C-Force CF016xT USB-C 144 Hz Portabel Monitor - Praktisk när den fungerar (Sammanfattning)
Anslutbarhet
Topp 10...
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara allround/multimediadatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara speldatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara budget/kontorsdatorer
» Topp 10: Bästa bärbara kontors/premiumdatorerna
» Topp 10: Bärbara arbetsstationer
» Topp 10: De bästa små/kompakta bärbara datorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa ultrabooks
» Topp 10: Bästa hybriddatorerna
» Topp 10: Bästa surfplattorna
» Topp 10: Marknadens bästa smartphones
|
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 90 %
Kontrast: 932:1 (Svärta: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.34 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.12
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96.2% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
60.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
66.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.4% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
64.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.51
C-Force CF016xT 1920x1080, 16.1" | C-Force CF015C 3840x2160, 15.6" | MageDok Atlas Gaming Monitor 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lepow Type-C Portable Monitor X0025I0D4P 1920x1080, 15.6" | Odake BladeX 4K UHD 3840x2160, 15.6" | Asus MB16AC 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 29% | -4% | -36% | 32% | -32% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 64.2 | 86.1 34% | 62.1 -3% | 41.31 -36% | 90.5 41% | 43.35 -32% |
sRGB Coverage | 96.4 | 99.9 4% | 90.7 -6% | 62.1 -36% | 100 4% | 64.7 -33% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 66.3 | 99 49% | 64.1 -3% | 42.71 -36% | 100 51% | 44.84 -32% |
Response Times | -63% | 0% | -64% | -73% | -22% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 20.4 ? | 32.4 ? -59% | 10.4 ? 49% | 30.8 ? -51% | 40 ? -96% | 19 ? 7% |
Response Time Black / White * | 16.4 ? | 27.2 ? -66% | 11 ? 33% | 23.6 ? -44% | 24.4 ? -49% | 28 ? -71% |
PWM Frequency | 25770 ? | 4950 ? -81% | 1000 ? -96% | 25000 ? -3% | ||
Screen | -8% | -51% | -83% | -27% | 77% | |
Brightness middle | 214.3 | 205.7 -4% | 144.9 -32% | 193.9 -10% | 371.9 74% | 166 -23% |
Brightness | 206 | 201 -2% | 146 -29% | 192 -7% | 366 78% | 154 -25% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 81 -10% | 91 1% | 88 -2% | 88 -2% | 82 -9% |
Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.27 -17% | 0.78 -239% | 0.75 -226% | 0.31 -35% | 0.02 91% |
Contrast | 932 | 762 -18% | 186 -80% | 259 -72% | 1200 29% | 8300 791% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.34 | 5.61 -29% | 5.79 -33% | 6.66 -53% | 6.36 -47% | 3.51 19% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.45 | 10.87 -69% | 8.43 -31% | 18.75 -191% | 10.34 -60% | 10.49 -63% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.12 | 2.12 -89% | 3.83 -242% | 5.89 -426% | ||
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.5 | 4.1 25% | 6.7 -22% | 7.6 -38% | 3.7 33% | 2.49 55% |
Gamma | 2.51 88% | 2.22 99% | 1.96 112% | 2.04 108% | 2.19 100% | 2.38 92% |
CCT | 7115 91% | 5904 110% | 6295 103% | 8567 76% | 6474 100% | 6346 102% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 60.6 | 88 45% | 58.2 -4% | 39.3 -35% | 91.7 51% | 41 -32% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 96.2 | 100 4% | 90.7 -6% | 61.8 -36% | 100 4% | 64 -33% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -14% /
-8% | -18% /
-34% | -61% /
-71% | -23% /
-22% | 8% /
38% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
16.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 10.8 ms rise | |
↘ 5.6 ms fall | ||
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 35 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
20.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 12 ms rise | |
↘ 8.4 ms fall | ||
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 30 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 25770 Hz | ≤ 42 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 25770 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 42 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 25770 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
C-Force CF016xT audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 82% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Går det verkligen att driva en tryckkänslig skärm på 16.1 tum med 1080p-upplösning, 300 nits och 144 Hz bilduppdatering med bara en USB Typ C-kabel? Det bästa vi lyckades uppnå var 200 nits och 144 Hz när den var ansluten till vår Surface Laptop 3, eller endast 60 Hz när det var ansluten via HDMI. Oavsett vilken strömförsörjning vi använde gick ljusstyrkan aldrig över 214 nits. I värsta fall flimrade skärmen okontrollerat även när vi använde två USB Typ C-kablar, en för data och en för att ge tillräcklig energiförsörjning.
De goda nyheterna är att skärmen fungerar utmärkt när allt klaffar. Färgerna är förvånansvärt exakta efter en ordentlig kalibrering och den smidiga bilduppdateringen på 144 Hz samt de tryckkänsliga kontrollerna resulterade i en smärtfri upplevelse i det här specifika scenariot. Men det går inte att neka att skärmen kunde fått lite mer kärlek i fråga om hur den hanterar sin energiförbrukning och hur den borde bete sig när två USB Typ C-kablar är anslutna samtidigt. Ett bättre utfällbart ställ hade också hjälpt till med att göra detta till en mer användbar extern skärm.