Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarFully Loaded Acer Swift 3 SF313 with Ice Lake Processor in Review
Acer’s Swift 3 SF313 is a small subnotebook equipped with a 13.5-inch display. It is based on Intel’s latest Ice Lake SoC and successor to the Kaby Lake generation of devices. In this review, we take a closer look at the high-end model equipped with an Intel Core i7-1065G7, a fast 1 TB SSD, and 16 GB of RAM. In other words: a mobile workhorse. Unfortunately, the LTE option is no longer available. This particular model is on sale for around $1,200 plus tax in Europe, and US prices are not yet available.
A cheaper SKU equipped with a Core i5-1035G4 is also available. With the same amount of RAM and storage it is currently listed for around $950 plus tax. The low-spec model equipped with 8 GB of RAM and a 512 GB SSD is sold for around $850 plus tax. Future models will feature an optional GeForce MX350. Prices for those SKUs are not yet available.
Generally speaking, the Acer Swift 3 is a great device for office work and photo editing. For comparison, we have chosen the following 13 and 14-inch subnotebooks:
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 87 % | 02/2020 | Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | 1.2 kg | 16.6 mm | 13.50" | 2256x1504 | |
| 88.2 % | 10/2019 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | 1.4 kg | 14.95 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 85.7 % | 01/2019 | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620 | 1.3 kg | 16 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 | |
| 88 % | 01/2019 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620 | 1.2 kg | 11.6 mm | 13.30" | 3840x2160 | |
| 86 % | 07/2019 | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620 | 1.3 kg | 15.9 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 | |
| 84.5 % | 08/2019 | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng i7-8565U, GeForce MX250 | 1.2 kg | 14.7 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 |
Case – Modern and Well-Made
The Swift 3’s case has been completely redesigned, and the result is a modern-looking case with thin bezels made of plastic and aluminum. Thanks to the latter, both the base and the display lid, are fairly rigid. We were unable to warp the base, and only managed to slightly twist the lid. The bezels around the display are now black while the rest of the case is clad in an inconspicuous silver-gray.
The hinges allow for an opening angle of a full 180 degrees. Despite their ease of operation, you will have a hard time opening the display one-handed due to the base’s low weight. Teetering has beeb reduced to a minimum, and our review unit’s build quality was impeccable. Everything fits perfectly, and we found no inconsistent gaps anywhere around the case.
Size Comparison
The Acer Swift 3 SF313’s foot print is slightly larger than its predecessor’s due to the ever so slightly larger display that now comes with a 3:2 aspect ratio. At around 1.2 kg (2.65 lb) our review unit was comparatively light and weighed about as much as the HP Envy 13 or the Dell XPS 13. The small charger adds another 275 g (0.61 lb).
Connectivity
All ports are situated along the left and right sides, and their selection is pretty limited. In addition to two USB-A ports, one of which only supports the slower USB 2.0 standard, we can find a Thunderbolt 3 USB-C port to connect external third-party devices to as well as an HDMI port to connect external displays to. Just like its predecessor, the current model continues to lack a card reader.
Communication
Wi-Fi 6 is included in all Swift 3 models by default, and Acer’s modem of choice is Intel’s AX201 Wi-Fi 6 module with support for Bluetooth 5.0. However, we were baffled by the device’s very poor transfer rates and were unable to determine the root cause. Given the poor results, we have to assume that the Swift 3 was hampered by some sort of driver issue. At just 50 and 289 Mbps (TX/RX) the Swift 3 was the slowest device in our test group by a long shot. Unfortunately, there are no alternatives since the device lacks an ethernet port, and it would have to be added retroactively with a USB dongle. LTE support is not available either.
Security Features
The included fingerprint reader is a very useful security feature for Windows login authentication. Setup is quick and painless, and the sensor worked without any issues. The Swift 3 also supports Kensington locks.
Accessories
There are not really any accessories in the box. All we could find were the device itself, a power supply, and the mandatory quick start and warranty guides.
Maintenance
Since maintenance is rather uncommon on the Acer Swift 3 the OEM decided not to equip this laptop with a maintenance opening. Should you decide to clean the fan or replace the built-in storage device you will have to remove the entire bottom cover, which will require special tools given that the cover will continue to sit very firmly in place with all screws undone. Once removed you have access to the internal components, although upgrades are limited to the storage device only. Upgrading the RAM is not possible.
Warranty
The Acer Swift 3 SF313 comes with Acer’s standard warranty by default, which differs in length and service options depending on region and country of purchase. For example, our European review unit comes with a 24-month limited warranty with free mail-in and return service.
Input Devices
Keyboard
The first thing we noticed about the new keyboard was that just like the case it is now also painted silver. While this makes for a more uniform and fitting design, it also means that the key caps were very hard to read in daylight due to the white backlight. Other than its color, the keyboard is very similar to its predecessor’s. The main keys are still 16 x 15 mm (~0.63 x 0.6 in) large, but the top row function keys have increased slightly in size. The keys themselves are smooth and without any texture, which required some getting used to at first. Accentuation is very well-defined, and feedback is nicely dampened.
The backlight can be adjusted in two stages or turned off entirely.
Touchpad
The ClickPad’s color matches the case very well. At 10.5 x 7.8 cm (~4.13 x 3.1 in), it is conveniently large to support multi-touch gestures. Its surface is smooth and without any texture, which means that fingers glide over it with ease. Navigating through menus is a breeze. That said, we did notice some input inaccuracies in all four corners. Fortunately, the touchpad was large enough so we barely noticed them during everyday work. The buttons are located at the bottom, and they offer a very distinct and clear click sound.
Display – New Aspect Ratio and Higher Resolution
The new Swift’s display has grown ever so slightly from 13.3 to 13.5 inches. The 3:2 panel runs at a native resolution of 2256-x-1504 resulting in a pixel density of 201 dpi. Thanks to its average display brightness of 426 nits it managed to secure second place behind the HP Envy 13. While brightness distribution was not the greatest, we failed to notice any shadowing.
The combination of high display brightness and low black level makes for a decent contrast ratio of 1,634:1. The Swift 3 uses PWM for brightness regulation. At just 208 Hz its PWM frequency is so low that sensitive users might suffer from eyesore. Clouding was not particularly pronounced on our test unit, and we found no issues in everyday use.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 82 %
Center on Battery: 466 cd/m²
Contrast: 1634:1 (Black: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.38 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 2.69
ΔE Greyscale 3.75 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
100% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
65% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
71.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
70.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.37
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 BOE, NE135FBM-N41, IPS, 2256x1504, 13.50 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL LP140WF9-SPE2, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14.00 | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ BOE NV133FHM-N62, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 ID: AUO 282B B133ZAN Dell: 90NTH, IPS, 3840x2160, 13.30 | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE N133HCE-EN2, a-Si IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.30 | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng InfoVision M133NVF3 R2, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -4% | -9% | -8% | -3% | -8% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 70.1 | 66 -6% | 67 -4% | 64.7 -8% | 67 -4% | 64.4 -8% |
| sRGB Coverage | 99.8 | 97.9 -2% | 88 -12% | 93.1 -7% | 99.1 -1% | 91.7 -8% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 71.2 | 67.3 -5% | 64.3 -10% | 65.3 -8% | 69.2 -3% | 65.2 -8% |
| Response Times | 7% | 48% | -11% | 3984% | 630% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 55 ? | 49.6 ? 10% | 44 ? 20% | 58 ? -5% | 40.4 ? 27% | 31 ? 44% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 31 ? | 30 ? 3% | 36 ? -16% | 36 ? -16% | 28.8 ? 7% | 24 ? 23% |
| PWM Frequency | 208 ? | 500 ? 140% | 25000 ? 11919% | 4000 ? 1823% | ||
| Screen | 4% | -40% | -16% | -1% | 0% | |
| Brightness middle | 474 | 384 -19% | 300 -37% | 404 -15% | 319 -33% | 768 62% |
| Brightness | 426 | 363 -15% | 277 -35% | 389 -9% | 309 -27% | 778 83% |
| Brightness Distribution | 82 | 90 10% | 87 6% | 85 4% | 92 12% | 82 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.29 | 0.17 41% | 0.26 10% | 0.37 -28% | 0.28 3% | 0.48 -66% |
| Contrast | 1634 | 2259 38% | 1154 -29% | 1092 -33% | 1139 -30% | 1600 -2% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.38 | 3.5 -47% | 5.96 -150% | 3.72 -56% | 2.4 -1% | 3.49 -47% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.88 | 5.5 6% | 10.6 -80% | 7.38 -26% | 6.3 -7% | 7.41 -26% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.69 | 1 63% | 2.47 8% | 2.06 23% | 0.6 78% | 2.07 23% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.75 | 4.6 -23% | 7.64 -104% | 4.44 -18% | 3.8 -1% | 4.09 -9% |
| Gamma | 2.37 93% | 2.32 95% | 2.44 90% | 2.34 94% | 2.16 102% | 2.54 87% |
| CCT | 6466 101% | 6884 94% | 6877 95% | 7095 92% | 7335 89% | 6452 101% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 65 | 62 -5% | 57 -12% | 60 -8% | 63.5 -2% | 60 -8% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 | 97.7 -2% | 88 -12% | 93 -7% | 99.1 -1% | 92 -8% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 2% /
3% | -0% /
-19% | -12% /
-14% | 1327% /
702% | 207% /
110% |
* ... smaller is better
Overall image quality was decent thanks to the display’s high contrast ratio and its accurate color representation. Out of the box it only showed slightly raised DeltaE 2000 deviations for colors and grayscale, which left us wondering whether Acer pre-calibrates the Swift 3 ex factory. Nevertheless, we conducted an individual calibration and were able to improve upon grayscale significantly. Colors, on the other hand, remained unchanged. Of particular note and praise is the Swift 3’s color space coverage. At 100% it managed to cover sRGB completely. As such, the Acer Swift 3 is well suited for amateur as well as semi-professional photo editing.
Outdoor usability was somewhat challenged by the reflective display coating. Nevertheless, the display remained usable even in bright sunlight thanks to its high brightness. A shady spot is definitely preferable, though, as can be clearly seen in the two photos below.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 31 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 14 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 82 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 55 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 25 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 30 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 90 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 208 Hz | ≤ 90 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 208 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 90 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 208 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
As expected, the Acer Swift 3 SF313’s IPS panel offered wide viewing angles. Our test image remained well recognizable at all angles without any noticeable bloom.
Performance
The device is very well-suited for office work. Its Intel Core i7-1065G7 is a great fit for the compact subnotebook, and offers plenty of performance headroom, for example for editing photos. Its 16 GB of RAM and 1 TB SSD are an added bonus. If you do not require this level of performance the Core i5-based Swift 3 might be the better choice as it, too, is more than capable of handling everyday office tasks.
Processor
Acer's processor of choice is the Intel Core i7-1065G7. It offers four cores with Hyper-threading running at a base clock speed of 1.3 GHz and turbo boost speeds of up to 3.9 GHz on two cores and up to 3.5 GHz on all four cores. In our benchmarks the SoC was not capable of fully utilizing its turbo boost potential and thus scored below average occasionally. The Lenovo Yoga C940 is a great demonstration of what this particular processor is capable of. Nevertheless, overall performance has increased over the Swift 3’s predecessor, particularly in regards to single-core performance.
In our Cinebench R15 multi-thread loop the Swift 3 offered a level of performance comparable to the Lenovo ThinkBook 13s. Scores dropped after the initial run since turbo boost was only applied for a short period of time. Performance remained consistent afterwards, and the Acer Swift 3 averaged 553 points in this benchmark.
Additional benchmarks and scores can be found on our CPU comparison page.
* ... smaller is better
System Performance
The Acer Swift 3 performed very well in our synthetic system performance benchmarks, and while it managed well above-average scores, it had to succumb to the Lenovo Yoga C940 once again. Subjectively, the Swift 3 performed very well, and using the device for work turned out to be a joyful and pleasant experience.
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3759 points | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 5979 points | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4802 points | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3975 points | |
Help | ||
Storage Devices
The built-in storage device is an M.2-2280 SSD made by Intel offering a whopping 1 TB of space. Since the device supported the fast NVMe protocol, its transfer speeds turned out to be very fast. We were particularly impressed with its 4K read performance of 57 MB/s. The Acer Swift 3 SF313 does not support a secondary storage device.
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng Toshiba KBG30ZMV512G | Average Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 8% | -7% | -36% | -34% | -42% | -11% | |
| Write 4K | 187.4 | 128.4 -31% | 113.7 -39% | 84.6 -55% | 89.3 -52% | 106.2 -43% | 144.5 ? -23% |
| Read 4K | 63.8 | 46.37 -27% | 40.6 -36% | 38.52 -40% | 37.4 -41% | 44.89 -30% | 54.1 ? -15% |
| Write Seq | 1776 | 1863 5% | 845 -52% | 557 -69% | 608 -66% | 639 -64% | 1445 ? -19% |
| Read Seq | 1693 | 2340 38% | 1137 -33% | 1393 -18% | 1019 -40% | 849 -50% | 1446 ? -15% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 492.3 | 451.1 -8% | 868 76% | 339.5 -31% | 487.9 -1% | 217.4 -56% | 427 ? -13% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 539 | 415.3 -23% | 1580 193% | 255.4 -53% | 284.8 -47% | 322.1 -40% | 456 ? -15% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1770 | 2985 69% | 345.6 -80% | 558 -68% | 872 -51% | 865 -51% | 1650 ? -7% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 1715 | 2565 50% | 411.7 -76% | 2541 48% | 1635 -5% | 1630 -5% | 1728 ? 1% |
| Write 4K Q8T8 | 899 | 451.4 -50% | 647 -28% | 387.3 -57% | 880 ? -2% | ||
| Read 4K Q8T8 | 630 | 1004 59% | 685 9% | 757 20% | 629 ? 0% | ||
| AS SSD | 35% | -26% | -33% | -18% | -72% | -14% | |
| Seq Read | 1703 | 2525 48% | 1403 -18% | 2035 19% | 1264 -26% | 1295 -24% | 1456 ? -15% |
| Seq Write | 1373 | 1253 -9% | 836 -39% | 658 -52% | 518 -62% | 593 -57% | 1404 ? 2% |
| 4K Read | 56.8 | 59.1 4% | 42.19 -26% | 39.74 -30% | 40.31 -29% | 45.58 -20% | 48.7 ? -14% |
| 4K Write | 164.4 | 134.1 -18% | 99.7 -39% | 105.7 -36% | 119.1 -28% | 118.8 -28% | 131.6 ? -20% |
| 4K-64 Read | 584 | 1010 73% | 738 26% | 461 -21% | 772 32% | 604 3% | 586 ? 0% |
| 4K-64 Write | 783 | 1461 87% | 606 -23% | 300.1 -62% | 672 -14% | 272.4 -65% | 788 ? 1% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.044 | 0.052 -18% | 0.074 -68% | 0.061 -39% | 0.046 -5% | 0.147 -234% | 0.07236 ? -64% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.038 | 0.029 24% | 0.045 -18% | 0.051 -34% | 0.031 18% | 0.168 -342% | 0.07731 ? -103% |
| Score Read | 811 | 1322 63% | 921 14% | 704 -13% | 939 16% | 779 -4% | 780 ? -4% |
| Score Write | 1085 | 1721 59% | 789 -27% | 471 -57% | 843 -22% | 450 -59% | 1060 ? -2% |
| Score Total | 2313 | 3670 59% | 2163 -6% | 1479 -36% | 2234 -3% | 1607 -31% | 2252 ? -3% |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 1401 | 2016 44% | 586 -58% | 893 -36% | 943 -33% | 593 -58% | 1469 ? 5% |
| Copy Program MB/s | 480.4 | 542 13% | 315.2 -34% | 287.9 -40% | 292.2 -39% | 277.6 -42% | 484 ? 1% |
| Copy Game MB/s | 820 | 1278 56% | 478.5 -42% | 618 -25% | 374.1 -54% | 452.7 -45% | 997 ? 22% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 22% /
24% | -17% /
-18% | -35% /
-34% | -26% /
-25% | -57% /
-61% | -13% /
-13% |
* ... smaller is better
GPU Performance
Given that our particular review model was equipped with an Ice Lake SoC the integrated GPU was an Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7. In our benchmarks it turned out to be slightly faster than a dedicated Nvidia GeForce MX250 and significantly faster than a Intel UHD Graphics 620. That said by comparing it with the Lenovo Yoga C940 we can once again see how Acer has failed to squeeze out the maximum from this particular SoC.
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 4308 points | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 63796 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 11959 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2508 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 1252 points | |
Help | ||
Gaming Performance
The Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 is no dedicated graphics card made for demanding 3D games. Nevertheless, it is well capable of running less demanding titles smoothly on the Acer Swift 3. Some games, such as "Bioshock Infinite" or "Rocket League", were even playable in their respective high preset.
Additional benchmarks for Intel’s Iris Plus Graphics G7 can be found here.
| low | med. | high | ultra | |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 91.6 | 58.6 | 50.9 | 19.4 |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 82.7 | 52.7 | 32.8 | 30 |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 38.9 | 23.4 | 13.6 | |
| Rocket League (2017) | 100 | 52.8 | 39.6 | |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 28.2 | 12.5 | 12.1 | |
| Borderlands 3 (2019) | 26.7 | 11.7 | 7.73 |
Emissions – Quiet and Persevering in Everyday Life
System Noise
A small fan is tasked with ensuring that all internal components are cooled properly. When idle, the fan is completely off, and the device thus dead silent. Even under load it remained inconspicuous and peaked at just 32.7 dB(A). Accordingly, the Swift 3 can take the lead and was the quietest device of our test group.
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 30.3 / 30.3 / 30.3 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 31.7 / 32.7 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 30.3 dB(A) | ||
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8265U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE UHD Graphics 620, i5-8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng GeForce MX250, i7-8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 1% | -2% | -3% | 1% | -3% | |
| off / environment * | 30.3 | 29.3 3% | 30.4 -0% | 30.4 -0% | 28.8 5% | 30 1% |
| Idle Minimum * | 30.3 | 29.3 3% | 30.4 -0% | 30.4 -0% | 28.8 5% | 30 1% |
| Idle Average * | 30.3 | 29.3 3% | 30.4 -0% | 30.4 -0% | 28.8 5% | 30 1% |
| Idle Maximum * | 30.3 | 29.3 3% | 30.7 -1% | 30.4 -0% | 29.7 2% | 30 1% |
| Load Average * | 31.7 | 33.3 -5% | 33.7 -6% | 31.7 -0% | 30.7 3% | |
| Load Maximum * | 32.7 | 33.3 -2% | 34 -4% | 38.1 -17% | 38.3 -17% | 39.5 -21% |
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
Even though the Swift 3 comes with just a single small fan we found no evidence of heat accumulation that heated up the case. As our tests showed the case peaked at just 35.6 °C (~96 °F), which is an excellent result. All of its competitors were hotter under load.
During our one-hour long load test we noticed that the cooler reached its limit very quickly. At 92 °C (~198 °F), which was reached after a very short period of time, the SoC was very hot under load. On average, the temperature then settled between a more acceptable 70 to 80 °C (~158 - 176 °F). At this stage the CPU ran at 1.6 GHz, and thus faster than its 1.3 GHz base clock speed.
Sustained load only had a minor impact on 3D performance, and we do not expect a significant drop in performance.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.5 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 35.6 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.9 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 30.7 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26.1 °C / 79 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(+) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (+2.2 °C / 3.9 F).
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8265U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE UHD Graphics 620, i5-8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng GeForce MX250, i7-8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -11% | -12% | -22% | -10% | -20% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 33.5 | 41 -22% | 40.4 -21% | 47.2 -41% | 40.3 -20% | 41 -22% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 35.6 | 44.6 -25% | 42.1 -18% | 43.3 -22% | 44.6 -25% | 42.9 -21% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 24.9 | 24.4 2% | 26.2 -5% | 27.6 -11% | 24.3 2% | 29.3 -18% |
| Idle Bottom * | 25.4 | 25 2% | 26 -2% | 28.6 -13% | 24.4 4% | 30.2 -19% |
* ... smaller is better
Speaker
Both speakers continue to be of the downward-facing specimen, although in this latest iteration they no longer sit on the sides, but at the front right underneath the palm rest instead. Voices were very clear and well recognizable. Music playback lacked bass. For an improved audio experience, we would advise you to use external speakers or headphones, which can be connected to the Acer Swift 3 via a 3.5-mm headphone jack.
Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (71.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 81% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | reduced highs - on average 7.6% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Energy Management
Power Consumption
Acer has managed to create a very energy-efficient subnotebook, which becomes clear when looking at the table below. No other device from our test group was capable of keeping up with the Swift 3. At just 1.8 to 6.1 W it was extremely efficient when idle, and only under load did it ever reach double digits. On average, its power consumption under load was measured at 27.4 W. A short peak of up to 45 W signifies the CPU’s use of its turbo boost capabilities. The power supply is rated at 65 W and thus more than adequate.
| Off / Standby | 0.4 / 0.4 Watt |
| Idle | 1.8 / 4.6 / 6.1 Watt |
| Load |
27.4 / 27 Watt |
   
| |
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8, IPS, 2256x1504, 13.50 | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14.00 | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG, IPS, 3840x2160, 13.30 | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A, a-Si IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.30 | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, Toshiba KBG30ZMV512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Average Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -77% | -48% | -88% | -42% | -98% | -71% | -107% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.8 | 3.2 -78% | 3.4 -89% | 4.8 -167% | 3.1 -72% | 3.9 -117% | 3.91 ? -117% | 4.9 ? -172% |
| Idle Average * | 4.6 | 7 -52% | 5.8 -26% | 8.6 -87% | 5.87 -28% | 7.8 -70% | 7.33 ? -59% | 8.36 ? -82% |
| Idle Maximum * | 6.1 | 8.9 -46% | 8.8 -44% | 10.4 -70% | 6.6 -8% | 10.8 -77% | 9.16 ? -50% | 10.4 ? -70% |
| Load Average * | 27.4 | 47.6 -74% | 34 -24% | 37.9 -38% | 35.3 -29% | 53 -93% | 39.2 ? -43% | 45.9 ? -68% |
| Load Maximum * | 27 | 63.1 -134% | 42 -56% | 48.5 -80% | 46.5 -72% | 62.7 -132% | 49.8 ? -84% | 66 ? -144% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery Life
Compared to its predecessor the new Swift 3 is not just more efficient, but features a bigger battery to boot, resulting in very long battery life. It managed to last for a full 10.5 hours in our real-world Wi-Fi test with display brightness normalized to 150 nits (40% in the Swift’s case). Given that it lasted just as long in the H.264 test it should be well-suited for even the longest movie night conceivable.
The only competitor capable of keeping up with the Swift 3 was Lenovo's Yoga C940, mostly thanks to its larger 60 Wh battery. On battery, the Swift 3 throttled both CPU and GPU performance noticeably, which was evident in both the single and multi-core benchmarks. In return, 3D performance was not throttled on battery at all.
| Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), 54.5 Wh | Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL i7-1065G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), 60 Wh | Acer Swift 3 SF313-51-59SZ i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 48.8 Wh | Dell XPS 13 9380 2019 i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 52 Wh | Lenovo ThinkBook 13s-20R90071GE i5-8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | HP Envy 13-aq0003ng i7-8565U, GeForce MX250, 53.2 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -8% | -11% | -13% | -16% | -17% | 2% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1281 | 1117 -13% | 1032 -19% | 1252 ? -2% | |||
| H.264 | 627 | 793 26% | 495 -21% | 647 3% | 794 ? 27% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 620 | 636 3% | 573 -8% | 498 -20% | 545 -12% | 512 -17% | 629 ? 1% |
| Load | 139 | 64 -54% | 137 -1% | 141 1% | 83 -40% | 115.4 ? -17% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict – A Good Subnotebook with some Minor Flaws
Acer’s new Swift 3 SF313 is an overall improved device. It was not just redesigned to look better, but has received a major internal overhaul as well. Intel’s latest Ice Lake SoC makes for a small performance improvement, which, truth be told, we would have expected to be bigger. The Intel Core i7-1065G7 performed very well and better than its Kaby Lake predecessors. However, when compared to other similarly equipped devices, the Swift 3 fell behind. It scored with its great design and its robust build quality. The bright IPS display will definitely remain a memorable experience, and its 3:2 aspect ratio fit the Swift’s overall concept very well.
The Acer Swift 3 SF313 offers decent performance, long battery life, and a great display without stretching the budget too much.
Its flaws include the poor Wi-Fi performance and the keyboard, which was very hard to read in daylight due to its white backlight. That said, disabling the backlight in bright environments did improve upon the keyboard’s legibility somewhat. Connectivity is modern albeit a second USB-C port would not have hurt anyone. We would have also not complained about a card reader or an LTE option.
All things considered the Swift 3 is an improvement over its predecessor resulting in an all-over solid subnotebook that also does a great job as a multimedia device. Adding a secondary storage device and making the RAM upgradeable would have made the device even better than it already is.
Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7
-
02/17/2020 v7
Sebastian Bade
More articles related to this device
Acer Swift 3 SF313-52-71Y7 (Swift 3 SF313 Series)Related Articles
Pricecompare
