Acer Swift Go 14 AI laptop review: 24-hour runtime for the MacBook Air competitor with Snapdragon
Extreme binge-watching potential.
ARM processors for Windows laptops are here to stay for the third time. In the new Acer Swift Go 14 AI, the ARM CPU makes room for a large battery, resulting in outstanding runtime. But what about the performance of the Snapdragon laptop? We take a closer look!Christian Hintze, 👁 Christian Hintze, ✓ Anton Avdyushkin (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 🇩🇪 🇫🇷 ...
Verdict - Battery life as the absolute Snapdragon trump card in the Swift Go 14
Our test model of the Acer Swift Go 14 AI is equipped with one of the weaker Snapdragon ARM processors and yet it is clear that we have an office machine here that is more than just usable. If applications are appropriately ARM-optimized, the chip can certainly compete with the Intel and AMD alternatives in terms of performance. However, we were really impressed by the runtimes - 24 hours in our video test is quite an achievement and certainly a selling point for some customers!
Nevertheless, ARM processors for Windows have not yet reached their goal, as various apps are not yet optimized for ARM and therefore run rather modestly in terms of performance. Another disadvantage of the SoCs is that hardly any components can be replaced, RAM and WiFi module are permanently soldered and even the SSD is hidden behind a broadband cable. And why has Acer actually removed so many ports, even though the case dimensions have actually increased slightly? If it weren't for the great battery life, there would hardly be any advantages over the more powerful predecessor with Intel CPU. Perhaps there would be, since noise and temperature are also important factors for an office laptop.
If you need more performance and compatibility, the predecessor with Intel Core Ultra 7 is still a good choice, but the battery life of the Snapdragon model is almost three times as long.
Pros
Cons
Price and availability
The Acer store itself currently only offers one configuration of the Swift Go 14 AI based on the Snapdragon X1P-64-100 CPU, at a price of €1,199. However, our test model is already available at a lower price, with prices starting at 879 euros on the comparison platform Geizhals. You can get it for 899 euros at Notebooksbilliger.de.
Possible competitors in comparison
Image | Model / Review | Geizhals | Weight | Height | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 84.8%  | Acer Swift Go 14 AI Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Listenpreis 1149 Euro Geizhals Suche | 1.3 kg | 16.55 mm | 14.50" 2560x1600 208 PPI IPS |
2. 85.9%  | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Intel Core Ultra 7 258V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 140V ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | 1.3 kg | 16.5 mm | 14.00" 2560x1600 216 PPI IPS LED | |
3. 85.1%  | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS ⎘ 16 GB Memory | 1.2 kg | 10.9 mm | 14.00" 2880x1800 243 PPI OLED | |
4. 83.4%  | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS ⎘ AMD Radeon 780M ⎘ 16 GB Memory | Listenpreis 820 USD Geizhals Suche | 1.6 kg | 16.64 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI IPS |
5. 83.5%  | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Intel Core Ultra 5 226V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 130V ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | 1.3 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" 2880x1800 243 PPI OLED | |
6. 92.4% v7 (old)  | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU Apple M3 ⎘ Apple M3 10-Core GPU ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | 1.2 kg | 11.3 mm | 13.60" 2560x1664 225 PPI IPS |
Table of Contents
- Verdict - Battery life as the absolute Snapdragon trump card in the Swift Go 14
- Specifications
- Case & features - Swift Go 14 with complete design update
- Input devices - lights for the co-pilot
- Display - 2.5K, but no more OLED option for the Go
- Performance - Swift Go 14 has become slower
- Emissions & energy - Relatively quiet, economical and cool
- Notebookcheck overall rating
In contrast to the Acer Swift 14, the Acer Swift Go 14 is cheaper and even more mobile, somewhat at the expense of performance. Last year we had the Acer Swift Go 14 with Core i5-1335U and later also the Swift Go 14 with Core Ultra 7 155H in the test; 2024 Acer goes one step further towards mobility and relies on a Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 for our Swift Go AI which promises even more endurance and mobility, but brings with it a few other challenges. At the same time, the Swift Go with its new ARM processor resembles its role model, the MacBook Air, more closely. We will examine whether it can be an affordable alternative to the Air.
Specifications
Case & features - Swift Go 14 with complete design update
In 2024, Acer gave the Swift Go 14 a design upgrade so that it now differs visually from its predecessor in many areas. Among other things, the display frame has been redesigned, the air outlets are no longer just on the right at the back but extend over the entire length between the two hinges, the color scheme has become darker, the 1,440p webcam now has a physical shutter, the opening angle is now 180 degrees, the Acer logo has been moved to a different position, the base plate has been redesigned and so on.
A T6 screwdriver is required to remove the 10 screws of the same size. However, the easy levering open of the base plate is only of limited use, as there is not much to service inside apart from the fans. Even the SSD is hidden under a wide motherboard cable, most components such as RAM and the WLAN module are permanently installed or soldered anyway. The large battery is screwed in place.
The connections have also changed, but not necessarily for the better, as Acer has simply omitted the HDMI port. Anyone who wants to connect an external monitor now has to use the USB-C, either directly or via a dock. The Kensington port and the MicroSD card slot of the predecessor are also history. At least there is now a webcam shutter and WiFi 7 is also supported. Unfortunately, no other ports have been added, so the predecessor is clearly ahead in this respect. The new Swift Go is slightly larger and also slightly thicker than the 2023 model.
Sustainability
Acer uses 100% recyclable materials for the packaging. Most of it is made of cardboard, but plastic is still used in some cases. Acer also claims that 21.56% of the plastic used in the Swift Go 14 AI is made from PCR, i.e. recycled plastic.
Input devices - lights for the co-pilot
The keyboard layout has remained the same, and the single-color backlighting is still available in two brightness levels. We find keys with a fairly short travel, but still good feedback, which could be a little crisper. Overall, typing on it is good and fast, but there are better models. The typing noise is moderate to medium loud.
The touchpad, which is slippery when dry, measures approx. 12.6 x 7.7 cm and now has an eye-catching, curved LED pattern in the top right-hand corner, which lights up whenever we call up the co-pilot. The integrated buttons trigger reliably and make a moderate noise.
Display - 2.5K, but no more OLED option for the Go
The display is a matte, 14.5-inch IPS panel with a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 pixels and 120 Hz. The brightness is rather average at around 341 nits, while the illumination is very even at 93%. The contrast is okay, but the OLED in the predecessor outperforms the new panel in virtually all areas. The response times are very slow. Although the display has a 2.5K resolution and is by no means bad, we still see a slight downgrade compared to the OLED version of the predecessor, as there are apparently no alternative display options at the moment.
It is interesting that Acer advertises edge-to-edge glass; in our test model, the panel is surrounded by a plastic frame on the inside. According to the footnote, the features can vary depending on the region, but whether this really refers to the display frame is at least doubtful.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 357.4 cd/m²
Contrast: 1192:1 (Black: 0.3 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 3.27 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.83}
calibrated: 0.95
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 5.14 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø5.1}
73.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
99% sRGB (Argyll 3D)
71.2% Display P3 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.44
CCT: 6026 K
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI MNE507QS2-2 CSOT T9, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5", 120 Hz | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X NE140QDM-NX4, IPS LED, 2560x1600, 14", 144 Hz | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 ATNA40CU07-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 120 Hz | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 ATNA40YK11-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 90 Hz | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 LEN140WUXGA, IPS, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU IPS, 2560x1664, 13.6", 60 Hz | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -1% | 18% | 25% | -45% | 20% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 71.2 | 70.8 -1% | 97 36% | 99.75 40% | 38 -47% | 98.4 38% |
| sRGB Coverage | 99 | 98 -1% | 100 1% | 99.99 1% | 56 -43% | 99.9 1% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 73.3 | 71.6 -2% | 85.2 16% | 98.56 34% | 39.3 -46% | 87.9 20% |
| Response Times | -24% | 97% | 60% | 5% | -32% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 32 ? | 36.3 ? -13% | 0.83 ? 97% | 2.2 ? 93% | 29 ? 9% | 34.5 ? -8% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 17.5 ? | 23.4 ? -34% | 0.69 ? 96% | 12.8 ? 27% | 17.3 ? 1% | 27.2 ? -55% |
| PWM Frequency | 240 | 300 | ||||
| PWM Amplitude * | 50 | |||||
| Screen | 20% | 33% | 37% | -71% | 30% | |
| Brightness middle | 357.5 | 457 28% | 392 10% | 388 9% | 313.6 -12% | 525 47% |
| Brightness | 341 | 457 34% | 398 17% | 391 15% | 301 -12% | 506 48% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 95 2% | 97 4% | 98 5% | 91 -2% | 92 -1% |
| Black Level * | 0.3 | 0.12 60% | 0.0411 86% | 0.27 10% | 0.42 -40% | |
| Contrast | 1192 | 3808 219% | 9440 692% | 1161 -3% | 1250 5% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.27 | 4.9 -50% | 1.3 60% | 6.32 -93% | 6.79 -108% | 1.4 57% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.83 | 8.5 -24% | 3.2 53% | 8.82 -29% | 22.76 -233% | 2.8 59% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 0.95 | 1.7 -79% | 4.79 -404% | 3.53 -272% | ||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.14 | 5.7 -11% | 2.3 55% | 2.61 49% | 5.6 -9% | 2 61% |
| Gamma | 2.44 90% | 2.25 98% | 2.24 98% | 1.772 124% | 2.13 103% | 2.2 100% |
| CCT | 6026 108% | 7647 85% | 6517 100% | 6202 105% | 6050 107% | 6876 95% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -2% /
9% | 49% /
40% | 41% /
38% | -37% /
-55% | 6% /
18% |
* ... smaller is better
Unfortunately, the panel is not well-calibrated ex-works; our manual calibration reduces the average DeltaE values in the grayscale and colors to below 1.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 17.5 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 8.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 8.9 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. » 37 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 41 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.1 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8327 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
The new Swift Go 14 copes very well with a gray November day. Here, it also presents good viewing angles and absence of significant reflections.
Performance - Swift Go 14 has become slower
At the heart of the new Swift Go 14 is the ARM CPU Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, which integrates an NPU and a graphics unit. There is also 16 GB of permanently installed RAM and, in our case, a 1 TB NVMe SSD. The Swift Go 14 AI is particularly suitable for office workloads and AI applications thanks to the SoC, which is quite far back in the series of Snapdragon X Plus CPUs, which is what Acer primarily advertises.
Test conditions
The manufacturer has pre-installed the Acer Sense software as a performance center. Unfortunately, Acer has recently made a name for itself by misusing its software as a data collection machine and also for placing advertisements, and the Swift Go 14 is unfortunately no different. In the screenshots below is an incomplete list of all the data Acer Sense collects (from the Acer Sense privacy policy). We also had to click away ads for a game that popped up via Acer Jumstart. And right after the first Windows 11 Home start, we were "greeted" by two pop-up windows for configuring Acer Sense and Acer Quickpanel. We would very much welcome it if laptop manufacturers were forced to minimize data collection and exercise more restraint when it comes to advertising, as some manufacturers obviously cannot be expected to exercise voluntary restraint.
We used the Performance mode for our benchmarks in Acer Sense. Since the interaction with the Windows modes is unclear, we also set Windows to performance mode.
Processor
The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 with 8 cores and a maximum clock frequency of 3.4 GHz. The SoC includes a 45 TOPS NPU for accelerating AI applications and a GPU but is one of the weaker SoCs from the Snapdragon X Plus series.
Nevertheless, the CPU cuts a decent figure, at least in native applications such as the ARM version of Cinebench 2024. The Snapdragon's potential at least shines through in the multi-thread test, although the single-thread performance tends to drop off here.
In Geekbench 6.3, the scores increase considerably if you download the latest version, which is also adapted for ARM, compared to our usual Intel/AMD version. In our case, the multi-score increases from 7596 to 11438 points, and the single-score from 1896 to 2404. Our Snapdragon hardly looked competitive before, now it at least keeps up.
| Cinebench 2024 / CPU Multi Core | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Cinebench 2024 / CPU Single Core | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Geekbench 6.4 / Multi-Core | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Geekbench 6.4 / Single-Core | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
If the Snapdragon has to emulate a benchmark, the performance drops significantly, which is reflected in our performance rating. Cinebench R15 still runs surprisingly well on the Swift Go, but across all our CPU measurements, our test model unfortunately clearly takes last place and has no chance against Apple, Intel, and AMD. The Apple M3 even comes out on top in this comparison, despite also being an ARM CPU, and shows that ARM can also perform significantly better. The big brother Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100 in the Samsung Galaxy Book4 does better, but not really well either.
After all, hardly any further performance seems to be lost in battery mode. Instead of 1,554 points with the mains connection, we now measure 1504 points, a negligible drop.
Cinebench R15 Multi loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 6.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
| CPU Performance Rating | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU -9! | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 -2! | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 | |
| Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (1577 - 20399, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (6062 - 8284, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Cinebench R23 / Single Core | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (708 - 2130, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (1065 - 1134, n=7) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (590 - 8086, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (2361 - 3097, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (285 - 815, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (406 - 425, n=7) | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (246 - 3132, n=88, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (1191 - 1556, n=7) | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (99.5 - 312, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (206 - 215, n=7) | |
| Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (399 - 683, n=7) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average of class Office (163 - 1956, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (7532 - 76886, n=88, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (29238 - 32811, n=7) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (3046 - 6497, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (4087 - 4675, n=7) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Geekbench 6.4 / Multi-Core | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (10833 - 11508, n=7) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (662 - 14998, n=95, last 2 years) | |
| Geekbench 6.4 / Single-Core | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (2287 - 2442, n=6) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (457 - 2894, n=94, last 2 years) | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (1018 - 14192, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (4457 - 6244, n=2) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (510 - 2096, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (1486 - 1576, n=2) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (1.72 - 22.4, n=85, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (3.16 - 6.02, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (55.3 - 62.7, n=7) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (41.1 - 129.6, n=85, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (0.728 - 0.777, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average of class Office (0.4098 - 1.06, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
| Performance Rating | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (1685 - 31245, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (1480 - 6185, n=7) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (8977 - 125394, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (14234 - 17585, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average of class Office (590 - 5398, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (2036 - 2614, n=7) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (20636 - 115197, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (44346 - 48581, n=7) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (1064 - 18321, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (1240 - 1502, n=7) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (4415 - 66922, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (4929 - 9929, n=7) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (7254 - 155900, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (37646 - 45232, n=7) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (138.6 - 1366, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (473 - 521, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (859 - 17834, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (2262 - 3399, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (31088 - 32139, n=7) | |
| Average of class Office (9310 - 55359, n=86, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
System performance
PCMark 10 always stopped in the middle of the test on the ARM architecture, in each case during the MS Office benchmarks. A final result could not be determined here.
In CrossMark, the non-Snapdragon competitors are at least 50 percent ahead in the emulated version. If we run the same CrossMark test in the native version, the gap to the Lenovo Yoga 7 with Ryzen 7 8840HS or Asus ExpertBook with Core Ultra 7 258V drops to just 13 percent.
WebXPRT 3: Overall
WebXPRT 4: Overall
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Total
| CrossMark / Overall | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average of class Office (348 - 1891, n=82, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (1061 - 1463, n=7) | |
| CrossMark / Productivity | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (393 - 1880, n=82, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (1059 - 1284, n=7) | |
| CrossMark / Creativity | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average of class Office (319 - 2155, n=82, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (1070 - 1630, n=7) | |
| CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (258 - 2017, n=82, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (989 - 1563, n=7) | |
| WebXPRT 3 / Overall | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (129.9 - 426, n=7) | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average of class Office (121 - 455, n=81, last 2 years) | |
| WebXPRT 4 / Overall | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (130.3 - 284, n=7) | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (80 - 328, n=82, last 2 years) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 / Total | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average of class Office (391 - 1966, n=90, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (408 - 1145, n=7) | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
* ... smaller is better
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (61258 - 62525, n=7) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average of class Office (19648 - 108783, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (123557 - 127282, n=7) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average of class Office (10084 - 127282, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (20073 - 117935, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 (45782 - 47845, n=7) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
DPC latencies
Our usual test tool LatencyMon does not run on ARM. At least we were able to run our YouTube test. The 4K/60 fps video was played without any dropped frames, but the Snapdragon's iGPU was utilized to over 80 percent of its capacity during playback.
Mass storage
Acer installs a 512 GB NVMe SSD from Micron. In our SSD best list, however, it performs really well in the Swift Go 14 and can more than keep up with the competition. The sequential write and read rates are between 3,500 and 4,000 MB/s. In the endurance test, the SSD only suffers a brief dip towards the end of the endurance test.
* ... smaller is better
Continuous read: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
Graphics card
The Qualcomm Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS-Version has comparatively small and slow caches, in contrast to the better-equipped 3.8 TFLOPS and the 4.6 TFLOPS X1-85 iGPUs. As a result, it is one of the slower iGPUs, and its performance also varies greatly depending on the application, as the Qualcomm drivers are not yet fully optimized in all areas.
Even in the synthetic 3DMark benchmarks, it is very clearly behind the AMD and Intel iGPUs of its competitors; the predecessor alone is more than twice as fast here - a disappointing result! In battery mode, no further performance is lost during a Fire Strike run.
The conditions for gaming are similarly weak. The new Acer Swift Go 14 AI is therefore only suitable for gaming to a very limited extent. Also because some games like X-Plane 11.11 crash. Even Witcher 3 didn't want to start on our system, nor did Baldur's Gate 3.
If you look at our energy measurements, you can see that 3D applications consume significantly less power than CPU-heavy applications. The consumption in Cyberpunk 2077 is only 25 to 30 W, while it can easily rise to 60 W in the Cinebench CPU tests. This shows that the smaller Snapdragon is not designed for high performance in 3D applications.
While the competition can play current games at least in reduced resolutions and details despite the iGPU, this is not the case with the Go 14. The GPU is therefore primarily suitable for video playback, video encoding and decoding and the like. Gaming is only possible with older and less demanding titles (e.g. DOTA 2 Reborn).
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 4444 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 17699 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 3634 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 981 points | |
Help | ||
* ... smaller is better
| Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X -1! | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 -1! | |
| Average of class Office | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset (FSR off) | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (6.65 - 29.6, n=51, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Average of class Office (3.98 - 47.8, n=75, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (6.45 - 36.5, n=81, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Office (12.8 - 61.7, n=64, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking | |
| Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 | |
| Average of class Office (13.4 - 121.2, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
| Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 | |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra FPS chart
| low | med. | high | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTA V (2015) | 91.5 | 84.2 | 32.8 | 14 |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 83.4 | 65.8 | 55.7 | 48.1 |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 36.9 | 15.2 | 9.81 | |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 36 | |||
| Strange Brigade (2018) | 85.5 | 29.6 | 22.5 | 19.3 |
| Baldur's Gate 3 (2023) | 13.5 | 11.2 | 9.7 | 9.4 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty (2023) | 14.7 | 11.2 | 9.6 | 8.26 |
Emissions & energy - Relatively quiet, economical and cool
Noise emissions
The fans of the Swift Go 14 always remain deactivated in idle mode, regardless of the performance mode. During gaming, we also measured values below 30 dB in performance mode, which confirms our low energy measurements in 3D applications. It can only get a bit louder in the stress test or CPU-heavy applications with a maximum of 39 dB.
However, since the Swift won't be used for high-performance workloads anyway, the background noise is very restrained in everyday use. Despite its good performance, the slightly smaller MacBook Air with its passive and therefore silent cooling system is of course significantly better than the other competitors.
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 23 / 23 / 23 dB(A) |
| Load |
| / 39.14 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 23 dB(A) | ||
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Micron 2550 MTFDKBA512TGE | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Arc 140V, Core Ultra 7 258V, Western Digital PC SN5000S SDEQNSJ-1T00 | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, SD X Elite X1E-80-100 | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Arc 8-Core, Ultra 7 155H, SK hynix HFS001TEJ9X110NA | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 Radeon 780M, R7 8840HS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -2% | 1% | -11% | -13% | |
| off / environment * | 23 | 24.1 -5% | 24 -4% | 25 -9% | 24.5 -7% |
| Idle Minimum * | 23 | 24.1 -5% | 24 -4% | 25 -9% | 24.7 -7% |
| Idle Average * | 23 | 24.1 -5% | 24 -4% | 25 -9% | 24.7 -7% |
| Idle Maximum * | 23 | 24.1 -5% | 26.3 -14% | 26.2 -14% | 24.7 -7% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 28.13 | 31.7 -13% | 27.2 3% | 40.1 -43% | |
| Load Maximum * | 39.14 | 31.2 20% | 27.2 31% | 45.5 -16% | 42.4 -8% |
| Load Average * | 31.2 | 27.2 | 35.7 | 42.7 |
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
When gaming, the laptop does not reach 40 °C even at the hot spots. In the stress test, however, we measured a maximum of 45 °C on the underside in the central and right area towards the display when viewed from below. Overall, the device heats up more on the left side when viewed from above, but it never gets uncomfortably warm even on the keys.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 45 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.6 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) 3: The average temperature for the upper side is 29 °C / 84 F, compared to the average of 29.5 °C / 85 F for the class Office.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29 °C / 84.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.6 °C / 81.7 F (-1.4 °C / -2.5 F).
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, Intel Arc Graphics 140V | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS, AMD Radeon 780M | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU Apple M3, Apple M3 10-Core GPU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -3% | -14% | -13% | -4% | 2% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 39 | 41.6 -7% | 47.9 -23% | 36.5 6% | 38.8 1% | 44.3 -14% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 45 | 43.2 4% | 51.3 -14% | 49.5 -10% | 43 4% | 43.4 4% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 24 | 25.7 -7% | 26.7 -11% | 25.5 -6% | 26.4 -10% | 22.3 7% |
| Idle Bottom * | 25 | 25.3 -1% | 26.9 -8% | 35 -40% | 27.2 -9% | 22.1 12% |
* ... smaller is better
Speaker
The frequency response reveals linear mids and highs with a lowered bass. However, the latter is not as precarious as with other models, and the stereo speakers in the Swift sound quite decent for a laptop speaker. A 3.5 mm jack output is available for connecting external devices.
Acer Swift Go 14 AI audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 21% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2021 M1 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (4.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Power consumption
The idle consumption in particular is very low. If we activate the best energy efficiency and minimize the screen brightness, we can reduce the consumption to just 3.7 W. Only the MacBook Air 13 is even better here.
Under load, we measured around 25 W during gaming and an average of 46.8 W in the stress test. The maximum consumption can briefly rise to 67 W. The small USB-C power supply is designed for 65 W and should always be able to supply the laptop with enough power.
| Off / Standby | 0.4 / 0.36 Watt |
| Idle | 3.7 / 6.5 / 7.8 Watt |
| Load |
/ 67.04 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, Micron 2550 MTFDKBA512TGE, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5" | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, Western Digital PC SN5000S SDEQNSJ-1T00, IPS LED, 2560x1600, 14" | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 SD X Elite X1E-80-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, , OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core, SK hynix HFS001TEJ9X110NA, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M, , IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU M3, M3 10-Core GPU, Apple SSD AP0512Z, IPS, 2560x1664, 13.6" | Average Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS | Average of class Office | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -30% | -17% | -51% | -33% | 12% | 15% | -12% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.7 | 3.9 -5% | 5.4 -46% | 5.5 -49% | 4.1 -11% | 1.95 47% | 2.96 ? 20% | 4.56 ? -23% |
| Idle Average * | 6.5 | 8.9 -37% | 9.7 -49% | 10.1 -55% | 6.8 -5% | 8.7 -34% | 5.41 ? 17% | 7.54 ? -16% |
| Idle Maximum * | 7.8 | 9.6 -23% | 10.2 -31% | 11.2 -44% | 7.4 5% | 8.9 -14% | 6.84 ? 12% | 8.98 ? -15% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 25.4 | 42.8 -69% | 24.7 3% | 53.4 -110% | ||||
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra external monitor * | 28.5 | 41.8 -47% | 22 23% | 50.4 -77% | ||||
| Load Maximum * | 67.04 | 64.1 4% | 68.2 -2% | 104.1 -55% | 66.6 1% | 35.4 47% | 59.4 ? 11% | 61.7 ? 8% |
| Load Average * | 43.4 | 28.9 | 45.9 | 50.4 | 34.3 | 15.8 ? | 42.2 ? | |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 60.9 | 28.6 |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption Cyberpunk / Stress test
Power consumption with the external monitor
Battery life
Let's now move on to the absolute top category for our Swift Go 14, because the Snapdragon laptop finally shows its skills when it comes to battery life: In the video test, the laptop lasted for over 24 hours! We were amazed when we wanted to continue testing the Swift the next morning, but the video loop had still been running since the previous evening and only finally stopped the following evening - great!
We also measured an outstanding 21 hours of runtime in the WiFi test with the brightness lowered to 150 nits.
This is made possible by the Snapdragon's good power-saving mechanisms on the one hand, but also by the large 75 Wh battery; the competition has mostly installed smaller models.
| Acer Swift Go 14 AI SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, 75 Wh | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, 63 Wh | Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge 14 SD X Elite X1E-80-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, 55.9 Wh | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core, 65 Wh | Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14AHP9 R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M, 71 Wh | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU M3, M3 10-Core GPU, 52.6 Wh | Average of class Office | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 5% | -41% | -53% | -37% | -9% | -36% | |
| H.264 | 1501 | 827 -45% | 1044 -30% | 790 ? -47% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 1313 | 973 -26% | 539 -59% | 479 -64% | 821 -37% | 914 -30% | 675 ? -49% |
| Load | 128 | 173 35% | 103 -20% | 74 -42% | 171 34% | 111.1 ? -13% |
Notebookcheck overall rating
The new Acer Aspire Go 14 with Snapdragon CPU will find its target group, as it boasts an almost unbelievable battery life. However, it sacrifices a lot of (3D) performance and compatibility.
Acer Swift Go 14 AI
- 12/03/2024 v8
Christian Hintze
Total Sustainability Score: Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
