驰为 Hi10 Pro 平板电脑简短评测
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L | |
| Chuwi Hi10 Pro | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L | |
| Chuwi Hi10 Pro | |
| iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
| Asus ZenPad 10.0 Z300M-6A039A | |
| Medion Lifetab P10505 | |
| iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
| Asus ZenPad 10.0 Z300M-6A039A | |
| Medion Lifetab P10505 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 379 cd/m²
Contrast: 902:1 (Black: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.88
ΔE Greyscale 6.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.1
Gamma: 2.23
| Chuwi Hi10 Pro IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1" | Xiaomi MiPad 2 IPS, 2048x1536, 7.9" | Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1" | Medion Lifetab P10505 IPS, 1920x1080, 10.1" | Asus ZenPad 10.0 Z300M-6A039A IPS, 1280x800, 10.1" | Huawei MediaPad T2 10.0 Pro IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1" | Haier Pad 971 IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 14% | 22% | -23% | 4% | 2% | 12% | |
| Brightness middle | 379 | 425 12% | 435 15% | 320 -16% | 370 -2% | 392 3% | 294 -22% |
| Brightness | 356 | 402 13% | 425 19% | 308 -13% | 351 -1% | 385 8% | 294 -17% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 91 5% | 92 6% | 84 -3% | 89 2% | 91 5% | 90 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.42 | 0.4 5% | 0.34 19% | 0.36 14% | 0.4 5% | 0.59 -40% | 0.37 12% |
| Contrast | 902 | 1063 18% | 1279 42% | 889 -1% | 925 3% | 664 -26% | 795 -12% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.8 | 4.98 -4% | 4.1 15% | 7.5 -56% | 4.6 4% | 4.5 6% | 3.2 33% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11.2 | 6.61 41% | 8.5 24% | 16.1 -44% | 9.5 15% | 7.8 30% | 6.5 42% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.7 | 5.2 22% | 4.4 34% | 10.8 -61% | 6.5 3% | 4.8 28% | 3 55% |
| Gamma | 2.23 99% | 2.65 83% | 2.11 104% | 2.3 96% | 2.17 101% | 2.47 89% | 2.3 96% |
| CCT | 6988 93% | 7249 90% | 7414 88% | 9907 66% | 6354 102% | 7426 88% | 6882 94% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8529 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 11 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 78 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.8 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 83 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 39 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 44 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. » 99 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.6 ms). | ||
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.5 °C / 110 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 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.5 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
Chuwi Hi10 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (33.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 92% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 6% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 7% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, 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
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 32.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 72% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.2 / 0.69 Watt |
| Idle |  1.4 / 4.82 / 5.43 Watt |
| Load |
11.61 / 12.48 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Chuwi Hi10 Pro 6500 mAh | Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh | Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L 7000 mAh | Medion Lifetab P10505 7000 mAh | Asus ZenPad 10.0 Z300M-6A039A 4680 mAh | Huawei MediaPad T2 10.0 Pro 6600 mAh | Haier Pad 971 7800 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -17% | 11% | 3% | 41% | 20% | 48% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.4 | 3.33 -138% | 1.7 -21% | 2.01 -44% | 1.22 13% | 1.58 -13% | 1.38 1% |
| Idle Average * | 4.82 | 5.01 -4% | 4.4 9% | 4.82 -0% | 3.15 35% | 4.12 15% | 1.46 70% |
| Idle Maximum * | 5.43 | 5.19 4% | 4.7 13% | 4.89 10% | 3.39 38% | 4.15 24% | 1.6 71% |
| Load Average * | 11.61 | 8.32 28% | 8.4 28% | 8.35 28% | 3.95 66% | 6.2 47% | 5.06 56% |
| Load Maximum * | 12.48 | 9.33 25% | 9.2 26% | 9.91 21% | 5.64 55% | 9.27 26% | 6.95 44% |
* ... smaller is better
| Chuwi Hi10 Pro 6500 mAh | Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh | Lenovo Tab 3 10 Business TB3-X70L 7000 mAh | Medion Lifetab P10505 7000 mAh | Asus ZenPad 10.0 Z300M-6A039A 4680 mAh | Huawei MediaPad T2 10.0 Pro 6600 mAh | Haier Pad 971 7800 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | |||||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 364 | 421 16% | 601 65% | 564 55% | 435 20% | 416 14% | 423 16% |
Pros
Cons
来自驰为的这台平板电脑具备美观的设计和高品质铝合金机身。另外Hi10 Pro搭配了一块视角稳定、对比度和色彩都十分优秀的IPS屏幕，同时搭配了各种常用接口。值得一提的还有它的实用配件（手写笔和键盘底座），尽管在这次测试中我们很遗憾地没能测试它们。
驰为Hi10 Pro是一台十分有趣的10寸平板电脑，它十分适合那些难以决定使用哪款操作系统，或者需要在系统间切换的用户。
安卓和Windows双启动功能在我们的测试中十分流畅，这也是这台设备值得考虑的卖点之一（甚至是最大卖点）。遗憾的是，这家中国生产商只为它预装了安卓5.1 lollipop，这并不是最新的安卓系统版本。
英特尔凌动x5-Z8300结合4GB内存带来的性能足够两个操作系统的基本需要，不过用户不能期待它具备完整Windows电脑的性能。对于Windows 10上网浏览和文字处理来说它的表现十分不错，在安卓中更是非常流畅。遗憾的是它的eMMC闪存传输速率较低，无线模组速度也较慢。作为一台10寸平板电脑，它的功耗过高，电池续航也因此只算一般。
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。
Chuwi Hi10 Pro
- 11/28/2016 v5.1 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
