3.7 87% | 24.3 13% | 14.88 47% | 16.7 40% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 13.3 | 12.78 4% | 2.5 81% | 4.5 66% | 9.55 28% | 10.32 22% | 11.1 17% |
| Gamma | 2.2 100% | 2.33 94% | 2.31 95% | 2.33 94% | 2.47 89% | 2.48 89% | 2.2 100% |
| CCT | 16811 39% | 15436 42% | 6869 95% | 7318 89% | 11384 57% | 11884 55% | 12445 52% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 39 | 41 5% | 63.4 63% | 39.8 2% | 38.84 0% | 38 -3% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 62 | 64 3% | 98.3 59% | 62.9 1% | 60.59 -2% | 60 -3% | |
| Media total (Programa/Opciones) | 560% /
319% | 24% /
50% | -5% /
8% | -12% /
-3% | -14% /
-7% | 1% /
0% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 17.2 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 12 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 5.2 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. » 34 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (21.5 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 35.2 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 18 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 17.2 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. » 43 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es similar al dispositivo testado medio (33.7 ms). | ||
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM detectado | 495 Hz | ≤ 99 % de brillo |  |
La retroiluminación del display parpadea a 495 Hz (seguramente usa PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) a un brillo del 99 % e inferior. Sobre este nivel de brillo no debería darse parpadeo / PWM. La frecuencia de 495 Hz es relativamente alta, por lo que la mayoría de gente no debería ver parpadeo o tener fatiga visual. Sin embargo, hay informes de que algunas personas pueden seguir viendo parpadeos a 500 Hz y superior, por lo que cuidado. Comparación: 53 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 17900 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 3846000) Hz. | |||
| wPrime 2.10 - 1024m | |
| Jumper EZbook 3 | |
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP | |
| Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 | |
| HP 15-bw077ax | |
| Cube Thinker m3 | |
| Lenovo Thinkpad 13-20J1001BUS | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 1788 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 1935 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 2558 puntos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 1220 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP 64 GB eMMC Flash | Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR SanDisk DF4032 | Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 64 GB eMMC Flash | Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 SanDisk DF4128 | HP 15-bw077ax WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1 | Toshiba Portege A30-D-139 Toshiba SG5 THNSNK128GVN8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 5% | -49% | 18% | -57% | 321% | |
| Write 4K | 12.44 | 13.87 11% | 3.23 -74% | 11.87 -5% | 0.92 -93% | 79.9 542% |
| Read 4K | 9.59 | 12.23 28% | 5.37 -44% | 11.45 19% | 0.3 -97% | 22.68 136% |
| Write Seq | 104.9 | 101.7 -3% | 49.49 -53% | 106.1 1% | 97.3 -7% | 139.4 33% |
| Read Seq | 169.9 | 165.1 -3% | 153.3 -10% | 293.6 73% | 99.6 -41% | 472.7 178% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 15.3 | 13.63 -11% | 3.6 -76% | 15.22 -1% | 0.94 -94% | 122.6 701% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 32.1 | 36.23 13% | 17.4 -46% | 33.91 6% | 0.84 -97% | 234.6 631% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 98.1 | 94.8 -3% | 24 -76% | 110.3 12% | 97.7 0% | 139.3 42% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 134.9 | 147.5 9% | 113.2 -16% | 183 36% | 98.6 -27% | 549 307% |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 17286 puntos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 2306 puntos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 358 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| bajo | medio | alto | ultra | |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 21 |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 41.2 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 47.2 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.8 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 30.7 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28.2 °C / 82.8 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (+0.1 °C / 0.1 F).
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3350, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), N3060, SanDisk DF4032 | Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3450, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3450, SanDisk DF4128 | Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 14 AO1-431-C6QM HD Graphics (Braswell), N3050, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HP Stream 13-c102ng HD Graphics (Braswell), N3050, 32 GB eMMC Flash | Jumper EZbook 3 HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3350, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 2% | 7% | -3% | -9% | -2% | 5% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 41.2 | 40.7 1% | 39.2 5% | 42.4 -3% | 39.9 3% | 36.5 11% | 41 -0% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 47.2 | 41 13% | 39.4 17% | 45 5% | 44.7 5% | 51.6 -9% | 42 11% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 26.8 | 28.2 -5% | 27.7 -3% | 28.6 -7% | 33 -23% | 26.5 1% | 27 -1% |
| Idle Bottom * | 29.2 | 29.6 -1% | 26.8 8% | 31.4 -8% | 35 -20% | 32 -10% | 27 8% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (68.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.5% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (20.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.9% higher than median
(-) | highs are not linear (22.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (52.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 100% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 95% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (31.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 92% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 7% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 88% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 9% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Jumper EZbook 3 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.28 / 0.27 Watt |
| Ocioso |  2.7 / 5.3 / 5.7 Watt |
| Carga |
12.9 / 13.1 Watt |
    
| |
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500, 64 GB eMMC Flash, TN LED, 1366x768, 14.00 | Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR N3060, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), SanDisk DF4032, TN LED, 1366x768, 11.60 | Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 Celeron N3450, HD Graphics 500, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 2736x1824, 12.30 | Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 Celeron N3450, HD Graphics 500, SanDisk DF4128, IPS, 1920x1080, 14.10 | Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 14 AO1-431-C6QM N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 32 GB eMMC Flash, TN LED, 1366x768, 14.00 | HP Stream 13-c102ng N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 32 GB eMMC Flash, TN, 1366x768, 13.30 | Jumper EZbook 3 Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC, TN LED, 1920x1080, 14.10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -51% | -67% | -16% | -24% | -22% | -11% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 2.7 | 7 -159% | 5.9 -119% | 3.6 -33% | 4.2 -56% | 4.6 -70% | 3.18 -18% |
| Idle Average * | 5.3 | 8.2 -55% | 7.7 -45% | 6.2 -17% | 6.3 -19% | 6.8 -28% | 6.14 -16% |
| Idle Maximum * | 5.7 | 8.5 -49% | 8.6 -51% | 6.5 -14% | 7.3 -28% | 6.5 -14% | 6.4 -12% |
| Load Average * | 12.9 | 12.5 3% | 18.2 -41% | 13.5 -5% | 12.5 3% | 12.7 2% | 13.3 -3% |
| Load Maximum * | 13.1 | 12.3 6% | 23.6 -80% | 14.3 -9% | 15.9 -21% | 13.2 -1% | 13.6 -4% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500, 32 Wh | Lenovo Ideapad 110S-11IBR N3060, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 39.1 Wh | Chuwi Lapbook 12.3 Celeron N3450, HD Graphics 500, 36.48 Wh | Chuwi LapBook 14 inch 2017 Celeron N3450, HD Graphics 500, 38 Wh | Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 14 AO1-431-C6QM N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 55 Wh | HP Stream 13-c102ng N3050, HD Graphics (Braswell), 37 Wh | Jumper EZbook 3 Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500, 38 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -8% | -6% | 10% | 51% | -12% | 0% | |
| Reader / Idle | 957 | 696 -27% | |||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 419 | 384 -8% | 395 -6% | 372 -11% | 631 51% | 370 -12% | 420 0% |
| Load | 118 | 199 69% |
Pro
Contra
El Lenovo Ideapad es una máquina lenta. Incluso tareas simples, como abrir el administrador de archivos o cargar una página web liviana, pueden convertirse en un ejercicio de paciencia. La pantalla también es muy inexacta al mostrar los colores y los ángulos de visión son pobres. Si bien es lo suficientemente competente para las tareas básicas de oficina y la navegación web, los usuarios deberán reducir sus expectativas o frustrarse.
Dicho esto, hay varios lugares donde los 120s superan a su competencia. En términos de diseño, estabilidad de la carcasa, teclado y duración de la batería, hay pocos portátiles económicos que pueden superar los 120s a $250. El diseño sin ventilador crea una experiencia silenciosa, y la duración de la batería y su construcción ligera la convierten en una máquina fácil de transportar. Si bien el rendimiento es lento, el Ideapad 120s supera rutinariamente a otros portátiles Celeron de doble núcleo por un margen notable en los puntos de referencia.
Para los posibles compradores con un presupuesto increíblemente ajustado, el Ideapad 120s es difícil de superar.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
Lenovo Ideapad 120S-14IAP
-
11/25/2017 v6(old)
Sam Medley
Pricecompare
