Notebookcheck

Autor Thema: Acer Swift 7 SF714-52T Review: Slim and light subnotebook for a fat wallet  (Gelesen 329 mal)

Redaktion

  • Editor
  • High End NB
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 60340
  • Karma: +35/-2
With the Swift 7, Aces has added a feather-light and ultra-slim 14-inch notebook to its offerings. The devices scores with an IPS touchscreen display, 16 GB of working memory (dual-channel mode), and silent operation. This is accompanied by a good battery life and two Thunderbolt-3 slots. For the whole package, you have to put almost 2000 Euros (~$2226; $1700 in the US) on the table.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Swift-7-SF714-52T-Review-Slim-and-light-subnotebook-for-a-fat-wallet.442104.0.html

S.Yu

  • DTR
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 895
  • Karma: +2/-0
There were devices this light, there were devices this thin, but this is probably the only one that's this light and this thin, but the 32Wh battery also sounds worst-in-class, I may have only seen such a small battery on 11" laptops and tablets.

DavidC1

  • Gast
There were devices this light, there were devices this thin, but this is probably the only one that's this light and this thin, but the 32Wh battery also sounds worst-in-class, I may have only seen such a small battery on 11" laptops and tablets.

Ehh, who cares?

The battery life is fantastic. This is the most efficient Core-based device I've seen. 31.9WHr and gets 8.5 hours battery life in web browsing and 10.5 hours in video playback!

Of course the multi-threaded performance isn't fantastic, and so is the graphics.

Adam_F

  • Einsteiger NB
  • Beiträge: 5
  • Karma: +0/-0
That contrast ratio is amazing - a record for IPS? Shame about the brightness.

S.Yu

  • DTR
  • ****
  • Beiträge: 895
  • Karma: +2/-0
There were devices this light, there were devices this thin, but this is probably the only one that's this light and this thin, but the 32Wh battery also sounds worst-in-class, I may have only seen such a small battery on 11" laptops and tablets.

Ehh, who cares?

The battery life is fantastic. This is the most efficient Core-based device I've seen. 31.9WHr and gets 8.5 hours battery life in web browsing and 10.5 hours in video playback!

Of course the multi-threaded performance isn't fantastic, and so is the graphics.
I don't put much trust in the "efficiency" of x86 and Intel, so far the only way I got acceptable battery life on a Windows device without a huge battery was through using the battery saver, and dealing with severe throttling and a barely legible screen brightness. Maybe it's my usage pattern I don't know but I'm not even gonna try a passively cooled Core device (the lag) at the moment, they're not Apple.

Jesse

  • Gast
Come on Acer, enough with the 'checkbox' crap.

Drop the touchscreen.  Increase the thickness by a mm or two and bump the battery size up to at least 42 watt hours.

Then cut the price by 1/3.   Plus, I can never find these extra-ultrabooks anywhere.  They are mythical beasts.   Can they only be ordered directly from you?

william blake

  • Office NB
  • **
  • Beiträge: 141
  • Karma: +0/-0
it took my attention, no doubt.
just extra 100 nit-and it worth the money, in my opinion.

Jörg Fichl

  • Gast
While I would love to get a new fanless laptop for programming, this misses the mark: too expensive, display too dark, battery life too short - I want to work up to 9 hours even after 2 years: nope, not for me. The CPU is in the same ballpark as a 3rd gen i5, plenty for what I do...

 

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