Chuwi is infamous for its lineup of low-cost laptops and tablets running on Intel Celeron or Atom CPUs that have the appearance of high-end systems.The Chuwi LapBook Air, for example, looks a lot like the Apple MacBook Air except with a much slower CPU for a much lower price to compensate.
The Chuwi Hi10 X is a 10.1-inch Windows tablet with a 16:10 touchscreen and a detachable keyboard base in contrast to the MediaTek-powered Android HiPad or Atom-powered Android Hi10 Pro .It competes directly with other inexpensive Windows 10 tablets like the Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320 , the HP x2 , and the Microsoft Surface Go .
More Chuwi reviews:
Chuwi UBook Chuwi LapBook Pro Chuwi MiniBook Chuwi AeroBook Chuwi Hi10 Air average (69%) Chuwi Hi10 X Intel Celeron N4100 Intel UHD Graphics 600 Convertible – 05/05/2020 – v7 Test device courtesy of Chuwi.com Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG Chuwi Hi10 X ( Hi10 Series ) Processor Intel Celeron N4100 Graphics adapter Intel UHD Graphics 600 , 26.20.100.7262 Memory 6144 MB , 1066 MHz, Dual-Channel Display 10.1 inch 16:10, 1920 x 1200 pixel 224 PPI, 10-point capacitive, AU Optronics AUO17D8, IPS, glossy: yes, detachable screen, 60 Hz Storage SanDisk DF4128, 128 GB Connections 2 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm headphones, Card Reader: MicroSD reader, Sensors: Accelerometer Networking Wireless AC-9461 (ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.1 Size height x width x depth (in mm): 8.8 x 261.8 x 167.3 ( = 0.35 x 10.31 x 6.59 in) Battery 24 Wh Lithium-Polymer Operating System Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit Camera Primary Camera: 5 MPix
Secondary Camera: 2 MPix Additional features Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: no, 12 Months Warranty, fanless Weight 600 g ( = 21.16 oz / 1.32 pounds), Power Supply: 188 g ( = 6.63 oz / 0.41 pounds) Links Chuwi homepage
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.see all specifications
[+] Add to comparison » Compare devices Rating Date Model Weight Height Size Resolution Best Price 69 % 05/2020 Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600 600 g 8.8 mm 10.1″ 1920×1200 83 % 10/2018 Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
4415Y, UHD Graphics 615 523 g 8.3 mm 10″ 1800×1200 80 % 08/2017 Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 1 kg 17.5 mm 10.1″ 1920×1200 77 % 12/2018 HP x2 210 G2
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 1.2 kg 23.5 mm 10.1″ 1280×800 68 % 04/2020 Jumper EZbook X3
Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500 1.3 kg 18 mm 13.3″ 1920×1080 Top 10 Laptops
Multimedia , Budget Multimedia , Gaming , Budget Gaming , Lightweight Gaming , Business , Budget Office , Workstation , Subnotebooks , Ultrabooks , Chromebooks
under 300 USD/Euros , under 500 USD/Euros , 1.000 USD/Euros
Best Displays , for University Students
Top 10 Smartphones
Smartphones , Phablets , ≤5-inch , Camera Smartphones Notebookcheck’s Top 10 Smartphones under 160 Euros
Case Chuwi devices always feel good in the hand relative to the price and the Hi10 X is no exception.
The metal chassis is rigid with only minor creaking or warping when attempting to bend it from the sides.The base is metal as well to be stronger than the much more expensive Microsoft Surface Type Cover.
There are a few major drawbacks to keep in mind.
First, the tablet (596 g) and base (584 g) are heavy at for a combined total of almost 1.1 kg.Secondly, the hinges tend to teeter and their maximum angle is quite low.
full resolution full resolution Reviews , News , CPU , GPU , Articles , Columns , Other “or” search relation.5G , Accessory , AMD , Android , Apple , ARM , Audio , Bay Trail , Business , Cannon Lake , Charts , Chinese Tech , Chromebook , Coffee Lake , Comet Lake , Console , Convertible / 2-in-1 , Cryptocurrency , Cyberlaw , Deal , Desktop , Fail , Foldable , Gadget , Galaxy Note , Galaxy S , Gamecheck , Gaming , Geforce , Google Nexus / Pixel , How To , Ice Lake , Internet of Things (IoT) , iOS , iPad Pro , iPhone , Kaby Lake , Lakefield , Laptop , Linux / Unix , MacBook , Mini PC , Monitor , MSI , OnePlus , Opinion , Phablet , Project Athena , Renoir , Review Snippet , Rocket Lake , Rumor , Ryzen (Zen) , Security , Smart Home , Smartphone , Smartwatch , Software , Storage , Tablet , ThinkPad , Thunderbolt , Tiger Lake , Touchscreen , Ultrabook , Virtual Reality (VR) / Augmented Reality (AR) , Wearable , Whiskey Lake , Windows , Workstation , XPS , Zen 3 (Vermeer) Ticker Firm metal base feels more expensive than it really is Matte, slightly roughened metal texture hides fingerprints well Lid opened to maximum angle (~130 degrees) The hinge teeters significantly when trying to adjust the angle At almost 1.1 kg, the 10.1-inch detachable is quite dense Pins and lock on the base Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 Chuwi Hi10 X Lenovo Yoga Smart Tab YT-X705F Chuwi HiPad Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 262 mm / 10.3 inch 159 mm / 6.26 inch 9.8 mm / 0.3858 inch 504 g 1.111 lbs 261.8 mm / 10.3 inch 167.3 mm / 6.59 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 600 g 1.323 lbs 242 mm / 9.53 inch 166 mm / 6.54 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 580 g 1.279 lbs 252.5 mm / 9.94 inch 163 mm / 6.42 inch 9.4 mm / 0.3701 inch 490 g 1.08 lbs 245 mm / 9.65 inch 175 mm / 6.89 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 523 g 1.153 lbs 245.2 mm / 9.65 inch 149.4 mm / 5.88 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 460 g 1.014 lbs Connectivity There are two USB Type-C ports and a single Micro-HDMI port on the tablet while the base integrates two USB Type-A ports.If you plan on using the HDMI port, you’ll likely have to find a Micro-HDMI adapter to carry around with you.
Front: No connectivity Right: USB 2.0 (on base) Rear: No connectivity Left: USB 2.0 (on base), MicroSD reader, USB Type-C 2.0, USB Type-C 3.1, Micro-HDMI, 3.5 mm headphones SD Card Reader Transferring 1 GB of pictures from our UHS-II MicroSD test card to desktop takes about 43 seconds.Inserting the MicroSD card can be tricky and ejecting it can be even trickier since the card sits flushed against the edge of the tablet.
Good luck trying to get that MicroSD card out without nails or a pen SDCardreader Transfer Speed average JPG Copy Test (av.of 3 runs) Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) 67.8 MB/s ∼100% +184% HP x2 210 G2
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) 48 MB/s ∼71% +101% Jumper EZbook X3
24.3 MB/s ∼36% +2% Chuwi Hi10 X
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II) 23.9 MB/s ∼35% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) 23.2 MB/s ∼34% -3% Dell Latitude 3400
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) 23 MB/s ∼34% -4% LincPlus P1
18.1 MB/s ∼27% -24% maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) 84.9 MB/s ∼100% +224% HP x2 210 G2
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) 76.4 MB/s ∼90% +192% Dell Latitude 3400
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) 32.3 MB/s ∼38% +23% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) 27 MB/s ∼32% +3% Jumper EZbook X3
27 MB/s ∼32% +3% LincPlus P1
27 MB/s ∼32% +3% Chuwi Hi10 X
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II) 26.2 MB/s ∼31% Communication The integrated 1×1 Intel Wireless AC-9461 offers a theoretical maximum transfer rate of 433 Mbps while our own real-world test shows an average of 367 Mbps when connected to our Netgear RAX200 router.
We experienced no connectivity issues during our time with the system.Bluetooth 5.1 is supported.
Networking iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10 Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4 581 MBit/s ∼100% +58% HP x2 210 G2
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265 448 (min: 399, max: 476) MBit/s ∼77% +22% Chuwi Hi10 X
Wireless AC-9461 367 (min: 359, max: 373) MBit/s ∼63% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165 289 MBit/s ∼50% -21% iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10 HP x2 210 G2
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265 483 (min: 364, max: 559) MBit/s ∼100% +40% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4 476 MBit/s ∼99% +38% Chuwi Hi10 X
Wireless AC-9461 346 (min: 309, max: 369) MBit/s ∼72% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165 272 MBit/s ∼56% -21% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 Tooltip ; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø367 (359-373) ; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø346 (309-369) Webcam
2.8 ∆E 12 ∆E 13.2 ∆E 6.3 ∆E 16.7 ∆E 11.3 ∆E 13.2 ∆E 6.7 ∆E 18 ∆E 11.2 ∆E 14.5 ∆E 17.8 ∆E 7.9 ∆E 7.7 ∆E 18.7 ∆E 17.5 ∆E 19.4 ∆E 6.7 ∆E 2.9 ∆E 12.6 ∆E 14.7 ∆E 12.4 ∆E 8.5 ∆E 8.1 ∆E ColorChecker Chuwi Hi10 X : 11.7 ∆E min: 2.83 – max: 19.44 ∆E
Chuwi Hi10 X Accessories and Warranty There are no extras in the box other than the usual paperwork and AC adapter.
An HDMI adapter or active pen would have been nice to include.Instead, Chuwi offers the active pen as a separate purchase for an additional $20 USD.
A one-year limited manufacturer warranty applies.
Returning the system may require overseas shipping which would slow the process for most users.
Input Devices Keyboard Key feedback on the detachable keyboard is above average especially for its category.Whereas keys on most other detachable keyboards tend to be soft, the QWERTY keys here are firmer and more uniform.Of course, typing still feels cramped due to the small screen size.
Unfortunately, there is no keyboard backlight and the printed letters and symbols on the plastic keys will eventually rub off.The smaller F keys, PgUp and PgDn keys, and arrow keys are also much spongier compared to the main QWERTY keys.
Touchpad The clickpad (~8.4 x 4.2 cm) is two times wider than it is tall for easier horizontal movement at the cost of cramped vertical movement.
Vursor control is slow to respond and it tends to skip as well.The unreliability of the clickpad makes the tablet difficult to use without an external mouse.
Additionally, the clickpad is not Precision-enabled.Two-finger inputs are supported albeit inconsistent.
Standard QWERTY keys with no backlight Very small arrow keys are spongy Integrated clickpad keys have an audible click with great feedback when pressed.Unfortunately, cursor control is inconsistent Though the keys themselves feel cramped, feedback is at least satisfactory Display The glossy 16:10 1200p touchscreen is slightly grainy and colors are way off.
Its biggest drawback, however, is the relatively dim backlight of just 256 nits maximum.In comparison, most other tablets reach over 400 nits to be much easier to use and see when outdoors.
Glossy touchscreen with excessive glare because of the dim display Thick bezels add a lot to the weight of the system The thick glass overlay obscures what could have otherwise been a crisp subpixel image Only slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges and corners 257.8
cd/m² 265.6
cd/m² 259.6
cd/m² 248.8
cd/m² 256.3
cd/m² 256.2
cd/m² 245.9
cd/m² 253.5
cd/m² 250.9
cd/m² Distribution of brightness AU Optronics AUO17D8 X-Rite i1Pro 2 Maximum: 265.6 cd/m² Average: 255 cd/m² Minimum: 31.63 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 256.3 cd/m²
Contrast: 625:1 (Black: 0.41 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 10.04 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9, calibrated: 2.17
ΔE Greyscale 10.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
96.7% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 63% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.23 ICC File (X-Rite i1Pro 2) Chuwi Hi10 X
AU Optronics AUO17D8, IPS, 10.1, 1920×1200 Amazon Fire HD 10 2019
IPS, 10.1, 1920×1200 Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
TFT-LCD, 10.1, 1920×1200 Chuwi HiPad
IPS, 10.1, 1920×1200 Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Sharp SHP14A6, IPS, 10, 1800×1200 Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
YF102, MS_9003, IPS, 10.1, 1920×1200 Response Times -34% -52% -39% -25% -2% Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * 30.4 (18.8, 11.6) 49.6 (26, 23.6) -63% 52.8 (26.8, 26) -74% 33.2 (16.4, 16.8) -9% 44 (22, 22) -45% 32 (14, 18) -5% Response Time Black / White * 24.4 (12.4, 12) 25.6 (8.4, 17.2) -5% 31.6 (13.6, 18) -30% 41.2 (25.2, 16) -69% 25.6 (11.6, 14) -5% 24 (13, 11) 2% PWM Frequency 1020 (99) 19000 (90) Screen 38% 39% 36% 55% 12% Brightness middle 256.3 449 75% 401 56% 408.7 59% 456 78% 251 -2% Brightness 255 425 67% 396 55% 396 55% 426 67% 244 -4% Brightness Distribution 93 89 -4% 86 -8% 85 -9% 88 -5% 79 -15% Black Level * 0.41 0.6 -46% 0.5 -22% 0.51 -24% 0.31 24% 0.33 20% Contrast 625 748 20% 802 28% 801 28% 1471 135% 761 22% Colorchecker DeltaE2000 * 10.04 3.1 69% 2.9 71% 4.13 59% 1.3 87% 5.34 47% Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max.* 17.49 6.4 63% 5.8 67% 7.34 58% 3 83% 9.91 43% Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated * 2.17 1.1 49% Greyscale DeltaE2000 * 10.4 3.8 63% 4.1 61% 4.4 58% 1.4 87% 6.04 42% Gamma 2.23 99% 2.09 105% 2.36 93% 2.24 98% 2.24 98% 3.23 68% CCT 10211 64% 7202 90% 7263 89% 7389 88% 6687 97% 7491 87% Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) 63 62.3 -1% 51 -19% Color Space (Percent of sRGB) 96.7 96.8 0% 81 -16% Total Average (Program / Settings) 2% / 24% -7% / 20% -2% / 21% 15% / 43% 5% / 10% * …smaller is better
Color space covers approximately 97 percent of sRGB to be higher than anticipated for such an inexpensive Windows tablet.This suggests that the Hi10 X is capable of reproducing accurate colors at least in theory.
vs.sRGB vs.
AdobeRGB Further measurements with an X-Rite colorimeter show an overly cool color temperature with extremely inaccurate colors as a result.Because of the wide color space mentioned above, however, the display becomes much more accurate after calibrating it ourselves.Average grayscale DeltaE, for example, improves from 10.4 to just 1.0 and so we recommend applying our ICC profile above to get the most out of the display.
Grayscale before calibration Saturation Sweeps before calibration ColorChecker before calibration Grayscale after calibration Saturation Sweeps after calibration ColorChecker after calibration Display Response Times ℹ Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next.Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting).Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
↔ Response Time Black to White 24.4 ms …rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined ↗ 12.4 ms rise ↘ 12 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms.» 39 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey 30.4 ms …rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined ↗ 18.8 ms rise ↘ 11.6 ms fall The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms.» 20 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.4 ms).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 not detected In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display.
If PWM was detected, an average of 18183 (minimum: 5 – maximum: 25 ) Hz was measured.
Outdoor visibility is poor because of the dim display.The wide viewing angles alone aren’t enough to mitigate the unavoidable glare.
Outdoors under sunlight Outdoors under shade Outdoors under sunlight Wide IPS viewing angles.Colors and contrast change only if viewing too far off center Performance Processor The Celeron N4100 is about 9 to 13 percent slower than the average Celeron N4100 in our database.
CPU performance is still similar to the Pentium 4415Y as found on the Surface Go even though the latter offers significantly faster GPU performance.
See our dedicated page on the Celeron N4100 for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.
CineBench R15 CineBench R20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 Tooltip Chuwi Hi10 X UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø170 (168.8-171.36) Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, SanDisk DF4128; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø97.7 (95.02-98.38) HP x2 210 G2 HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø96.1 (93.86-96.75) Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003 UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y, 64 GB eMMC Flash; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø163 (162.13-163.67) Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Cinebench R20: CPU (Single Core) | CPU (Multi Core)
Blender 2.79: BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 -mmt1 | 7z b 4
Geekbench 5.1: 64 Bit Single-Core Score | 64 Bit Multi-Core Score
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit – CPU Multi 64Bit Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 406 Points ∼100% +137% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U 350 Points ∼86% +105% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel Pentium Silver N5000 213 Points ∼52% +25% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(161 – 254, n=10) 197 Points ∼49% +15% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel Core M-5Y10a 190 Points ∼47% +11% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 171 (min: 168.8, max: 171.36) Points ∼42% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y 164 Points ∼40% -4% Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U 134 Points ∼33% -22% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 121 (min: 118.17, max: 121.14) Points ∼30% -29% HP x2 210 G2
Intel Atom x5-Z8350 97 Points ∼24% -43% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Atom x5-Z8350 92 Points ∼23% -46% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 82.3 (min: 81.02, max: 82.28) Points ∼20% -52% Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit – CPU Single 64Bit Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 157 Points ∼100% +128% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U 154 Points ∼98% +124% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel Core M-5Y10a 83 Points ∼53% +21% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel Pentium Silver N5000 78 Points ∼50% +13% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 70.9 Points ∼45% +3% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 68.8 Points ∼44% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(62 – 71, n=10) 67.9 Points ∼43% -1% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y 65 Points ∼41% -6% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 43.4 Points ∼28% -37% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Atom x5-Z8350 28 Points ∼18% -59% HP x2 210 G2
Intel Atom x5-Z8350 28 Points ∼18% -59% Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) – CPU (Single Core) Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 403 Points ∼100% +163% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U 296 Points ∼73% +93% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 160 Points ∼40% +5% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 153 Points ∼38% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(151 – 153, n=5) 152 Points ∼38% -1% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 100 Points ∼25% -35% Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) – CPU (Multi Core) Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 948 Points ∼100% +151% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U 657 Points ∼69% +74% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(368 – 560, n=5) 417 Points ∼44% +10% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 378 Points ∼40% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 273 Points ∼29% -28% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 190 Points ∼20% -50% Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U 159 Points ∼17% -58% Blender 2.79 / BMW27 CPU – BMW27 CPU Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 6277 Seconds * ∼100% -83% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 4736 Seconds * ∼75% -38% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 3436 Seconds * ∼55% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(2437 – 3527, n=5) 3187 Seconds * ∼51% +7% Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 1264 Seconds * ∼20% +63% 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 – 7z b 4 -mmt1 Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 3851 MIPS ∼100% +79% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 2298 MIPS ∼60% +7% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(2125 – 2459, n=5) 2213 MIPS ∼57% +3% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 2150 MIPS ∼56% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 1653 MIPS ∼43% -23% 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 – 7z b 4 Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 10942 MIPS ∼100% +95% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(5620 – 7729, n=5) 6402 MIPS ∼59% +14% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 5620 MIPS ∼51% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 4114 MIPS ∼38% -27% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 3267 MIPS ∼30% -42% Geekbench 5.1 / 64 Bit Single-Core Score – 64 Bit Single-Core Score LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 436 Points ∼100% +7% Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U 434 Points ∼100% +6% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 409 Points ∼94% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(378 – 409, n=4) 396 Points ∼91% -3% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 310 Points ∼71% -24% Geekbench 5.1 / 64 Bit Multi-Core Score – 64 Bit Multi-Core Score Average Intel Celeron N4100
(1082 – 1271, n=4) 1152 Points ∼100% +6% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 1082 Points ∼94% Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U 873 Points ∼76% -19% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 797 Points ∼69% -26% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 591 Points ∼51% -45% HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset – 4k Preset Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1 3.122 fps ∼100% +203% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(0.974 – 1.5, n=4) 1.154 fps ∼37% +12% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y 1.09 fps ∼35% +6% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 1.03 fps ∼33% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 0.79 fps ∼25% -23% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 0.65 fps ∼21% -37% LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF – 20 Documents To PDF Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 281 s ∼100% +75% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(161 – 178, n=3) 170 s ∼60% +6% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 161 s ∼57% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 156 s ∼56% -3% R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean – Overall mean Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350 2.21 sec * ∼100% -26% Average Intel Celeron N4100
(1.75 – 1.786, n=3) 1.765 sec * ∼80% -1% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100 1.75 sec * ∼79% LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000 1.652 sec * ∼75% +6% * …smaller is better
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit 171 Points Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit 12.7 fps Cinebench R15 Ref.Match 64Bit 97.8 % Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit 68.8 Points Help …in comparison Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit in comparison Toshiba Satellite W30Dt-A-100 (min)
A4-1200, Radeon HD 8180 33 …Lenovo Flex 2 14
4010U, GeForce 840M 171 Fujitsu Lifebook A514
4005U, HD Graphics 4400 171 Dell Latitude 11 5175
6Y57, HD Graphics 515 171 Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600 171 Acer TravelMate P256-M-39NG
4005U, HD Graphics 4400 172 Acer Aspire Switch 12S SW7-272-M3A0
6Y30, HD Graphics 515 172 HP Spectre x2 12-a001ng
6Y30, HD Graphics 515 172 …(max)
TR 2970WX, RX Vega 64 4376 System Performance PCMark benchmarks are consistently below the average Intel Celeron N4100 PC in our database.System performance is so slow that Windows will often skip frames or have noticeable input delays that impact the user experience.
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated PCMark 8 Work Accelerated PCMark 10 Standard PCMark 8 | PCMark 10 PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G 3291 Points ∼50% +20% Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(2738 – 3191, n=7) 2936 Points ∼45% +7% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 2738 Points ∼42% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 1220 Points ∼19% -55% Home Score Accelerated v2 Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G 2480 Points ∼41% +49% Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(1670 – 2259, n=10) 1925 Points ∼32% +15% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 1670 Points ∼27% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 1546 Points ∼25% -7% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, SanDisk DF4128 1264 Points ∼21% -24% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y, 64 GB eMMC Flash 741 Points ∼12% -56% PCMark 10 Digital Content Creation Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(886 – 1237, n=8) 989 Points ∼8% +12% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 886 Points ∼7% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 605 Points ∼5% -32% Productivity Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(2567 – 2993, n=8) 2766 Points ∼27% +6% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 2599 Points ∼25% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 1121 Points ∼11% -57% Essentials Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(3776 – 5199, n=8) 4347 Points ∼38% +3% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 4208 Points ∼37% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 2662 Points ∼23% -37% Score Average Intel Celeron N4100 , Intel UHD Graphics 600
(1502 – 1920, n=8) 1634 Points ∼20% +7% Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 1527 Points ∼19% HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash 872 Points ∼11% -43% PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 1670 points PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 2738 points Help DPC Latency LatencyMon shows DPC latency issues when opening multiple browser tabs and running Prime95 in sequence.You may want to avoid multi-tasking if using the tablet for real-time audio recording.
LatencyMon – Web, Youtube, Prime95 Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128 1981.4 μs ∼100% Storage Devices The integrated 128 GB SanDisk DF4128 SSD offers sequential read and write rates of about 250 MB/s and 120 MB/s, respectively, to be slower than most SATA III-based SSDs where 500 MB/s is the norm.
Results are at least faster than on the Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320 equipped with the same SanDisk SSD.
See our table of HDDs and SSDs for more benchmark comparisons.
Chuwi Hi10 X
SanDisk DF4128 Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
64 GB eMMC Flash Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
SanDisk DF4128 HP x2 210 G2
64 GB eMMC Flash Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G AS SSD 83% -22% 382% Copy Game MB/s 103.75 76.48 -26% 51.39 -50% Copy Program MB/s 88.32 44.34 -50% 36.15 -59% Copy ISO MB/s 130.18 99.05 -24% 57.16 -56% Score Total 117 225 92% 94 -20% 648 454% Score Write 35 92 163% 28 -20% 199 469% Score Read 58 88 52% 47 -19% 302 421% Access Time Write * 1.105 0.233 79% 0.896 19% 0.104 91% Access Time Read * 0.597 0.151 75% 0.454 24% 0.16 73% 4K-64 Write 10.16 44.48 338% 12.91 27% 152.48 1401% 4K-64 Read 25.96 40.27 55% 28.99 12% 241.96 832% 4K Write 12.4 35.07 183% 7.42 -40% 33.22 168% 4K Read 5.94 18.29 208% 5.51 -7% 19.3 225% Seq Write 120.76 126.65 5% 41.75 -65% 134.69 12% Seq Read 258.47 289.84 12% 127.49 -51% 405.38 57% CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 77% 17% Write 4K 12.85 26.91 109% 18.11 41% Read 4K 10.02 19.72 97% 15.77 57% Write Seq 120.8 126.2 4% 62.49 -48% Read Seq 259.7 268 3% 121.8 -53% Write 4K Q32T1 15.17 62.89 315% 31.72 109% Read 4K Q32T1 33.09 39.82 20% 48.64 47% Write Seq Q32T1 108.8 131.3 21% 95.63 -12% Read Seq Q32T1 180.1 259.3 44% 166.5 -8% Total Average (Program / Settings) 80% / 81% -22% / -22% 17% / 17% 382% / 382% * …smaller is better
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 AS SSD DiskSpd SanDisk DF4128 CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 180.1 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 108.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 33.09 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 15.17 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 259.7 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 120.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 10.02 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 12.85 MB/s
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 AS SSD DiskSpd SanDisk DF4128 Sequential Read: 258.47MB/s
Sequential Write: 120.76MB/s
4K Read: 5.94MB/s
4K Write: 12.4MB/s
4K-64 Read: 25.96MB/s
4K-64 Write: 10.16MB/s
Access Time Read: 0.597ms
Access Time Write: 1.105ms
Copy ISO: 130.18MB/s
Copy Program: 88.32MB/s
Copy Game: 103.75MB/s
Score Read: 58Points
Score Write: 35Points
Score Total: 117Points
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 AS SSD DiskSpd SanDisk DF4128 DiskSpd seq_q8t1_read: 252MB/s
DiskSpd seq_q8t1_write: 114MB/s
DiskSpd seq_read: 243MB/s
DiskSpd seq_write: 119MB/s
DiskSpd 4k_q32t16_read: 27.4MB/s
DiskSpd 4k_q32t16_write: 13MB/s
DiskSpd 4k_q1t1_read: 10.7MB/s
DiskSpd 4k_q1t1_write: 13.7MB/s
GPU Performance The integrated UHD Graphics 600 is unfit for gaming as one would expect.Performance is about 60 percent slower than the already slow UHD Graphics 620 as found on most Core ix CPUs.Thankfully, the tablet can still handle 4K playback on YouTube without any dropped frames.
See our dedicated page on the UHD Graphics 600 for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.
Ice Storm Cloud Gate 3DMark 11 Fire Strike Time Spy 3DMark 11 | 3DMark 3DMark 11 1280×720 Performance Combined Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1 2375 Points ∼11% +556% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 1301 Points ∼6% +259% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y 1134 Points ∼5% +213% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a 764 Points ∼3% +111% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000 605 Points ∼3% +67% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(362 – 791, n=13) 526 Points ∼2% +45% HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 392 Points ∼2% +8% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100 362 Points ∼2% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 357 Points ∼2% -1% 1280×720 Performance GPU Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1 2133 Points ∼4% +347% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 1461 Points ∼3% +206% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y 1257 Points ∼2% +164% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a 795 Points ∼2% +67% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000 648 Points ∼1% +36% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(429 – 638, n=13) 532 Points ∼1% +12% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100 477 Points ∼1% HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 349 Points ∼1% -27% Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 297 Points ∼1% -38% 3DMark 2560×1440 Time Spy Graphics Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 310 Points ∼2% +230% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100 94 Points ∼1% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(85 – 99, n=4) 92.3 Points ∼1% -2% 1920×1080 Fire Strike Graphics Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1 1521 Points ∼4% +326% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 942 Points ∼2% +164% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y 819 Points ∼2% +129% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a 509 Points ∼1% +43% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000 459 Points ∼1% +29% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(348 – 484, n=7) 403 Points ∼1% +13% LincPlus P1
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4000 386 Points ∼1% +8% Jumper EZbook X3
Intel HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3350 364 Points ∼1% +2% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100 357 Points ∼1% HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 234 Points ∼1% -34% 1280×720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1 10966 Points ∼6% +304% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 7496 Points ∼4% +176% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y 6602 Points ∼3% +143% Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a 4498 Points ∼2% +66% Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000 3370 Points ∼2% +24% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(2714 – 3869, n=8) 3284 Points ∼2% +21% Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100 2714 Points ∼1% HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350 1841 Points ∼1% -32% 1920×1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1 40415 Points ∼6% Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, 4415Y 35452 Points ∼5% Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U 32448 Points ∼4% Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
(8644 – 16594, n=6) 13302 Points ∼2% 3DMark 11 Performance 519 points 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score 14062 points 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score 2346 points 3DMark Fire Strike Score 327 points 3DMark Time Spy Score 107 points Help …
in comparison 3DMark 11 in comparison Lenovo Flex 5-1570 81CA000RUS (min)
i5-8550U, GeForce MX130 28 …Asus Transformer Book TX300CA
3537U, HD Graphics 4000 519 BMAX MaxBook Y11 H1M6
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600 519 Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600 519 Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600 519 HP ProBook 4535s-LG855EA
A4-3300M, Radeon HD 6480G 521 Dell XPS 11
4210Y, HD Graphics 4200 525 Packard Bell EasyNote LK11-BZ-080GE
E-450, Radeon HD 6470M 525 …(max)
i9-9900KS, NVIDIA Titan RTX 35034 low med.
high ultra Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 19.1 12.4 5.9 5.7 fps X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 3.94 3.48 3.18 fps Emissions Temperature AC adapter after running Prime95 for almost an hour Surface temperatures are generally warmer on the left half of the tablet than the right half since the motherboard is positioned on this side of the device.At worst, the corner hot spot can become as warm as 43 C as shown by the temperature maps below compared to 47 C on the Surface Go .
Max.Load Idle 41.8 °C
107 F 30.4 °C
87 F 36.4 °C
98 F 41 °C
106 F 30.2 °C
86 F 32.8 °C
91 F 37.6 °C
100 F 30 °C
86 F 39 °C
102 F Maximum: 41.8 °C = 107 F
Average: 35.5 °C = 96 F 32 °C
90 F 35 °C
95 F 42.8 °C
109 F 32.2 °C
90 F 34.4 °C
94 F 41 °C
106 F 32 °C
90 F 34 °C
93 F 38 °C
100 F Maximum: 42.8 °C = 109 F
Average: 35.7 °C = 96 F Power Supply (max.) 43 °C = 109 F | Room Temperature 22.2 °C = 72 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer Max.
Load Idle 29 °C
84 F 26.2 °C
79 F 30.8 °C
87 F 29 °C
84 F 26.2 °C
79 F 28 °C
82 F 29.2 °C
85 F 26.3 °C
79 F 33 °C
91 F Maximum: 33 °C = 91 F
Average: 28.6 °C = 83 F 29 °C
84 F 29 °C
84 F 31 °C
88 F 29 °C
84 F 29 °C
84 F 30.8 °C
87 F 29.2 °C
85 F 29 °C
84 F 30.4 °C
87 F Maximum: 31 °C = 88 F
Average: 29.6 °C = 85 F Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer (±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.5 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 30.3 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Convertible.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 41.8 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.8 to 55.7 °C for the class Convertible.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 42.8 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 36.5 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.6 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 30.3 °C / 87 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 39 °C / 102.2 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-10.2 °C / -18.4 F).
System idle (front) System idle (back) Maximum stress (front) Maximum stress (back) Stress Test Running Prime95 causes CPU clock rates to boost to 1.8 GHz for about a second or two before stabilizing at 1.5 GHz.After about a minute, however, clock rates would begin fluctuating between 0.9 GHz and 1.5 GHz as shown by the screenshot below.This cycling behavior mirrors our power consumption observations.Core temperature remains steady at about 65 C when under such extreme loads.
Running on battery power will impact performance slightly.
A 3DMark 11 test on battery power returns Physics and Graphics scores of 1918 and 408 points, respectively, compared to 2009 and 477 points when on mains.
System idle Prime95 stress Prime95+FurMark stress CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) System Idle — — 45 Prime95 Stress 0.9 – 1.5 — ~65 Prime95 + FurMark Stress 0.4 – 0.6 — ~65 Speakers Speaker grilles on two sides of the tablet Pink noise at maximum volume.Bass is poor and maximum volume is on the low side dB(A) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Deep Bass Middle Bass High Bass Lower Range Mids Higher Mids Lower Highs Mid Highs Upper Highs Super Highs 20 42.4 39.3 42.4 25 39.3 38.1 39.3 31 37.5 39 37.5 40 39.2 38.7 39.2 50 39.3 35.6 39.3 63 36.9 36.9 36.9 80 35.7 34.9 35.7 100 35.1 35.4 35.1 125 34.5 33.8 34.5 160 34.3 33.1 34.3 200 34.1 32.7 34.1 250 35.7 32.2 35.7 315 39.1 31.7 39.1 400 42.1 30.6 42.1 500 46.8 30 46.8 630 48.4 29.2 48.4 800 52 28.9 52 1000 59.7 28.6 59.7 1250 60.2 28.5 60.2 1600 58.4 27.9 58.4 2000 56.1 27.9 56.1 2500 53.6 27.8 53.6 3150 54.6 27.8 54.6 4000 57.5 27.6 57.5 5000 66 27.6 66 6300 62.7 27.6 62.7 8000 54.8 27.6 54.8 10000 49.3 27.5 49.3 12500 45 27.4 45 16000 49.8 27.3 49.8 SPL 71 40.4 71 N 24.5 3.9 24.5 median 49.8 median 28.5 median 49.8 Delta 8.5 1.4 8.5 35.3 35.1 32.9 31.8 31.8 32 36.5 35.1 32.4 28.9 33 28.9 36.3 28.8 48.3 27 61.5 27 52.9 24.8 60.9 24 62.8 22.7 63.3 22 69.5 21.2 67.8 21 74.8 20 75.9 19.4 72.7 18.9 71 17.7 70.1 17.8 69 17.6 71.8 17.6 68.1 17.6 71.4 17.6 73.7 17.6 70.4 17.5 71.6 17.6 71.6 17.6 69.6 17.4 59.7 17.5 83.6 30.6 62.5 1.5 median 69.6 median 17.8 4.6 2.4 hearing range hide median show median Pink Noise Chuwi Hi10 X Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices) Chuwi Hi10 X audio analysis (-) | not very loud speakers (71 dB)
Bass 100 – 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass – on average 14.4% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.2% delta to prev.
frequency)
Mids 400 – 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids – on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (14.8% delta to prev.frequency)
Highs 2 – 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs – on average 7.3% higher than median
(-) | highs are not linear (21.2% delta to prev.frequency)
Overall 100 – 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (39% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 96% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 3% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 98% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%
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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%
Energy Management Power Consumption Idling on desktop consumes between 3 W and 7 W depending on the brightness setting and power profile.
The difference between minimum brightness and maximum brightness is about 2.6 W.
Running 3DMark 06 demands an average of 14 W to be a couple watts higher than some Atom-based tablets like the Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320 or HP x2 .We’re able to record a maximum consumption of 14.5 W from the small (~9 x 4.3 x 3 cm) 24 W AC adapter.
Constant consumption when running 3DMark 06 Prime95 initiated at 10s mark.Consumption cycles between 11 W and 14 W after about a minute into the stress test Power Consumption Off / Standby 0.66 / 0.73 Watt Idle 3.7 / 6.3 / 6.7 Watt Load 14 / 14.5 Watt
Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, SanDisk DF4128, IPS, 1920×1200, 10.1 Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
4415Y, UHD Graphics 615, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1800×1200, 10 Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), SanDisk DF4128, IPS, 1920×1200, 10.1 HP x2 210 G2
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1280×800, 10.1 Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
5Y10a, HD Graphics 5300, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G, IPS, 1920×1080, 10.8 Power Consumption -10% 17% 24% -1% Idle Minimum * 3.7 2.88 22% 3 19% 2.9 22% 2 46% Idle Average * 6.3 4.8 24% 5.3 16% 4.8 24% 5.9 6% Idle Maximum * 6.7 7.5 -12% 6.4 4% 5.2 22% 6.2 7% Load Average * 14 16.9 -21% 10.9 22% 10.4 26% 19.1 -36% Load Maximum * 14.5 23.8 -64% 11 24% 10.9 25% 18.2 -26% * …smaller is better
Battery Life The small 24 Wh battery provides about 5.5 hours of real-world WLAN use.Recharging from empty to full capacity takes about two hours.Keep in mind that charging must be done via a specific USB Type-C port even though there are two ports available.
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 5h 36min Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, 24 Wh Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
4415Y, UHD Graphics 615, 28 Wh Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 33.3 Wh HP x2 210 G2
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 32.5 Wh Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
5Y10a, HD Graphics 5300, 38 Wh Lenovo Yoga Smart Tab YT-X705F
SD 439, Adreno 505, 27 Wh Battery Runtime 33% 37% 64% 137% Reader / Idle 771 777 2083 WiFi v1.3 336 448 33% 461 37% 551 64% 795 137% Load 180 244 288 WiFi 562 Pros + front 2 MP and rear 5 MP cameras + attractive aluminum chassis + >95 percent sRGB coverage + integrated MicroSD reader + firm keyboard feedback + USB Type-C charging + decent battery life + inexpensive + fanless Cons – poorly calibrated colors out of the box – slow and laggy system performance – slow and unreliable clickpad – speakers are not very loud – display could be brighter – teetering hinges – relatively heavy – thick bezels Verdict In review: Chuwi Hi10 X Convertible.
Test unit provided by Chuwi There are a small handful of redeeming qualities about the Chuwi Hi10 X.
The strong chassis and keyboard base leave solid first impressions considering the low asking price and the number of integrated port options is commendable.Unfortunately, these don’t make up for the unreliable clickpad, teetering hinges, dim display, or laggy Windows experience.Trying to use the tablet outdoors or even indoors without a dedicated mouse can be frustrating.This is more of a backup Windows tablet or a tablet for some light browsing and video streaming as anything heavier will slow it to a crawl.
A decent Windows tablet for low processing loads or even as an HTPC solely for video streaming purposes.Otherwise, the clickpad is unreliable and the display is too tim for outdoor conditions.
Chuwi Hi10 X – 2020-05-05 05/05/2020 v7
Allen Ngo
Chassis 72 / 98 → 73% Keyboard 49% Pointing Device 43% Connectivity 41 / 75 → 55% Weight 82 / 20-75 → 100% Battery 67% Display 75% Games Performance 15 / 78 → 19% Application Performance 53 / 85 → 63% Temperature 88% Noise 100% Audio 47 / 91 → 51% Camera 40 / 85 → 47% Average 59% 69% Convertible – Weighted Average.
