Notebookcheck Logo
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte Tablet review

华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 评测--纸质显示屏是平板电脑的未来吗？

写在纸上。

通过 PaperMatte 显示屏，MatePad 11.5S 提供了一种特殊的涂层，结合对笔的支持，可以确保一流的书写体验。不过，华为平板电脑的磨砂屏幕也暴露出了一些弱点。
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...
Android Touchscreen Tablet

MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 版的亮点在于显示屏，更准确地说，是 11.5 英寸 144 Hz IPS 面板的涂层，采用类 3:2 格式，分辨率高达 2,800 x 1,840 像素。PaperMatte "涂层是一种玻璃盖板，采用了微观纳米级蚀刻表面结构，可在不影响显示屏清晰度的情况下防止反光。

华为还承诺，MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 显示屏与第三代 M-Pencil 兼容，可实现高效办公。由于采用了特殊的表面，书写体验应该与在纸上使用铅笔类似。

这款华为平板电脑只配备 8 GB 内存和 256 GB 闪存。建议零售价为 399 欧元。

Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (MatePad 11 Series)
Processor
HiSilicon Kirin 9000W 12 x 1.5 - 2.5 GHz
Graphics adapter
HiSilicon Maleoon 910
Memory
8 GB 
Display
11.50 inch 3.04:2, 2800 x 1840 pixel 291 PPI, Capacitive Touchscreen, native pen support, TFT-LCD, anti-glare (non reflecting), glossy: no, HDR, 144 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 227 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: USB Type C, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, hall, OTG
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 6.2 x 261 x 177.3
Battery
8800 mAh Lithium-Ion
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Huawei HarmonyOS
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix (f/1.8) Camera2 API: Limited
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix /f/2.0)
Additional features
Speakers: Quad-Audio-System, Keyboard: OnScreen, charger, USB cable, info material, HarmonyOS 4.2, 24 Months Warranty, DRM widevine L1; Bluetooth Audio Codecs: SBC, AAC, LDAC, HDR 10, HGL, fanless
Weight
510 g, Power Supply: 61 g
Price
399 Euro
Links
Huawei homepage
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating
Version
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Price
81.1 %v8
09 / 2024
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Kirin 9000W, Maleoon 910		510 g6.2 mm11.50"2800x1840
74.8 %v8
06 / 2024
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Dimensity 7050, Mali-G68 MP4		615 g6.9 mm12.70"2944x1840
88.8 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
08 / 2023
Xiaomi Pad 6
SD 870, Adreno 650		490 g6.51 mm11.00"2880x1800
85.3 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
05 / 2024
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4		467 g7 mm10.40"2000x1200
86.8 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
11 / 2023
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Exynos 1380, Mali-G68 MP5		524 g6.5 mm10.90"2304x1440

注：我们已经更新了评级系统，第 8 版的结果与第 7 版的结果不具可比性。 这里.

保护套 - MatePad 11.5S PaperMatte 铝制

MatePad 11.5 S 的厚度仅为 6 毫米，纤薄的感觉令人愉悦，而华为 11.5 英寸平板电脑 510 克的重量也相对较轻。IPS 面板周围的边缘也没有什么可批评的，因为它们保持得相当窄，从而使屏幕与设备正面之间的尺寸比略低于 85%，令人愉悦。华为没有告诉用户安装了哪种保护玻璃。

虽然 PaperMatte 版定位中端，但高品质的金属外壳意味着在手感方面无需做出任何妥协。虽然没有获得 IP 认证，但外壳的质量令人印象深刻。

测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑

尺寸比较

❌
293.4 mm 190.8 mm 6.9 mm 615 g261 mm 177.3 mm 6.2 mm 510 g254.3 mm 165.8 mm 6.5 mm 524 g253.95 mm 165.18 mm 6.51 mm 490 g244.5 mm 154.3 mm 7 mm 467 g297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g

功能 - 配备 USB 3.0 的华为平板电脑

除蓝牙 5.3 外，这款中端平板电脑还配备了四个扬声器和四个麦克风，以及 NearLink 无线技术和 USB OTG。通过 USB 接口进行的数据传输基于 3.0 标准（3.2 Gen 1），也可进行图像传输。在我们使用已连接的 M2.SSD（三星 980 Pro）进行的拷贝测试中，MatePad 11.5 S 的速度达到了 288 MB/s。它支持 exFAT 和 NTFS 文件系统，后者是微软系统的首选。

软件 - 配备 HarmonyOS 的中端平板电脑

华为的这款中端平板电脑搭载了最新的 HarmonyOS 4.2，它只是基于过时的Android 12。不过，该操作系统只使用了开源部分，这意味着大多数Android 应用都可以安装在 MatePad 11.5 S 上，但由于商业限制，谷歌移动服务（GMS）不可用。

有了应用程序库和跨系统搜索 "Pental Search"（可从第三方来源获取应用程序而无需检查），用户仍然可以使用许多应用程序，但（可能）要以数据保护和来源不明的 apk 文件中的恶意代码为代价。谷歌应用程序也可以 通过绕道.

测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑

可持续性

不过，华为尚未正式宣布打算为其 MatePad 11.5 S 提供多长时间的软件。在测试时，这款平板电脑运行的安全补丁是从 2024 年 7 月开始的。

至少在营销方面，可持续性并不是经济型 MatePad 系列的重点。制造商没有提供任何关于材料提取或可回收性的信息。不过，这款平板电脑的包装似乎不含塑料。设备本身用铝箔包裹，而包装的其他部分则由纸板制成。

通信和全球导航卫星系统 - 不带 GPS 的华为 MatePad 11.5 S

配备 WiFi 6 的 MatePad 11.5 S 在 5 GHz 范围内，通过我们的参考路由器华硕 ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 实现了高达 1,000 MBit/s 的高传输速率。高数据传输速率在很大程度上也是稳定的，至少在传输过程中测量的数据是如此。没有使用移动数据的选项。遗憾的是，华为平板电脑也无法通过卫星系统进行定位。

Networking
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
876 (min: 737) MBit/s ∼94%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1015 (min: 495) MBit/s ∼100%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
673 (min: 516) MBit/s ∼72%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
873 (min: 734) MBit/s ∼86%
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
932 (min: 727) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
880 (min: 791) MBit/s ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
450 (min: 371) MBit/s ∼48%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
493 (min: 472) MBit/s ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
847 (min: 791) MBit/s ∼91%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
795 (min: 342) MBit/s ∼78%
055110165220275330385440495550605660715770825880935990Tooltip
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W, HiSilicon Maleoon 910; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø875 (737-950)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380, ARM Mali-G68 MP5; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø847 (791-876)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W, HiSilicon Maleoon 910; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø999 (495-1037)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380, ARM Mali-G68 MP5; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø795 (342-895)

摄像头 - 配备单摄像头的华为平板电脑

与 MatePad 11.5 S 自拍
与 MatePad 11.5 S 自拍

显示屏上方边框内置的 800 万像素固定焦距摄像头采用 f/2.0 光圈，效果不错。不过，照片的曝光度和清晰度都无法令人信服。

背面的单摄像头方案成像效果稍好，分辨率也略高，达到 1300 万像素。不过，光学系统和自动对焦在动态范围方面存在很大不足，而且在日光下模糊现象已经相当明显。在弱光条件下，尽管有 f/1.8 光圈，但 1300 万像素镜头很快就会被逼到极限。我们对最佳光照条件下的色彩还原进行了分析，发现了一些重大偏差（>15）。

1x
1x
2x
2x
5 倍（最大值）
5 倍（最大值）
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑
测试华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 平板电脑

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.

Main cameraMain cameraLow LightZoom 5x
ColorChecker
12.5 ∆E
14.5 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
14 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
16.2 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
15.5 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
16.7 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
11 ∆E
14.9 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
16.3 ∆E
14.4 ∆E
10.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Huawei MatePad 11.5 S: 12.18 ∆E min: 5.28 - max: 16.69 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.1 ∆E
54.2 ∆E
39.4 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
45.6 ∆E
61.5 ∆E
53.3 ∆E
35.7 ∆E
43.2 ∆E
29 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
63.2 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
47.1 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
75.4 ∆E
43.7 ∆E
41.9 ∆E
90.9 ∆E
70.6 ∆E
52 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Huawei MatePad 11.5 S: 46.47 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 90.94 ∆E

配件和保修 - 带电源装置的中端平板电脑

MatePad 11.5 S 的电源装置
MatePad 11.5 S 的电源装置

MatePad 11.5 S 随附 22.5 瓦电源适配器、USB 线缆（USB-A 至 USB-C）和信息资料。如果您直接从制造商处订购，还将在包装中免费获得第三代 M-Pencil（零售价：99 欧元）。华为还提供可选配件，如对开盖或智能磁性键盘。

在欧洲，制造商提供 保修保修 24 个月。

输入设备和操作 - MatePad 11.5S 支持手写笔

华为第三代 M-Pencil
华为第三代 M-Pencil

IPS 面板提供 144 Hz 的超高刷新率，确保在滚动或浏览菜单时显示流畅。不过，在日常使用中，Honor 平板电脑有时会出现轻微延迟。

带有特殊涂层的玻璃表面触感舒适，手写笔也能带来比游戏面板更自然的书写和绘图体验。虽然无法达到纸张的阻力，但使用 M-Pencil 在 11.5 英寸的屏幕上书写仍然非常有趣。华为表示其压力灵敏度非常高，超过 10,000 级，而且在我们的测试中延迟也很低。笔通过磁力吸附在外壳上，并通过无线方式充电。

无法使用生物手指识别解锁。不过，用户可以使用前置摄像头通过二维面部识别进行身份验证。在光线充足的日常使用中，该功能运行稳定，总共可保存五个配置文件。未安装振动电机。

显示屏 - 配备 TFT 面板的华为平板电脑

LC 显示器采用经典的 RGB 子像素矩阵，由一个红色、一个蓝色和一个绿色发光二极管组成。
LC 显示器采用经典的 RGB 子像素矩阵，由一个红色、一个蓝色和一个绿色发光二极管组成。

这块对角线长约 29 厘米的 IPS 显示屏像素密度略低于 300 PPI，令人满意。华为宣传说采用磨砂面板不会明显降低显示质量，但在我们看来，磨砂表面确实会减弱色彩的亮度和清晰度。

对于这个价位的产品来说，亮度是令人满意的，但只有 83% 的亮度并不均匀。在我们的测量中，MatePad 11.5 S 的最大亮度为 511 cd/m²。即使在模拟面板上亮区和暗区均匀分布的更真实的 APL18 测量中，亮度也几乎相同，为 509 cd/m²。在示波器下，我们无法检测到脉冲宽度调制引起的任何闪烁。

441
cd/m²		459
cd/m²		442
cd/m²
424
cd/m²		511
cd/m²		442
cd/m²
444
cd/m²		450
cd/m²		429
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 511 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 449.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.28 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 511 cd/m²
Contrast: 516:1 (Black: 0.99 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
97.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
TFT-LCD, 2800x1840, 11.5"		Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
LTPS, 2944x1840, 12.7"		Xiaomi Pad 6
IPS LCD, 2880x1800, 11"		Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
TFT, 2000x1200, 10.4"		Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
TFT-LCD, 2304x1440, 10.9"
Screen
1%
43%
55%
45%
Brightness middle
511
148
-71%
541
6%
486
-5%
694
36%
Brightness
449
139
-69%
494
10%
466
4%
695
55%
Brightness Distribution
83
90
8%
89
7%
92
11%
88
6%
Black Level *
0.99
0.3
70%
0.65
34%
0.26
74%
0.66
33%
Contrast
516
493
-4%
832
61%
1869
262%
1052
104%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
3.6
3.59
-0%
0.9
75%
2.29
36%
2.1
42%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
7.5
5.52
26%
1.8
76%
6.82
9%
4.3
43%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.5
3
45%
1.4
75%
2.8
49%
3.3
40%
Gamma
2.27 97%
2.243 98%
2.26 97%
2.229 99%
2.26 97%
CCT
7566 86%
7115 91%
6710 97%
7145 91%
7010 93%

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

PaperMatte Edtion 在色彩还原方面有一些小瑕疵。我们使用 Calman 分析软件检查了 IPS 面板的校准情况。我们使用光度计测量的平均 Delta-E 偏差为 3.6（色彩）和 5.5（灰度），超出了目标范围（<3）。

显示屏的对比度在 1:500 时也不是很好。原因是 0.99 cd/m² 的黑色值较差。我们无法确定蚀刻表面结构在多大程度上产生了负面影响，但我们以前很少看到如此高的数值。

色彩精确度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常、标准）
色彩精确度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常、标准）
色彩空间（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）
色彩空间（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）
灰度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）
灰度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）
色彩饱和度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）
色彩饱和度（目标色彩空间：sRGB，配置文件：正常，标准）

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
14.82 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4.988 ms rise
↘ 9.836 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 32 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms).
   ↔    Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
29.48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 12.48 ms rise
↘ 17 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 36 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

IPS 面板的可视角度稳定性尚可，色彩没有明显变化。相比之下，MatePad 11.5 S 的户外配置非常出色。在阳光直射下，内容依然清晰易读，由于采用了特殊的显示处理，玻璃表面几乎没有反光。

性能 - 配备麒麟 SoC 的 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte

MatePad 11.5 S 安装的处理器非常有趣。这不是 麒麟 9000W 的 MatePad Pro 13.2而是华为没有详细描述的另一个 9000WL 版本。不过，根据系统应用（Device Info HW），该芯片同样由四个 ARM Cortex A510 内核和八个来自海思的额外内核（6x 0x0D42 + 2x 0x0D02）组成。这是因为在 Geekbench 基准测试中，这两款自制 SoC 的性能处于非常接近的水平。总体而言，麒麟 9000WL 在中端平板电脑中的定位非常具有竞争力。

Geekbench 6.3 | Geekbench 5.5 | PCMark for Android | CrossMark | BaseMark OS II | AImark | UL Procyon AI Inference for Android
Geekbench 6.3
Multi-Core
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (3987 - 4370, n=4)
4109 Points +3%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
3989 Points
Average of class Tablet (493 - 14690, n=70, last 2 years)
3544 Points -11%
Xiaomi Pad 6
3357 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
2858 Points -28%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
2408 Points -40%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
2021 Points -49%
Single-Core
Xiaomi Pad 6
1299 Points +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (1174 - 1343, n=4)
1248 Points 0%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
1245 Points
Average of class Tablet (185 - 3715, n=70, last 2 years)
1111 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
1011 Points -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
966 Points -22%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
964 Points -23%
Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Xiaomi Pad 6
1003 Points +4%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
965 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (867 - 1006, n=3)
946 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
778 Points -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
767 Points -21%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
757 Points -22%
Average of class Tablet (140 - 1887, n=71, last 2 years)
707 Points -27%
Multi-Core
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (3694 - 3951, n=3)
3841 Points +4%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
3694 Points
Xiaomi Pad 6
3328 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
2728 Points -26%
Average of class Tablet (312 - 8624, n=71, last 2 years)
2494 Points -32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
2045 Points -45%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
2025 Points -45%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Xiaomi Pad 6
13728 Points +16%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
12789 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
12637 Points +6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (10620 - 13858, n=4)
12057 Points +2%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
11872 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
11259 Points -5%
Average of class Tablet (3195 - 20841, n=73, last 2 years)
9847 Points -17%
CrossMark - Overall
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (834 - 1028, n=4)
927 Points +2%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
911 Points
Average of class Tablet (172 - 1944, n=63, last 2 years)
773 Points -15%
Xiaomi Pad 6
754 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
673 Points -26%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
656 Points -28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
601 Points -34%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
6401 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (5821 - 6464, n=4)
6238 Points -3%
Xiaomi Pad 6
5289 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
4424 Points -31%
Average of class Tablet (444 - 11721, n=59, last 2 years)
4205 Points -34%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
3976 Points -38%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
3965 Points -38%
System
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (10428 - 10785, n=4)
10571 Points +1%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
10447 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
9016 Points -14%
Xiaomi Pad 6
8463 Points -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
8365 Points -20%
Average of class Tablet (1103 - 16435, n=59, last 2 years)
7265 Points -30%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
6734 Points -36%
Memory
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
8362 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (7687 - 8362, n=4)
8118 Points -3%
Xiaomi Pad 6
6127 Points -27%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
5328 Points -36%
Average of class Tablet (916 - 10977, n=59, last 2 years)
4862 Points -42%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
4486 Points -46%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
3932 Points -53%
Graphics
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
12763 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (10876 - 12763, n=4)
12155 Points -5%
Xiaomi Pad 6
11263 Points -12%
Average of class Tablet (580 - 57192, n=59, last 2 years)
9168 Points -28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
7031 Points -45%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
5160 Points -60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
5145 Points -60%
Web
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
1532 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (1255 - 1582, n=4)
1479 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
1433 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
1347 Points -12%
Xiaomi Pad 6
1336 Points -13%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
1335 Points -13%
Average of class Tablet (10 - 2051, n=59, last 2 years)
1269 Points -17%
AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Tablet (84 - 156427, n=50, last 2 years)
7290 Points +888%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (738 - 927, n=4)
828 Points +12%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
738 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
636 Points -14%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
457 Points -38%
Xiaomi Pad 6
Points -100%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Points -100%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Xiaomi Pad 6
16501 Points +52%
Average of class Tablet (1662 - 74821, n=57, last 2 years)
11323 Points +4%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
10847 Points
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (10373 - 11155, n=4)
10812 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
6110 Points -44%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
5266 Points -51%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
5087 Points -53%

Legend

 
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W, HiSilicon Maleoon 910, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper MediaTek Dimensity 7050, ARM Mali-G68 MP4, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Xiaomi Pad 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 Samsung Exynos 1280, ARM Mali-G68 MP4, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380, ARM Mali-G68 MP5, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W
 
Average of class Tablet

麒麟 9000WL 安装的图形芯片是内部解决方案，即 马龙 910.它略高于 Adreno 650略高于 小米 Pad 6.虽然 MatePad 11.5 S 的 GFXBench 屏幕外成绩明显更好，但在 3DMark 中，华为平板电脑不得不承认输给了 Pad 6。

3DMark: Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | Wild Life Extreme | Wild Life Unlimited Score | Wild Life Score
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | 3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3001 Points +195%
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1233 Points +21%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1018 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
641 Points -37%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
616 Points -39%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1246 Points +25%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
994 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
838 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
632 Points -36%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
623 Points -37%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4252 Points +12%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3802 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2987 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2268 Points -40%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2236 Points -41%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4293 Points +12%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3843 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2958 Points -23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2299 Points -40%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2148 Points -44%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
109 fps +82%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
82 fps +37%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
59 fps -2%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
51 fps -15%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
256 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
181 fps -29%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
120 fps -53%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
100 fps -61%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
95 fps -63%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps +5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
58 fps +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
56 fps 0%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56 fps
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
30 fps -46%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
155 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
118 fps -24%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
79 fps -49%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
65 fps -58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
63 fps -59%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
38 fps -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
35 fps -12%
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps -17%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
17 fps -57%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
106 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps -24%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
53 fps -50%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
43 fps -59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
42 fps -60%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
21 fps -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
21 fps -5%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10 fps -55%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps +2%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
48 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
31 fps -35%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
26 fps -46%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
25 fps -48%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
17 fps +6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps 0%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
16 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
14 fps -12%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
6.9 fps -57%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
23 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
20 fps -13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps -39%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
11 fps -52%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
10 fps -57%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
28 fps
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
24 fps -14%
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps -21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
20 fps -29%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps -57%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
64 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
35 fps -45%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
29 fps -55%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
27 fps -58%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10 fps
Xiaomi Pad 6
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9.7 fps -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
6 fps -40%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4.7 fps -53%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
4.5 fps -55%
Jetstream 2 | WebXPRT 4 | Speedometer 2.0 | Speedometer 3.0 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (89.5 - 155.8, n=4)
112.1 Points +25%
Average of class Tablet (19.9 - 334, n=70, last 2 years)
111.2 Points +24%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
108.8 Points +22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE (Chrome 119)
102.6 Points +15%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
102.343 Points +14%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
89.474 Points
Xiaomi Pad 6 (Chrome 115)
86.985 Points -3%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (85 - 160, n=4)
116 Points +36%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
114 Points +34%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE (Chrome 119)
107 Points +26%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
107 Points +26%
Average of class Tablet (21 - 315, n=69, last 2 years)
106.9 Points +26%
Xiaomi Pad 6 (Chrome 115)
94 Points +11%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
85 Points
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Tablet (2.59 - 572, n=64, last 2 years)
121.9 runs/min +94%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (62.7 - 208, n=3)
112.9 runs/min +80%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
99.8 runs/min +59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
90.6 runs/min +44%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE (Chrome 119)
80.1 runs/min +28%
Xiaomi Pad 6 (Chrome 115)
68.93 runs/min +10%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
62.7 runs/min
Speedometer 3.0 - Score
Average of class Tablet (1.25 - 33.7, n=26, last 2 years)
13.1 runs/min +321%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (3.11 - 12.5, n=3)
7.14 runs/min +130%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
6.37 runs/min +105%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
5.3 runs/min +70%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
3.11 runs/min
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (32134 - 46687, n=4)
37658 Points +17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE (Chrome 119)
34739 Points +8%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
34656 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
32436 Points +1%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
32134 Points
Xiaomi Pad 6 (Chrome 115)
30783 Points -4%
Average of class Tablet (763 - 105178, n=87, last 2 years)
29371 Points -9%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Tablet (319 - 34733, n=75, last 2 years)
3734 ms * -200%
Xiaomi Pad 6 (Chrome 115)
1532.1 ms * -23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 (Chrome 124)
1287.1 ms * -3%
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper (Chrome 126)
1263.6 ms * -2%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S (Huawei Browser V14)
1243.7 ms *
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE (Chrome 119)
1208.7 ms * +3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 9000W (836 - 1244, n=4)
1076 ms * +13%

* ... smaller is better

Huawei MatePad 11.5 SLenovo Tab P12 PaperXiaomi Pad 6Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FEAverage 256 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
-43%
-23%
-74%
-66%
-14%
-47%
Sequential Read 256KB
1837.4
894.3
-51%
1673.97
-9%
521.67
-72%
526.65
-71%
1742 ?(950 - 2037, n=102)
-5%
1045 ?(163 - 3912, n=74, last 2 years)
-43%
Sequential Write 256KB
1134.93
722.1
-36%
745.32
-34%
80.44
-93%
282.47
-75%
1160 ?(452 - 2004, n=102)
2%
686 ?(78.2 - 3154, n=74, last 2 years)
-40%
Random Read 4KB
334.71
237.4
-29%
298.45
-11%
167.23
-50%
225.02
-33%
286 ?(173.5 - 543, n=102)
-15%
189.4 ?(18.4 - 451, n=74, last 2 years)
-43%
Random Write 4KB
498.29
225.7
-55%
304.34
-39%
98.68
-80%
68.78
-86%
319 ?(132.1 - 499, n=103)
-36%
189.9 ?(8.23 - 555, n=74, last 2 years)
-62%

游戏 - MatePad 11.5S 仅能达到 60 fps

通过 GameBench 的应用程序我们来看看Android 游戏在 Maleloon 910 上运行的流畅程度。 Maleloon 910运行。MatePad 11.5 S 甚至可以运行《源氏冲击》等要求较高的低细节游戏。不过，华为的这款中端设备无法运行 HFR 游戏。我们测得的最高帧数为每秒 60 帧。在购买之前，您还应该记住，由于缺乏谷歌移动服务，有些游戏可能无法玩。

Geshin Impact
Geshin Impact
PUBG 手机
PUBG 手机
使命召唤》移动版
使命召唤》移动版
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; Call of Duty Mobile: Ø59.9 (58-60)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; Genshin Impact; lowest 120 fps: Ø56 (46-61)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; Genshin Impact; highest 120 fps: Ø37.2 (18-60)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø59.5 (57-60)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø59.4 (49-60)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD: Ø39.7 (37-41)

排放物 - 带低音的华为平板电脑

温度

在日常使用中，外壳几乎不会发热，即使在负载情况下，温度上升也很温和。我们使用 3DMark 来检查内部散热情况。MatePad 11.5 S 的极限压力测试运行平稳，一致性超过 99%。

Max. Load
 39.8 °C41.2 °C36.5 °C 
 37.8 °C37.9 °C33.7 °C 
 34.7 °C33.8 °C32.9 °C 
Maximum: 41.2 °C
Average: 36.5 °C
36.6 °C37.9 °C41.3 °C
33 °C35.4 °C36.9 °C
33 °C33.3 °C35.3 °C
Maximum: 41.3 °C
Average: 35.9 °C
Power Supply (max.)  37.4 °C | Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36.5 °C / 98 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 41.2 °C / 106 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 41.3 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.5 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

0510152025Tooltip
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø23.6 (23.5-23.7)
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø13 (12.9-13)
Xiaomi Pad 6 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø21.5 (21.1-25.4)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø13.8 (13.7-13.8)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø17.7 (17.6-17.9)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø6.29 (6.26-6.32)
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper Mali-G68 MP4, Dimensity 7050, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø3.74 (3.73-3.75)
Xiaomi Pad 6 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø6.27 (6.1-7.39)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø3.8 (3.77-3.83)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Mali-G68 MP5, Exynos 1380, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø5.05 (5.03-5.07)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S Maleoon 910, Kirin 9000W, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø22.7 (22.6-22.7)
3DMark
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
99.5 (3.73min - 3.75max) % +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
99.3 (5.03min - 5.07max) % 0%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
99 (6.26min - 6.32max) %
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
98.2 (3.77min - 3.83max) % -1%
Xiaomi Pad 6
82.5 (6.1min - 7.39max) % -17%
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
99.5 (12.9min - 13max) % 0%
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
99.2 (23.5min - 23.7max) %
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
99.1 (13.7min - 13.8max) % 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
98.4 (17.6min - 17.9max) % -1%
Xiaomi Pad 6
83.1 (21.1min - 25.4max) % -16%
Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
99.5 (22.6min - 22.7max) %
Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
98.3 (1.765min - 1.795max) %

Legend

 
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W, HiSilicon Maleoon 910, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper MediaTek Dimensity 7050, ARM Mali-G68 MP4, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Xiaomi Pad 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024 Samsung Exynos 1280, ARM Mali-G68 MP4, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380, ARM Mali-G68 MP5, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash

发言人

四个扬声器为中端平板电脑提供了非常好的音效体验。即使是轻微的低音也清晰可辨。华为平板电脑无疑是这个价位最好的平板电脑之一。在外放音频方面，MatePad 的表现就没那么好了：蓝牙编解码器的选择非常有限，功能列表中也缺少 3.5 毫米插孔连接。

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.835.62530.833.73125.536.44021.536.15031.335.76328.236.18016.53910018.850.1125165316017.965.820015.966.325015.562.731516.366.74001470.650015.376.563015.477.48001573.7100015.280.4125014.284.516001579.9200014.280.6250014.279315015.578.4400014.271500014.171.3630015.574800014.470.71000014.170.91250015.766.71600014.163.9SPL26.990.3N0.885median 15.2median 71.3Delta0.86.236.937.929.62723.725.635.629.338.639.124.230.518.934.318.940.315.745.813.959.714.759.715.263.712.966.911.46712.77112.270.111.571.611.673.613.675.312.875.81374.412.774.112.775.112.975.913.47313.471.813.97313.669.513.660.613.753.725.185.70.668.5median 13.4median 710.76.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHuawei MatePad 11.5 SSamsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 77% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 11% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 8% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

能源管理 - MatePad 11.5S PaperMatte 在负载情况下几乎不耗电

耗电量

8800 毫安时电池可通过 USB-C 接口充电，最高功率为 22.5 瓦，充满电需要大约两个小时。11.5 英寸平板电脑的功率接近 6 瓦，闲置时有些耗电，但 MatePad 在负载情况下仅多消耗 1 瓦。

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.11 / 0.16 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.53 / 5.96 / 6.07 Watt
Load midlight 6.87 / 6.88 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
8800 mAh		Xiaomi Pad 6
8840 mAh		Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
7040 mAh		Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
8000 mAh
Power Consumption
-26%
42%
-35%
Idle Minimum *
1.53
0.96
37%
1.2
22%
1.13
26%
Idle Average *
5.96
4.91
18%
1.4
77%
4.81
19%
Idle Maximum *
6.07
5.07
16%
1.8
70%
4.89
19%
Load Average *
6.87
11.8
-72%
2.5
64%
15.02
-119%
Load Maximum *
6.88
15.9
-131%
8.3
-21%
15.22
-121%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

01234567891011Tooltip
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W: Ø5.62 (2.6-6.9)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380: Ø6.76 (2.38-11.7)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

0123456Tooltip
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø6.67 (6.28-6.8)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø5.4 (4.89-6.13)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S HiSilicon Kirin 9000W; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø2.67 (2.64-2.93)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE Samsung Exynos 1380; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø2.29 (2.22-2.76)

电池寿命

在标准显示屏亮度为 150 cd/m² 的实际 WiFi 网上冲浪测试中，华为平板电脑的续航能力非常出色。MatePad 11.5 S 的续航时间将近 14 个小时，即使在高效使用的情况下，也能坚持整个工作日。

Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing (Edge 124)
13h 51min
Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3 (sort by value)
Huawei MatePad 11.5 S
8800 mAh
831 min
Lenovo Tab P12 Paper
10200 mAh
692 min
Xiaomi Pad 6
8840 mAh
823 min
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6 Lite 2024
7040 mAh
754 min
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 FE
8000 mAh
872 min

Pros

+ 低反射面板
+ 运行时间长
+ 强大的扬声器
+ 支持笔
+ 无 PWM

Cons

- 无手机版
- 对比度低
- 无法本地化
- 显示屏可以更亮
- BT 编解码器数量少

判决

回顾：华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte。测试设备由华为德国公司提供
回顾：华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte。测试设备由华为德国公司提供

华为 MatePad 11.5 S 是Android 中端产品中的一个令人兴奋的选择，这要归功于它的磨砂显示屏。当然，蚀刻表面结构意味着必须接受一定程度的色彩还原暗淡，但这种妥协似乎是值得的，因为它的显示屏反射率低，而且使用出色的华为 M-Pencil 可以获得非常愉悦的书写体验--至少对于创意人士和户外使用来说是如此。不过，MatePad 11.5 S 缺少用于生产用途的手机选项，这一点其实并不令人理解。尤其是联想的直接竞争对手 Tab P12 Paper无法访问移动互联网。

MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 对于不喜欢谷歌或游戏的学生和小学生来说，是一款强有力的平板电脑。

除此之外，华为平板电脑还提供了全面的整体解决方案。不过，购买者必须接受内部的 HarmonyOS 系统，众所周知，该系统没有谷歌服务。当然，与 智能手机系列的制造商，但对于平板电脑来说，也必须仔细考虑这一障碍。

如果您不需要哑光显示屏，那么 小米平板 6是一款非常不错的中端替代产品，配备手写笔操作和谷歌 PlayStore。

价格和供应情况

华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 在 德国亚马逊（Amazon.de）或直接从制造商处购买，零售价为 399 欧元。

注：我们已经更新了评级系统，第 8 版的结果与第 7 版的结果不具可比性。 这里.

Huawei MatePad 11.5 S - 09/07/2024 v8
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
86 / 98 → 88%
Keyboard
70 / 80 → 88%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
52 / 69 → 75%
Weight
83 / 40-88 → 90%
Battery
90%
Display
79%
Games Performance
20 / 65 → 31%
Application Performance
63 / 92 → 68%
AI Performance
6%
Temperature
90%
Noise
100%
Audio
79 / 91 → 87%
Camera
57 / 90 → 63%
Average
59%
81%
Tablet - Weighted Average
CO2 Emissions
No Data
Materials
25%
Packaging
50%
Power Use
94.6%
Repairability
35%
Software Updates
25%
Recycle Logo Total Sustainability Score: 38.3%

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.

This is how Notebookcheck is testing

Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > 华为 MatePad 11.5 S PaperMatte 评测--纸质显示屏是平板电脑的未来吗？
Marcus Herbrich, 2024-09- 9 (Update: 2024-09- 9)