Acer Swift X 14 (2024) recenzija

· Krešimir Matanović · Mobilno · Stranica 2 od 3

Rezultati testova

Sintetika

3DMark Time Spy 3DMark Time SpyAsus ROG Strix Scar 17 -RTX 409020.355,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – RTX 407012.490,0Razer Blade 14 – RTX407011.651,0Asus ROG Zephyrus S17 – RTX 308010.903,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – RTX 407010.818,0Gigabyte Aorus 17 BKF – RTX 406010.815,0Asus ROG Strix G15 AE – Radeon RX 6800M10.606,0Asus ROG Strix SCAR 17 – RTX 308010.240,0Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 – AMD Radeon RX 6800S8.861,0Acer Swift X 14 – RTX 40608.068,0Gigabyte Aorus 15G KC – RTX 3060 MaxQ7.872,0Gigabyte Aero 15 KC – RTX 3060 MaxQ7.867,0Dell G7 7700 – RTX 2070 Super7.242,0Dell G7 7790 – RTX2080 MaxQ6.975,0Dell XPS 17 9710 – RTX 3060 MaxQ6.855,0MSI GTX 1660 Ti Gaming X6.757,0Dell G5 5590 – RTX2070 MaxQ6.516,0Asus TUF Gaming A15 – RTX 20606.083,0Asus G531GU – GTX1660Ti5.368,0Dell G3 3590 – GTX1660Ti MaxQ5.109,0Dell XPS 15 9520 – RTX 3050 Ti4.793,0Dell XPS 17 9700 – GTX1650 Ti3.831,0Dell XPS 15 9500 – GTX 1650 Ti3.653,0Dell G3 3590 – GTX 16503.639,0Asus Zenbook Duo (2024) – Intel Arc3.201,0Asus Zenbook 14X OLED – Iris Xe1.835,0Asus ZenBook Duo 14 – Iris Xe1.786,0Asus Zenbook S 13 OLED – Iris Xe1.527,0022.391 3DMark Port Royal 3DMark Port RoyalAsus ROG Strix Scar 17 (G733PY) – RTX 409013.080,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – RTX 40707.165,0Razer Blade 14 – RTX40707.063,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – RTX 40706.725,0Asus ROG Zephyrus S17 – RTX 30806.698,0Asus ROG Strix SCAR 17 – RTX 30806.328,0Gigabyte Aorus 17 BKF – RTX 40605.882,0Asus ROG Strix G15 AE – Radeon RX 6800M5.515,0Asus STRIX RTX 3060 12GB5.220,0Gigabyte Aorus 15G KC – RTX 3060 MaxQ4.700,0Dell XPS 17 9710 – RTX 3060 MaxQ4.017,0Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 – AMD Radeon RX6800S3.923,0Acer Swift X 14 – RTX 40603.819,0014.388 3DMark Speed Way 3DMark Speed WayAsus ROG Strix Scar 17 (G733PY) – RTX 40905.358,0Gigabyte RTX 4070 Ti Gaming OC5.156,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – RTX 40702.903,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – RTX 40702.723,0Acer Swift X 14 – RTX 40601.626,005.894 Grafičke performanse mobilne RTX 4060 kartice su u osnovi sasvim solidne i omogućavaju igranje modernih igara na 1080p rezoluciji u srednjoj razini kvalitete. Na Ray Tracing treba zaboraviti. Ipak, u prvom i drugom testu vidimo kako su performanse RTX 4060 kartice u ovom prijenosniku dosta niže nego recimo u Gigabyte Aorus 17 BKF koji ima znatno bolje riješeno hlađenje i puno deblju šasiju. Stoga će i igre biti nešto usporene i ne treba računati na performanse kao kod gamerskih prijenosnika. 3DMark CPU 3DMark CPU ProfileCore i7-14700K14.381,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 -i9-14900HX11.650,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – i7-13650HX9.033,0Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H7.574,0Razer Blade 14 – Ryzen 9 7940HS7.291,0Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H5.495,0015.819 Performanse procesora su pak znatno drugačije nego grafičke. On je bolje hlađen i ovdje vidimo kako je jači od Ryzena 9 7940HS, ali i od Core 9 Ultra 185H u iznimno tankom Zenbooku Duo 14 OLED.

CPU Performanse

Cinebench 23 Cinebench 23 Multicore CPURyzen 9 7950X37.776,0Core i7-14700K35.503,0Asus ROG Scar 17 – Ryzen 9 7945HX32.274,0Ryzen 9 7900X29.303,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – i9-14900HX28.895,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – i7-13650HX20.427,0Gigabyte Aorus 17 – Core i7-13700H15.962,0Ryzen 5 7600X15.409,0Razer Blade 14 – Ryzen 9 7940HS15.115,0Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H13.714,0Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H12.986,0Asus Zenbook S 13 OLED – i7-1355U5.808,0041.554 Cinebench 23 Single Core CPUAcer Predator Helios Neo 16 – i9-14900HX2.212,0Core i7-14700K2.187,0Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H1.806,0Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H1.736,002.433 Opet nešto više performanse 155H modela u odnosu na 185H govore koliko je hlađenje bitno i kako bi 155H možda bio sasvim dovoljan u Asusovom prijenosniku. Blender Blender BMW Benchmark (sekunde, manje je bolje)Core i7-14700K68,2Asus ROG Scar 17 – Ryzn 9 7945HX77,7Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – i9-14900HX95,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – i7-13650HX122,1Gigabyte Aorus 17 – Core i7-13700H154,6Ryzen 9 3900X157,4Razer Blade 14 – Ryzen 9 7940HS167,2Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H170,2Ryzen 9 5900HX176,7Core i9-11900H181,7Ryzen 9 5900HX @ Asus ROG Strix SCAR 17182,2AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS @ Asus ROG Zephyrus G14185,0Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H212,8Ryzen 7 4800H228,0Ryzen 7 3700X233,0Dell XPS 15 9520 – i9-12900HK237,3Core i7 10750H258,1Ryzen 7 2700X264,8i7 10870H275,7i5-10600K301,7Asus Zenbook S 13 OLED – i7-1355U451,30496 Blender Gooseberry Benchmark (sekunde, manje je bolje)Core i7-14700K317,8Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – i9-14900HX474,3Asus ROG Strix G16 – i7-13650HX901,0Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H949,9Razer Blade 14 – Ryzen 9 7940HS1.158,1Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H1.450,001.595 U Blender testovima ponovno ista situacija, 155H s boljim hlađenjem je puno brži od 185H, što se pogotovo osjeti u dugotrajnijem testu. Handbrake Handbrake (FPS)Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – i9-14900HX88,8Core i7-14700K79,5Acer Swift X 14 – Core Ultra 7 155H58,2Asus Zenbook Duo – Core Ultra 9 185H46,2098 I za kraj transkodiranje gdje 155H opet pokazuje sasvim solidne performanse.

SSD performanse

Čitanje ATTO Disk Benchmark 512KSamsung PM9A1 RAID 0 – Neo 1612.400,0Samsung PM9A1a 1TB – Swift X 146.620,0Gigabyte AG470S 1 TB6.533,0Samsung PM9A1 – Blade 146.210,0Samsung PM9A1 2TB6.030,0Micron 3400 1TB – Zenbook S 13 OLED5.930,0Samsung PM9A1 2TB- Scar 174.950,0Micron 2400 1 TB – Strix G164.380,0Micron 2450 1TB3.440,0Toshiba 1TB3.340,0SKHynix PC711 1TB3.200,0WDC SN730 1TB2.970,0SKHynix PC601 512GB @ G72.950,0Kingston OM8PCP3512F2.920,0SKHynix PC611 1TB @ XPS 152.920,0Toshiba XG6 512GB2.900,0Samsung PM991a 512 GB2.810,0Gigabyte SSD 512GB2.750,0Samsung PM981a 1TB2.730,0Kioxia XG6 1TB2.710,0Samsung 960 Evo 1TB2.473,4Toshiba BG4 256 GB @ G32.350,0Toshiba BG4 256 GB2.220,0Kioxia BG4 512GB @ Vostro 35002.210,0Kioxia BG4 512GB2.170,0SK Hynix PC401 512GB2.080,0Toshiba BG3 512GB1.521,9WDC PC SN520 @ G31.480,1WDC PC SN520 256 GB1.440,0Toshiba BG3 256GB1.370,0Toshiba BG3 512GB1.340,0Toshiba BG3 256GB1.340,0Toshiba BG3 512GB1.210,0Toshiba KBG30ZMS512G1.040,2SK Hynix SC311 256GB741,6Toshiba MQ04ABF100563,7ST1000LM035120,0WDC WD10SPZX @ G3104,4102,0013.640 Zapis ATTO Disk Benchmark 512KSamsung PM9A1 RAID 0 – Neo 169.720,0Gigabyte AG470S 1 TB5.221,0Samsung PM9A1a 1TB – Swift X 144.820,0Samsung PM9A1 2TB4.770,0Samsung PM9A1 2TB- Scar 174.620,0Samsung PM9A1 – Blade 144.610,0Micron 2450 1TB4.600,0SKHynix PC711 1TB3.950,0Micron 2400 1 TB – Strix G163.380,0WDC SN730 1TB3.080,0Samsung PM981a 1TB2.830,0Toshiba 1TB2.810,0Gigabyte SSD 512GB2.460,0SKHynix PC611 1TB @ XPS 152.350,0Samsung 960 Evo 1TB2.280,0SKHynix PC601 512GB @ G72.210,0Kioxia XG6 1TB1.690,0Samsung PM991a 512 GB1.600,0Toshiba BG4 256 GB @ G31.480,0WDC PC SN520 @ G31.460,0WDC PC SN520 256 GB1.370,0Kioxia BG4 512GB1.340,0Kioxia BG4 512GB @ Vostro 35001.330,0Toshiba BG3 256GB1.310,0Toshiba BG4 256 GB1.210,0Kingston OM8PCP3512F1.080,0Toshiba BG3 256GB932,7SK Hynix PC401 512GB690,0Toshiba KBG30ZMS512G636,1SK Hynix SC311 256GB540,0Toshiba BG3 512GB349,5Toshiba MQ04ABF100344,0WDC WD10SPZX @ G3102,0ST1000LM03596,685,9010.692 Samsungov PM9A1a očekivano ima visoke performanse.

Autonomija

4K@30fps playbackDell Latitude 9510 – 88Wh875,0Asus ROG Strix G15 AE – 90Wh634,0Asus Zenbook Duo – 75 Wh612,0Asus Zenbook S 13 OLED – 63 Wh557,0Dell Latitude 5500 – 68Wh518,0Asus ZenBook Duo 14 – 70Wh470,0Dell Latitude 7490 – 60 Wh465,0Asus Zenbook 14X OLED – 63Wh435,0Dell G7 7700 – 97Wh409,0Gigabyte Aorus 17 – 99 Wh396,0Asus ROG Strix SCAR 17 – 90 Wh390,0Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 – 76 Wh390,0Acer Swift X 14 – 76Wh389,0Dell Vostro 3500 – 42Wh375,0Dell XPS 15 9500 – 84 Wh374,0Dell Inspiron 3593 – 42 Wh367,0Asus ROG Zephyrus S17 – 90 Wh359,0Dell XPS 13 – 52 Wh346,0Gigabyte Aorus 15G KC – 99Wh345,0Dell XPS 17 9710 – 97Wh332,0Dell Vostro 3580 – 42 Wh323,0Gigabyte Aero 15 KC – 99Wh318,0Dell Precision 7530 – 97 Wh312,0Razer Blade 14 – 68 Wh302,0Dell 3590 G3 – 51 Wh274,0Asus UX580GE – 71 Wh272,0G531GU – 67 Wh256,0G3 3590 – 51 Wh255,0G5 5590 – 60 Wh239,0Dell G7 7790 – 60Wh237,0Asus ROG Strix G16 – 90 Wh232,0Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 – 90Wh229,0Dell Inspiron 7386 – 38Wh221,0Asus Scar 17 – 90Wh184,00963 Baterija kapaciteta 76 Wh je dovoljna za oko 6,5 sati autonomije ovoga prijenosnika što i nije sjajno. OLED je dosta veliki potrošač pa za kvalitetu slike očito moramo platiti autonomijom. Ako radite lagani uredski posao možete očekivati do jednog radnog dana ili 8 sati autonomije, no to je to.

Zagrijavanje i buka

acer_swift_x_14_15
 
acer_swift_x_14_14

Swift X 14 ima samo jedan ventilator koji proizvodi dosta visoku buku, pa smo tako izmjerili čak 48,6 dB(A) pri maksimalnom opterećenju procesora. Sama se radna površina ne zagrijava previši i najtoplija je iznad funkcijskih tipaka s 41,1°C. Tipkovnica je na cijelom području ispod 40°C. No, zbog takvog rashladnog sustava samo s jednim ventilatorom grafičke su performanse kao što smo vidjeli u 3DMark testovima malo ograničene i RTX 4060 ne ostvaruje svoj puni potencijal kao kod nekih debljih, igrački orijentiranih prijenosnika. Stoga je Swift X 14 pogodniji za rad i korištenje grafike u svrhu obrade fotografija i videa, nego za igranje – što ne znači da ne može sasvim solidno potjerati i kakvu igru.

POVEZANI ČLANCI