Recensione breve del Tablet Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Marcus Herbrich, 07/18/2017

Realizzato per gli spilorci. L'ultimo tablet Amazon Fire 7 è più sottile, monta un display migliore e dovrebbe offire una autonomia migliore. Il prezzo, tuttavia, resta invariato, e la generazione 2017 resta molto economica. Vediamo insieme se vale la pena o meno comprare questo tablet.

Dispositivo di test fornito da Amazon Deutschland

(download rating image as PNG or SVG)

I nostri Top 10
» Top 10 Portatili Multimedia
» Top 10 Portatili Gaming
» Top 10 Portatili Gaming Leggeri
» Top 10 Portatili da Ufficio e Business economici
» Top 10 Portatili Premium da Ufficio/Business
» Top 10 Portatili sotto i 300 Euro
» Top 10 Portatili sotto i 500 Euro
» Top 10 dei Portatili Workstation
» Top 10 Subnotebooks
» Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Top 10 Convertibili
» Top 10 Tablets
» Top 10 Tablets Windows
» Top 10 Smartphones

Size Comparison

Acer Iconia One 8 Xiaomi MiPad 2 Amazon Fire 7 2017 Amazon Fire Tablet Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	615 MBit/s ∼100% +1200%
Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	47.3 MBit/s ∼8%
Amazon Fire Tablet Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	45.1 MBit/s ∼7% -5%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash	569 MBit/s ∼100% +679%
Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	73 MBit/s ∼13%
Amazon Fire Tablet Mali-450 MP4, MT8127, 8 GB eMMC Flash	45.6 MBit/s ∼8% -38%

Confronto immagini

Scegliete una scena e navigate nella prima immagine. Un click cambia lo zoom. Un click sulla immagine zoommata apre quella originale in una nuova finestra. La prima immagine mostra la fotografia ridimensionata del dispositivo di test.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click per caricare le immagini

Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus

HTC U11

Cannon EOS 70D

click per caricare le immagini

click per caricare le immagini

Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus

HTC U11

Cannon EOS 70D


369 cd/m²	324 cd/m²	337 cd/m²
347 cd/m²	328 cd/m²	325 cd/m²
354 cd/m²	329 cd/m²	324 cd/m²

Distribuzione della luminosità

X-Rite i1Pro 2

Massima: 369 cd/m² Media: 337.4 cd/m² Minimum: 1.67 cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità: 88 %
Al centro con la batteria: 328 cd/m²
Contrasto: 937:1 (Nero: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.6 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 3.8 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.25

	Amazon Fire 7 2017 IPS, 1024x600, 7	Amazon Fire Tablet IPS, 1024x600, 7	Acer Iconia One 8 IPS, 1280x800, 8	Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 IPS, 1280x800, 7	Xiaomi MiPad 2 IPS, 2048x1536, 7.9	Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Super AMOLED, 2048x1526, 9.7
Screen		-40%	5%	-6%	-4%	40%
Brightness	337	299 -11%	338 0%	344 2%	402 19%	468 39%
Brightness Distribution	88	83 -6%	83 -6%	92 5%	91 3%	82 -7%
Black Level *	0.35	0.38 -9%	0.31 11%	0.37 -6%	0.4 -14%
Contrast	937	850 -9%	1184 26%	968 3%	1063 13%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *	4.6	9.3 -102%	4.1 11%	5.3 -15%	4.98 -8%	1.8 61%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *	3.8	7.8 -105%	4.38 -15%	4.7 -24%	5.2 -37%	1.2 68%
Gamma	2.25 ^107%	1.99 ^121%	2.33 ^103%	2.44 ^98%	2.65 ^91%	2.11 ^114%
CCT	7338 ^89%	7736 ^84%	6394 ^102%	7222 ^90%	7249 ^90%	6500 ^100%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)						82.32
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)						99.06

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

12500 Hz

17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 12500 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 12500 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6577 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Tempi di risposta del Display

ℹ

I tempi di risposta del display mostrano quanto sia veloce lo schermo a cambaire da un colore all'altro. Tempi di risposta lenti poccono creare sovrapposizioni negloi oggetti in movimento. Specialmente i giocatori patiti del 3D dovrebbero usare uno schermo con rempi di risposta bassi.

↔ Tempi di risposta dal Nero al Bianco
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 16 ms Incremento
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 12.4 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta relativamente lenti nei nostri tests e potrebbe essere troppo lento per i gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 65 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
↔ Tempo di risposta dal 50% Grigio all'80% Grigio
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 20.4 ms Incremento
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 18.8 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta lenti nei nostri tests e sarà insoddisfacente per i gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.8 ms).

AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	144426 Points ∼63% +452%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	73083 Points ∼32% +180%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	26141 Points ∼11%
Amazon Fire Tablet	26094 Points ∼11% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	22854 Points ∼10% -13%

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	5432 Points ∼80% +132%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2345 Points ∼34%
Work performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	5608 Points ∼68% +60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	5279 Points ∼64% +51%
Acer Iconia One 8	4739 Points ∼57% +35%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	3499 Points ∼42%
Amazon Fire Tablet	3480 Points ∼42% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3095 Points ∼37% -12%

BaseMark OS II
Web
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1007 Points ∼65% +103%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	952 Points ∼62% +92%
Acer Iconia One 8	837 Points ∼54% +68%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	521 Points ∼34% +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	497 Points ∼32%
Amazon Fire Tablet	10 Points ∼1% -98%
Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4941 Points ∼57% +2209%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1609 Points ∼19% +652%
Acer Iconia One 8	692 Points ∼8% +223%
Amazon Fire Tablet	248 Points ∼3% +16%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	214 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	150 Points ∼2% -30%
Memory
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1931 Points ∼44% +444%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1379 Points ∼31% +288%
Acer Iconia One 8	765 Points ∼17% +115%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	431 Points ∼10% +21%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	355 Points ∼8%
Amazon Fire Tablet	337 Points ∼8% -5%
System
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	3505 Points ∼53% +267%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1921 Points ∼29% +101%
Acer Iconia One 8	1359 Points ∼21% +42%
Amazon Fire Tablet	978 Points ∼15% +2%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	955 Points ∼15%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	923 Points ∼14% -3%
Overall
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2409 Points ∼64% +433%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1419 Points ∼37% +214%
Acer Iconia One 8	881 Points ∼23% +95%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	452 Points ∼12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	345 Points ∼9% -24%
Amazon Fire Tablet	167 Points ∼4% -63%

Geekbench 4.1
Compute RenderScript Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	7063 Points ∼83%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4187 Points ∼23% +244%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	1216 Points ∼7%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1745 Points ∼36% +290%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	448 Points ∼9%

3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1798 Points ∼59%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1572 Points ∼52%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2943 Points ∼55%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1261 Points ∼23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2578 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1319 Points ∼34%
Acer Iconia One 8	0 Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	1811 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1580 Points ∼52%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	4626 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1300 Points ∼17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	3438 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	1353 Points ∼27%
Acer Iconia One 8	0 Points ∼0%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	21886 Points ∼30% +196%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	20142 Points ∼28% +172%
Acer Iconia One 8	15430 Points ∼21% +109%
Amazon Fire Tablet	8881 Points ∼12% +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	7790 Points ∼11% +5%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	7395 Points ∼10%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	34002 Points ∼7% +1094%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	27537 Points ∼6% +867%
Acer Iconia One 8	12471 Points ∼3% +338%
Amazon Fire Tablet	4136 Points ∼1% +45%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3146 Points ∼1% +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2848 Points ∼1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	30277 Points ∼15% +818%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	25460 Points ∼13% +672%
Acer Iconia One 8	13026 Points ∼7% +295%
Amazon Fire Tablet	4693 Points ∼2% +42%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	3626 Points ∼2% +10%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	3299 Points ∼2%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	92 fps ∼7% +934%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	32 fps ∼2% +260%
Amazon Fire Tablet	9 fps ∼1% +1%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	8.9 fps ∼1%
Acer Iconia One 8	6 fps ∼0% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	4.2 fps ∼0% -53%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	59 fps ∼13% +354%
Acer Iconia One 8	24.4 fps ∼5% +88%
Amazon Fire Tablet	13 fps ∼3% 0%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	13 fps ∼3% 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	13 fps ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	6.5 fps ∼1% -50%

Legenda

Amazon Fire 7 2017 Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Amazon Fire Tablet Mediatek MT8127, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Acer Iconia One 8 Intel Atom Z3735G, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 Spreadtrum SC7731, ARM Mali-400 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Xiaomi MiPad 2 Intel Atom x5-Z8500, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Octane V2 | WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	9531 Points ∼100% +368%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	7994 Points ∼84% +292%
Acer Iconia One 8	6110 Points ∼64% +200%
Amazon Fire Tablet	2326 Points ∼24% +14%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	2300 Points ∼24% +13%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	2037 Points ∼21%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	132 Points ∼100% +230%
Acer Iconia One 8	95 Points ∼72% +138%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	40 Points ∼30% 0%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	40 Points ∼30%

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Xiaomi MiPad 2	43.039 Points ∼100% +259%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	42.73 Points ∼99% +256%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	14.5 Points ∼34% +21%
Amazon Fire Tablet	14.116 Points ∼33% +18%
Amazon Fire 7 2017	12.004 Points ∼28%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Amazon Fire 7 2017	17719.6 ms * ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	15533.8 ms * ∼88% +12%
Amazon Fire Tablet	14186.5 ms * ∼80% +20%
Acer Iconia One 8	5579.6 ms * ∼31% +69%
Xiaomi MiPad 2	4420.4 ms * ∼25% +75%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825	2244.4 ms * ∼13% +87%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

	Amazon Fire 7 2017	Amazon Fire Tablet	Acer Iconia One 8	Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016	Xiaomi MiPad 2	Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
AndroBench 3-5		22%	-12%	-14%	60%	120%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	27.74	29.19 5%		18.4 -34%		58.56 111%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	45.54	49.4 8%		21.41 -53%		76.39 68%
Random Write 4KB	6.03	11 82%	2.9 -52%	9.55 58%	13.96 132%	13.13 118%
Random Read 4KB	21.97	22 0%	17 -23%	21.95 0%	24.42 11%	45.82 109%
Sequential Write 256KB	34.1	37 9%	40 17%	28.95 -15%	56.37 65%	87.6 157%
Sequential Read 256KB	113.7	147 29%	126 11%	65.94 -42%	147.85 30%	288.58 154%

Carico massimo

Idle


39.3 °C	37.3 °C	37.5 °C
39.1 °C	36.3 °C	37.1 °C
39.1 °C	37.5 °C	34.7 °C

Massima: 39.3 °C
Media: 37.5 °C


30.5 °C	31.1 °C	39.9 °C
31.9 °C	32.3 °C	43.3 °C
31.4 °C	32.3 °C	42.5 °C

Massima: 43.3 °C
Media: 35 °C

Alimentazione (max) 36.3 °C | Temperatura della stanza 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

Amazon Fire 7 2017 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.04 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.76 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi MiPad 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (95.07 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (1.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 14% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo di corrente

Off / Standby	0.05 / 0.19 Watt
Idle	0.97 / 2.68 / 2.69 Watt
Sotto carico	4.26 / 4.64 Watt


Leggenda: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Amazon Fire 7 2017 2980 mAh	Amazon Fire Tablet 2980 mAh	Acer Iconia One 8 mAh	Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 4000 mAh	Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh
Power Consumption		-13%	-16%	-35%	-124%
Idle Minimum *	0.97	1.12 -15%	0.8 18%	1.91 -97%	3.33 -243%
Idle Average *	2.68	3.06 -14%	3.1 -16%	3.59 -34%	5.01 -87%
Idle Maximum *	2.69	3.31 -23%	3.3 -23%	4.06 -51%	5.19 -93%
Load Average *	4.26	4.44 -4%	5.1 -20%	4.29 -1%	8.32 -95%
Load Maximum *	4.64	5.09 -10%	6.5 -40%	4.31 7%	9.33 -101%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Autonomia della batteria

Idle (senza WLAN, min luminosità)		15ore 41minuti
Navigazione WiFi v1.3		8ore 36minuti
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		8ore 31minuti
Sotto carico (max luminosità)		3ore 29minuti

	Amazon Fire 7 2017 2980 mAh	Amazon Fire Tablet 2980 mAh	Acer Iconia One 8 mAh	Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 4000 mAh	Xiaomi MiPad 2 6190 mAh
Autonomia della batteria		-17%	31%	36%	-18%
Reader / Idle	941		1257 34%	1353 44%
H.264	511		795 56%	513 0%
WiFi v1.3	516	428 -17%	742 44%	619 20%	421 -18%
Load	209		185 -11%	379 81%

Pro

+ prezzo

+ pannello IPS

+ decente autonomia

+ qualità di costruzione solida

Contro

- CPU & GPU scarse

- spazio di archiviazione lento

- fotocamere scarse

- casse

Recensione: Amazon Fire 7 (2017). Modello fornito da Amazon Germany.

Considerando il prezzo di appena $49, il Fire 7 (2017) è una buona offerta. Avremmo preferito vedere un upgrade più consistente ma sfortunatamente, il SoC lento e lo spazio interno, il display low-resolution, ed appena 1 GB di RAM sono ancora qui. Pertanto, nonostante il fatto che l'autonomia e la precisione dei colori siano stati migliorati, il tablet nel complesso ha performance abbastanza limitate.

Tutti si dhiederanno a cosa serve questo Fire 7 (2017)? Il display con risoluzione bassa da 170 ppi sicuramente non va bene per sessioni di lettura prolungate. Non ha potenza per i giochi e anche per la semplice navigazione web. Guardare un film sarebbe stato più divertente se non fosse stato per la cassa davvero scarsa. Ovviamente, si possono fare molte cose con il Fire 7 (2017), ma occorre accettare dei compromessi.

L'ultimo tablet Amazon Fire 7 ancora una volta va bene per moltu utenti. Sfortunatamente, Amazon non ha aggiornato l'hardware del tablet. Pertanto, il Fire 7 (2017) ha come principale punto di forza il prezzo contenuto.

Nota: si tratta di una recensione breve, con alcune sezioni non tradotte, per la versione integrale in inglese guardate qui.

Amazon Fire 7 2017 - 2017-07-1007/10/2017 v6
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

73%

Tastiera

63 / 80 → 79%

Dispositivo di puntamento

83%

Connettività

23 / 65 → 36%

Peso

87 / 88 → 97%

Batteria

90%

Display

81%

Prestazioni di gioco

8 / 68 → 12%

Prestazioni Applicazioni

25 / 76 → 33%

Temperatura

88%

Rumorosità

100%

Audio

52 / 91 → 57%

Fotocamera

25 / 85 → 29%

Media

61%

77%

Tablet - Media ponderata

Recensione breve del Tablet Amazon Fire 7 (2017)

Size Comparison

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Tempi di risposta del Display

Amazon Fire 7 2017 audio analysis

Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 2016 audio analysis

Xiaomi MiPad 2 audio analysis

Pro

Contro

Pricecompare