- Created by Kael Hankins (Admin), last modified on May 15, 2017
Performance
Test Conditions: Fully Charged (Running on Battery) with excellent wifi signal strength running the latest available stable chrome build(57.0.2987.146). Each chromebook was restarted immediately prior to each benchmark. Jetstream is not averaged as it automatically incorporates three averaging runs.
Processing (Javascript)
All chromebooks tested scored very similarly, Acer #1 scored highest on Octane but only by about 2% over the lowest score. Acer #1 also scored the best on the Jet Stream benchmark with about 5% over the lowest score. Acer #2 scored the best on the Kraken download tests with about 3% better over the worst score. These test are far too close to differentiate a device.
Device | Octane 2 Score (Higher is better) | Jet Stream Score (Higher is better) | Kraken Score (download) (lower is better) |
---|---|---|---|
Acer #1 | Run 1: 9084 Run 2: 8302 Run 3: 7812 Average: 8399 | Average: 50.698 +/- 1.2492 | Run 1: 3579ms Run 2: 3641.2ms Run 3: 3724.8ms Average: 3648ms |
Acer #2 | Run 1: 8289 Run 2: 8633 Run 3: 7747 Average: 8223 | Average: 50.535 +/- 3.6711 | Run 1: 3617ms Run 2: 3481.3ms Run 3: 3538.7ms Average: 3546ms |
Lenovo #2 | Run 1: 8979 Run 2: 7821 Run 3: 8169 Average: 8323 | Average: 48.163 +/- 0.74562 | Run 1: 3700.5ms Run 2: 3651.9ms Run 3: 3651.7ms Average: 3669ms |
HP #2 | Run 1: 8045 Run 2: 8267 Run 3: 8595 Average: 8302 | Average: 51.018 +/- 1.1889 | Run 1: 3637.4ms Run 2: 3563.6ms Run 3: 3629.5ms Average: 3610ms |
Table of Contents
Battery Life
Discharge Test
Battery life testing will be completed by using a long video loop on youtube. Chromebooks were monitored by our NMS to record the time that they stop responding to ping. The video will be played at full resolution on full screen mode with the display on full brightness and the volume set to nothing.
Device | Test Start | Test End | Duration |
---|---|---|---|
Acer #1 | 10:20am | 4:41pm | 381 min |
Acer #2 | 10:20am | 2:20pm | 240 min |
Lenovo #2 | 10:20am | 4:25pm | 365 min |
HP #2 | 10:20am | 4:50pm | 390 min |
The HP #2 took this test but more interesting and concerning is that the only convertible, the Acer #2 had significantly reduced battery life compared to the other three. The other three averaged 378 minutes 57% more than the 240 minutes of Acer #2. Does this translate into real-world usage?
Recharge Test
All devices are permitted the same 1 hour time to charge and the claimed runtime is noted. the Acer #2 is the clear winner here provided that the life estimate is accurate under normal usage.
Device | Run Time @ 1hr Charge |
---|---|
Acer #1 | 3 hr 57 min |
Acer #2 | 6 hr 48 min |
Lenovo #2 | 3 hr 27 min |
HP #2 | 3 hr 47 min |
Durability Test
Durability tests were carried out according to the specifications here: MS 1:1 Chromebook Selection Criteria & Testing
Device | Screen Carry | Charger Damage | Pen Close | Earbud Close | Minor Drop | Major Drop | Open Drop | Water Infiltration
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Acer #1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
Acer #2 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 9 |
Lenovo #2 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
HP #2 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 7 | 10 | 7 |
Durability Notes
- Of the four models tested only the HP#2 suffered non-cosmetic damage in a drop test, breaking several clips internally.
- The Acer #2's screen bezel broke open but was easily re-assembled with no evident damage.
- The Lenovo #2 suffered minor distortion of the uppercase/keyboard near the power jack.
- The Acer #1 stands out as the clear winner of this test, suffer no detectable damage in the screen and drop tests and only the most trivial water infiltration which did not affect operation.
Durability Testing
Repairability Test
Following the durability tests the chromebooks were disassembled to assess repairability. The most easily repairable machine was given 10 pts and the others are scored against that standard.
Device | Score | Notes |
---|---|---|
Acer #1 | 10 | No feet or screw covers are used, permitting easy access to internals. No components are glued together. Both thread-lock and shake proof washers are used to retain screws. LCD replacement is very easy. Battery replacement and even a complete mainboard repair are easy to accomplish. |
Acer #2 | 9 | Construction is similar to C740 permitting familiarity to assist in repair. No components are glued together with the exception of the digitizer and LCD. Replacement of the screen assembly is extremely easy. No feet or screw covers are used, permitting easy access to internals. Glued on digitizer module. (-1 point) |
Lenovo #2 | 7 | Access to screen is via screws under rubber covers, same for internal repairs. (-2 points). Once inside case repairs are fairly simple and straightforward. Upper case design makes removal of keyboard and trackpad ribbon cables tricky and no lock washers are used to retain screws. (-1 point) |
HP #2 | 5 | Access to case is via screws under no less than seven adhesive rubber pads (- 2 points). No lock washers are used. (1 point). LCD screen replacement is simple and straightforward. Replacing motherboard is much more difficult due to the orientation of the parts and cables. (-2 points) |