联想Yoga上网本C630翻转本评测
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Average of class Convertible (17.7 - 209, n=29, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Acer Chromebook 14 CP5-471-53QV (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo Chromebook C330-81HY0000US (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Chromebook 11 3181 2-in-1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX | |
| Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 | |
| Google Pixelbook | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX | |
| Google Pixelbook | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 76 %
Center on Battery: 281.2 cd/m²
Contrast: 1172:1 (Black: 0.24 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.63 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.349
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX IPS, 15.6", 3840x2160 | Google Pixelbook IPS, 12.3", 2400x1600 | Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Acer Chromebook 14 CP5-471-53QV IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Lenovo Chromebook C330-81HY0000US IPS, 11.6", 1366x768 | Acer Chromebook R13 CB5-312T-K0YK IPS, 13.3", 1920x1080 | Dell Chromebook 11 3181 2-in-1 IPS, 11.6", 1366x768 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | -24% | 2% | 12% | 1% | 18% | -10% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 38.4 ? | 59.2 ? -54% | 40.8 ? -6% | 38 ? 1% | 43.2 ? -13% | 38 ? 1% | 52.8 ? -38% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 35.2 ? | 36 ? -2% | 32 ? 9% | 27 ? 23% | 30.4 ? 14% | 23 ? 35% | 28.8 ? 18% |
| PWM Frequency | 962 ? | 820 ? -15% | |||||
| Screen | -4% | 15% | 17% | -27% | -14% | -38% | |
| Brightness middle | 281.2 | 473.9 69% | 348.1 24% | 214 -24% | 198.9 -29% | 192 -32% | 213 -24% |
| Brightness | 262 | 443 69% | 321 23% | 214 -18% | 204 -22% | 204 -22% | 218 -17% |
| Brightness Distribution | 76 | 80 5% | 85 12% | 90 18% | 95 25% | 88 16% | 94 24% |
| Black Level * | 0.24 | 0.35 -46% | 0.28 -17% | 0.1 58% | 0.16 33% | 0.23 4% | 0.21 12% |
| Contrast | 1172 | 1354 16% | 1243 6% | 2140 83% | 1243 6% | 835 -29% | 1014 -13% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.63 | 3.9 -7% | 1.75 52% | 3.24 11% | 3.52 3% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.5 | 7.7 -71% | 4.74 -5% | 17.61 -291% | 18.36 -308% | ||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.3 | 5.4 -64% | 2.6 21% | 3.86 -17% | 1.6 52% | 3.99 -21% | 2.6 21% |
| Gamma | 2.349 94% | 2.13 103% | 2.206 100% | 2.42 91% | 2.311 95% | 2.45 90% | 2.283 96% |
| CCT | 6299 103% | 7643 85% | 6441 101% | 6276 104% | 6553 99% | 6380 102% | 6861 95% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -14% /
-9% | 9% /
12% | 15% /
16% | -13% /
-21% | 2% /
-6% | -24% /
-32% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 15.6 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. » 92 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 38.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16.4 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. » 54 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 962 Hz |  | |
| ≤ 99 cd/m² brightness | |||
The display backlight flickers at 962 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 cd/m² and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 962 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. Flickering occurs at relatively low brightness settings, so extended use at this brightness setting or lower can cause eyestrain. 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. | |||
* ... smaller is better
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 28 / 28 / 28 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 29.2 / 32.4 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  BK Precision 732A (15 cm distance) environment noise: 28 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 29 °C / 84 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 19.6 to 60 °C for the class Convertible.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 21.4 °C / 71 F, compared to the device average of 30.3 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 22.2 °C / 72 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(+) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (+5.9 °C / 10.6 F).
Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (69 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 63% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Google Pixelbook audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 73% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby | 0.3 / 0.47 Watt |
| Idle | 1.3 / 9.3 / 9.5 Watt |
| Load |
12.9 / 43.3 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 128 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 i3-8130U, UHD Graphics 620, 128 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo Chromebook C330-81HY0000US MT8173C, PowerVR GX6250, , IPS, 1366x768, 11.6" | Dell Chromebook 11 3181 2-in-1 N3060, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1366x768, 11.6" | Acer Chromebook 14 CP5-471-53QV 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 32 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Acer Chromebook R13 CB5-312T-K0YK MT8173C, PowerVR GX6250, 32 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 22% | 45% | 36% | -2% | -8% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.3 | 1.6 -23% | 1.4 -8% | 1.8 -38% | 2.7 -108% | 3.8 -192% |
| Idle Average * | 9.3 | 6.3 32% | 4.9 47% | 4.9 47% | 6.2 33% | 6.2 33% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9.5 | 6.5 32% | 5 47% | 5 47% | 6.7 29% | 6.6 31% |
| Load Average * | 12.9 | 8.1 37% | 5.3 59% | 6.8 47% | 14 -9% | 11 15% |
| Load Maximum * | 43.3 | 28.6 34% | 7.9 82% | 9.8 77% | 24 45% | 12.7 71% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh | Google Pixelbook i5-7Y57, HD Graphics 615, 41 Wh | Dell Inspiron 7486 Chromebook 14 2-in-1 i3-8130U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh | Lenovo Chromebook C330-81HY0000US MT8173C, PowerVR GX6250, 45 Wh | Dell Chromebook 11 3181 2-in-1 N3060, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 42 Wh | Acer Chromebook 14 CP5-471-53QV 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 45 Wh | Acer Chromebook R13 CB5-312T-K0YK MT8173C, PowerVR GX6250, 53.9 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | |||||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 383 | 835 118% | 637 66% | 698 82% | 772 102% | 540 41% | 773 102% |
Pros
Cons
联想Yoga Chromebook C630是一款功能强大的4K屏性能怪兽，事实证明Chrome OS对它来说太大材小用了。虽然C630是迄今为止功能最强大的Chrome OS笔记本电脑之一，但大部分功能都是性能过剩甚至是有不利影响。
特别是，与竞争对手相比，电池续航较差，与我们对Chromebook的期望相去甚远。此外，该设备可能是我们测试过的最不便携的Chromebook。这是15.6英寸翻转本的代价。对于这样一台针对有便携需求的用户的设备来说，C630显得过于笨重。
C630和竞争对手拉开距离。Pixelbook价格并不昂贵，并且在更紧凑的机身中提供了大部分细节。戴尔的Inspiron Chromebook 14占地面积略小，并以相同的价格保持了Yoga Chromebook C630的性能。 Inspiron还包括一个手写笔，并拥有我们在Chromebook上所见到的的最好的屏幕之一。
不过它还是有一些亮点的。首先，4K显示器看起来清晰而美观。此外，由于Chrome OS将来不可避免地要求更高的硬件，因此慷慨的RAM和存储选项将有能力“战未来”。考虑到谷歌在Chrome OS中与原生Android和Linux集成所取得的进步，这样的变化发生的时间可能不会太长，使得8 GB的RAM成为Chromebook的标准。
综合来说，联想Yoga Chromebook是一台称职的设备，但感觉有点大材小用。虽然4K显示屏，8 GB RAM和Core i5 CPU符合了市场的一切需求，但它们最终提供的功能远远超过其他高级Chromebook。而且，C630对于Chrome OS来说太过臃肿了。这个价位有更好的选择
Lenovo Yoga Chromebook C630-81JX0008UX
- 02/22/2019 v6 (old)
Sam Medley
Price comparison
