亚马逊 Fire 7 (2017) 平板电脑简短评测

Name: Amazon Fire 7 2017
Brand: Amazon

为在乎每一分钱的用户设计。 亚马逊的最新一代Fire 7平板电脑更薄，更轻，搭配了更好的屏幕，也应带来更好的电池续航。不过它的售价却没有改变，因此2017年版Fire 7仍然性价比非常高。请阅读我们的详尽评测了解这款入门级平板电脑是否值得考虑。

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Manuel Masiero (translated by Yuchen Wang), Published 07/22/2017 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android Touchscreen Tablet

Test device courtesy of Amazon Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Amazon Fire 7 2017 (Fire Series)

Processor

Mediatek MT8127 4 x 1.3 GHz, Cortex-A7

Graphics adapter

ARM Mali-450 MP4

Memory

1024 MB

Display

7.00 inch 16:10, 1024 x 600 pixel 170 PPI, 电容式，多点触控, LCD, IPS, glossy: yes

Storage

8 GB eMMC Flash, 8 GB

, 4.5 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Card Reader: MicroSD卡最大支持256 GB, Sensors: 加速感应器, OTG

Networking

802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.1

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 9.6 x 192 x 115

Battery

2980 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 6 h

Operating System

Android 5.1 Lollipop

Camera

Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Secondary Camera: 0.3 MPix

Additional features

Speakers: 单声道, Keyboard: 触控, Keyboard Light: yes, USB数据线，5瓦电源适配器，快速开始说明, Fire OS 5, 12 Months Warranty, fanless

Weight

295 g, Power Supply: 67 g

Price

70 Euro

Links

Amazon homepage

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Size Comparison

Acer Iconia One 8 Xiaomi MiPad 2 Amazon Fire 7 2017 Amazon Fire Tablet Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 DIN A5 ❌

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	569 MBit/s +679%
Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	73 MBit/s
Amazon Fire Tablet Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	45.6 MBit/s -38%
iperf3 receive AX12
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	615 MBit/s +1200%
Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	47.3 MBit/s
Amazon Fire Tablet Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	45.1 MBit/s -5%

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus

click to load images

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus

HTC U11

Cannon EOS 70D


369 cd/m²	324 cd/m²	337 cd/m²
347 cd/m²	328 cd/m²	325 cd/m²
354 cd/m²	329 cd/m²	324 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

LCD tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 369 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 337.4 cd/m² Minimum: 1.67 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 328 cd/m²
Contrast: 937:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
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

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

12500 Hz

≤ 17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 12500 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 12500 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 16 ms rise
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 12.4 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 73 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 20.4 ms rise
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 18.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 56 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	144426 Points +452%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	73083 Points +180%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	26141 Points
Amazon Fire Tablet	26094 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	22854 Points -13%

PCMark for Android
Work performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	5608 Points +60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	5279 Points +51%
Acer Iconia One 8	4739 Points +35%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	3499 Points
Amazon Fire Tablet	3480 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3095 Points -12%
Work 2.0 performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	5432 Points +132%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2345 Points

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2409 Points +433%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1419 Points +214%
Acer Iconia One 8	881 Points +95%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	452 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	345 Points -24%
Amazon Fire Tablet	167 Points -63%
System
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	3505 Points +267%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1921 Points +101%
Acer Iconia One 8	1359 Points +42%
Amazon Fire Tablet	978 Points +2%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	955 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	923 Points -3%
Memory
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1931 Points +444%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1379 Points +288%
Acer Iconia One 8	765 Points +115%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	431 Points +21%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	355 Points
Amazon Fire Tablet	337 Points -5%
Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4941 Points +2209%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1609 Points +652%
Acer Iconia One 8	692 Points +223%
Amazon Fire Tablet	248 Points +16%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	214 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	150 Points -30%
Web
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1007 Points +103%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	952 Points +92%
Acer Iconia One 8	837 Points +68%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	521 Points +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	497 Points
Amazon Fire Tablet	10 Points -98%

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1745 Points +290%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	448 Points
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4187 Points +244%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	1216 Points
Compute RenderScript Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	7063 Points

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	30277 Points +818%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	25460 Points +672%
Acer Iconia One 8	13026 Points +295%
Amazon Fire Tablet	4693 Points +42%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3626 Points +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	3299 Points
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	34002 Points +1094%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	27537 Points +867%
Acer Iconia One 8	12471 Points +338%
Amazon Fire Tablet	4136 Points +45%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3146 Points +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2848 Points
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	21886 Points +196%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	20142 Points +172%
Acer Iconia One 8	15430 Points +109%
Amazon Fire Tablet	8881 Points +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	7790 Points +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	7395 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	3438 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1353 Points
Acer Iconia One 8	0 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4626 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1300 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1811 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1580 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2578 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1319 Points
Acer Iconia One 8	0 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2943 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1261 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1798 Points
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1572 Points

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	59 fps +354%
Acer Iconia One 8	24.4 fps +88%
Amazon Fire Tablet	13 fps 0%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	13 fps 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	13 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	6.5 fps -50%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	92 fps +934%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	32 fps +260%
Amazon Fire Tablet	9 fps +1%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	8.9 fps
Acer Iconia One 8	6 fps -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	4.2 fps -53%

Legend

Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Amazon Fire Tablet Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Acer Iconia One 8 Intel Atom Z3735G, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 Spreadtrum SC7731, ARM Mali-400 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Xiaomi MiPad 2 Intel Atom x5-Z8500, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Octane V2 | WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	9531 Points +368%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	7994 Points +292%
Acer Iconia One 8	6110 Points +200%
Amazon Fire Tablet	2326 Points +14%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	2300 Points +13%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2037 Points

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	132 Points +230%
Acer Iconia One 8	95 Points +138%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	40 Points 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	40 Points

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi MiPad 2	43.04 Points +259%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	42.73 Points +256%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	14.5 Points +21%
Amazon Fire Tablet	14.12 Points +18%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	12 Points

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Amazon Fire 7 2017	17720 ms *
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	15534 ms * +12%
Amazon Fire Tablet	14187 ms * +20%
Acer Iconia One 8	5580 ms * +69%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	4420 ms * +75%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2244 ms * +87%

* ... smaller is better

	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%

Max. Load

Idle


39.3 °C	37.3 °C	37.5 °C
39.1 °C	36.3 °C	37.1 °C
39.1 °C	37.5 °C	34.7 °C

Maximum: 39.3 °C
Average: 37.5 °C


30.5 °C	31.1 °C	39.9 °C
31.9 °C	32.3 °C	43.3 °C
31.4 °C	32.3 °C	42.5 °C

Maximum: 43.3 °C
Average: 35 °C

Power Supply (max.) 36.3 °C | Room Temperature 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.5 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 30 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °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 33.3 °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, 6% similar, 23% 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%

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.05 / 0.19 Watt
Idle	0.97 / 2.68 / 2.69 Watt
Load	4.26 / 4.64 Watt


Key: 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%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)		15h 41min
WiFi Websurfing		8h 36min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		8h 31min
Load (maximum brightness)		3h 29min

	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
Battery Runtime		-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%

Pros

+ 售价

+ IPS屏幕

+ 不错的电池续航

+ 坚实的机身品质

Cons

- 较弱的处理器和显卡

- 闪存缓慢

- 相机效果差

- 扬声器

In review: Amazon Fire 7 (2017). Review unit courtesy of Amazon Germany.

考虑到仅仅49美元的低售价，Fire 7 (2017)可以算是一台超值的全面产品。我们希望它能够得到更大程度上的更新，不过遗憾的是，它依然搭配的是迟缓的处理器和闪存、低分辨率屏幕和仅1GB的内存。因此，尽管它的电池续航和色彩准确度有所改进，但这台平板电脑的整体性能仍然较弱。

最终每个人心中的疑问将是：Fire 7 (2017)的优势在哪？它的170ppi低分辨率屏幕显然不适合长时间阅读。而缺少性能也将会让游戏和甚至是上网都变得不那么流畅。如果前置扬声器的音响效果不那么差的话用它观看电影也将带来更多享受。当然，之前提到的所有用途Fire 7 (2017)都可以实现，但都需要用户相应做出一些妥协。

最新的亚马逊Fire 7平板电脑仍然只适合要求最低的用户。遗憾的是，亚马逊没能为它带来硬件更新。因此，Fire 7 (2017)最大的卖点依然是超低的价位。

注：本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本，阅读完整的英文评测，请点击这里。

Amazon Fire 7 2017 - 07/10/2017 v6 ^(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

73%

Keyboard

63 / 80 → 79%

Pointing Device

83%

Connectivity

23 / 65 → 36%

Weight