华硕 ZenPad 3S 10 LTE (Z500KL) 平板电脑简短评测
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 486 cd/m²
Contrast: 1944:1 (Black: 0.25 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.86
ΔE Greyscale 4.1 | 0.09-98 Ø5.1
Gamma: 2.73
| Asus ZenPad 3S 10 Z500KL IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7" | Asus ZenPad 3s 10 Z500M IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7" | Google Pixel C LTPS, 2560x1800, 10.2" | Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE Super AMOLED, 2048x1536, 9.7" | Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Super AMOLED, 2048x1526, 9.7" | Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch IPS, 2560x1600, 8.4" | Apple iPad (2017) IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -27% | -25% | 16% | 30% | -29% | 9% | |
| Brightness middle | 486 | 489 1% | 487 0% | 358 -26% | 452 -7% | 460 -5% | 514 6% |
| Brightness | 457 | 443 -3% | 510 12% | 357 -22% | 468 2% | 445 -3% | 485 6% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 86 -2% | 91 3% | 86 -2% | 82 -7% | 90 2% | 88 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.25 | 0.43 -72% | 0.39 -56% | 0.45 -80% | 0.46 -84% | ||
| Contrast | 1944 | 1137 -42% | 1249 -36% | 1022 -47% | 1117 -43% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.2 | 5.5 -6% | 5.24 -1% | 1.78 66% | 1.8 65% | 6.2 -19% | 1.4 73% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9 | 11.6 -29% | 4 56% | 10.5 -17% | 2.9 68% | ||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.1 | 6.7 -63% | 7.95 -94% | 1.38 66% | 1.2 71% | 6.5 -59% | 2.1 49% |
| Gamma | 2.73 81% | 2.06 107% | 2.16 102% | 2.24 98% | 2.11 104% | 2.33 94% | 2.22 99% |
| CCT | 6579 99% | 7457 87% | 6565 99% | 6366 102% | 6500 100% | 8056 81% | 6647 98% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 82.32 | ||||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.06 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 142900 Hz | ≤ 10 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 142900 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 10 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 142900 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 8439 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 30.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16 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. » 82 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.7 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 49 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 25.2 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. » 84 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.4 ms). | ||
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36 °C / 97 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 38.7 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.5 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
Asus ZenPad 3S 10 Z500KL audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 53% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Google Pixel C audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 73% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, 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%
| Off / Standby |   0.03 / 0.16 Watt |
| Idle |  1.57 / 4 / 4.09 Watt |
| Load |
7.99 / 9.71 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus ZenPad 3S 10 Z500KL 7800 mAh | Asus ZenPad 3s 10 Z500M 5900 mAh | Google Pixel C mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE 5870 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 6000 mAh | Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch 5100 mAh | Apple iPad (2017) 8.827 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -13% | -19% | -21% | 6% | 8% | -49% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.57 | 1.59 -1% | 1.82 -16% | 2.3 -46% | 2.08 -32% | 1.51 4% | 2.06 -31% |
| Idle Average * | 4 | 4.14 -4% | 4.26 -7% | 4.5 -13% | 3.5 12% | 3.64 9% | 7.42 -86% |
| Idle Maximum * | 4.09 | 4.23 -3% | 4.33 -6% | 5 -22% | 3.58 12% | 3.68 10% | 7.47 -83% |
| Load Average * | 7.99 | 10.89 -36% | 9.82 -23% | 9.4 -18% | 6.97 13% | 6.95 13% | 9.45 -18% |
| Load Maximum * | 9.71 | 11.58 -19% | 13.99 -44% | 10.4 -7% | 7.4 24% | 9.11 6% | 12.31 -27% |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus ZenPad 3S 10 Z500KL 7800 mAh | Asus ZenPad 3s 10 Z500M 5900 mAh | Google Pixel C mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 9.7 LTE 5870 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 6000 mAh | Huawei MediaPad M3 8.4 inch 5100 mAh | Apple iPad (2017) 8.827 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | |||||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 579 | 518 -11% | 638 10% | 393 -32% | 760 31% | 546 -6% | 764 32% |
Pros
Cons
尽管ZenPad 3S 10 LTE的缺点多于优点，但这台来自华硕的高端平板电脑仍然是一台不错的设备。它的机身外观和材质都非常优秀。遗憾的是，我们测试机的工艺品质却不尽人意。它的IPS屏幕十分锐利，亮度和对比度也较高，可以适合日常使用的需要。它在电池续航和系统性能方面也都十分让人满意。
我们对ZenPad 3S 10 LTE不够满意的方面包括：尽管它的售价达到了450欧元（约504美元），但硬件配置并不出色。这台华硕平板电脑没有提供指纹感应器，仅搭配32GB的eMMC闪存，无NFC芯片，控制键无背光，且处理器的性能相比同价位设备也相对较低。它的无线模组速度和后置相机品质也有待改进。在安卓O（Beta测试）已经发布的现在，一台高端设备只搭载过时的安卓6.0让人无法接受。
由于ZenPad 3S 10 LTE的问题较多，我们只能在有限的程度上推荐用户考虑这台设备，尽管它的整体得分十分不错，但目前的售价并不算便宜。
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。
Asus ZenPad 3S 10 Z500KL
- 05/22/2017 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
