Notebookcheck
, , , , , ,
zu verknüpfen.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Autor Thema: Dell XPS 13 9305 Core i5 Full HD laptop in review: Less display, better colors  (Gelesen 366 mal)

Redaktion

  • Editor
  • High End NB
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 85335
  • Karma: +46/-6
Equipped with a comparable configuration, the 9305 is 300 Euros (~$362) cheaper than the popular 9310. In return, it has a 16:9 screen that displays colors very well and an additional USB-C port. Is the XPS 9305 the low-budget entry into the XPS world?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-XPS-13-9305-Core-i5-Full-HD-laptop-in-review-Less-display-better-colors.539372.0.html

HeavingWithLushLice

  • Gast
Very confused by the DPC latency reported here. The review suggests it's "very well suited" for real time audio and video, but the latencymon shows the exact opposite, in fact some of the worst DPC latency around. Any clarification?

puremind

  • Office NB
  • **
  • Beiträge: 92
  • Karma: +0/-0
Actually higher resolution is debatable considering the subpixel arrangement. There is a loss of resolution because of this, I think reviews should display the effective instead of marketing claim resolution, since as you point out, that resolution is not felt at all.

Henk Poley

  • Gast
Did you typo the DPC latency in the statistics ?

Since the screenshot says 12278 microseconds, e.g. 12.3 **milli**seconds.

But the statistics reads as 12.3 microseconds (1000x off). And actually quite bad.

 

 
C 2018 » Impressum     Sprachen: Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Türkçe | Svenska