Notebookcheck Logo

Chuwi Hi10 X Convertible Review: Metal Chassis for $230 USD

Useful for very light loads only. How far can a cheap passively-cooled Windows 10 tablet from a lesser-known Chinese manufacturer get you? If all you're doing is light web browsing or word processing, then the Chuwi Hi10 X can get the job done if just barely.
Chinese Tech Touchscreen Convertible / 2-in-1 Tablet

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 Hi10 X (Hi10 Series)
Processor
Intel Celeron N4100 4 x 1.1 - 2.4 GHz, Gemini Lake
Graphics adapter
Intel UHD Graphics 600, 26.20.100.7262
Memory
6 GB 
, 1066 MHz, Dual-Channel
Display
10.10 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.

 

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
69.1 %
05/2020
Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600		600 g8.8 mm10.10"1920x1200
83.3 %
10/2018
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Pentium 4415Y, UHD Graphics 615		523 g8.3 mm10.00"1800x1200
80.4 %
08/2017
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)		1 kg17.5 mm10.10"1920x1200
77.3 %
12/2018
HP x2 210 G2
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)		1.2 kg23.5 mm10.10"1280x800
67.7 %
04/2020
Jumper EZbook X3
Celeron N3350, HD Graphics 500		1.3 kg18 mm13.30"1920x1080

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.

Firm metal base feels more expensive than it really is
Firm metal base feels more expensive than it really is
Matte, slightly roughened metal texture hides fingerprints well
Matte, slightly roughened metal texture hides fingerprints well
Lid opened to maximum angle (~130 degrees)
Lid opened to maximum angle (~130 degrees)
The hinge teeters significantly when trying to adjust the angle
The hinge teeters significantly when trying to adjust the angle
At almost 1.1 kg, the 10.1-inch detachable is quite dense
At almost 1.1 kg, the 10.1-inch detachable is quite dense
Pins and lock on the base
Pins and lock on the base
❌
262 mm / 10.3 inch 159 mm / 6.26 inch 9.8 mm / 0.3858 inch 504 g1.111 lbs261.8 mm / 10.3 inch 167.3 mm / 6.59 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 600 g1.323 lbs242 mm / 9.53 inch 166 mm / 6.54 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 580 g1.279 lbs252.5 mm / 9.94 inch 163 mm / 6.42 inch 9.4 mm / 0.3701 inch 490 g1.08 lbs245 mm / 9.65 inch 175 mm / 6.89 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 523 g1.153 lbs245.2 mm / 9.65 inch 149.4 mm / 5.88 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 460 g1.014 lbs297 mm / 11.7 inch 210 mm / 8.27 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 5.7 g0.01257 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
Front: No connectivity
Right: USB 2.0 (on base)
Right: USB 2.0 (on base)
Rear: No connectivity
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
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
Good luck trying to get that MicroSD card out without nails or a pen
SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.8 MB/s +184%
HP x2 210 G2
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
48 MB/s +101%
Jumper EZbook X3
 
24.3 MB/s +2%
Chuwi Hi10 X
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
23.9 MB/s
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23.2 MB/s -3%
Dell Latitude 3400
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23 MB/s -4%
LincPlus P1
 
18.1 MB/s -24%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
84.9 MB/s +224%
HP x2 210 G2
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
76.4 MB/s +192%
Dell Latitude 3400
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
32.3 MB/s +23%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27 MB/s +3%
Jumper EZbook X3
 
27 MB/s +3%
LincPlus P1
 
27 MB/s +3%
Chuwi Hi10 X
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
26.2 MB/s

Communication

The integrated 1x1 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 transmit AX12
HP x2 210 G2
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
483 (364min - 559max) MBit/s +40%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4
476 MBit/s +38%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Wireless AC-9461
346 (309min - 369max) MBit/s
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
272 MBit/s -21%
iperf3 receive AX12
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4
581 MBit/s +58%
HP x2 210 G2
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
448 (399min - 476max) MBit/s +22%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Wireless AC-9461
367 (359min - 373max) MBit/s
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
289 MBit/s -21%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
Chuwi Hi10 X; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø367 (359-373)
Chuwi Hi10 X; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø346 (309-369)

Webcam

ColorChecker
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

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
Standard QWERTY keys with no backlight
Very small arrow keys are spongy
Very small arrow keys are spongy
Integrated clickpad keys have an audible click with great feedback when pressed. Unfortunately, cursor control is inconsistent
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
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
Glossy touchscreen with excessive glare because of the dim display
Thick bezels add a lot to the weight of the system
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
The thick glass overlay obscures what could have otherwise been a crisp subpixel image
Only slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges and corners
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 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 265.6 cd/m² (Nits) 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 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 2.17
ΔE Greyscale 10.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
96.7% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
63% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
68.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.9% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.23
Chuwi Hi10 X
AU Optronics AUO17D8, IPS, 10.10, 1920x1200		Amazon Fire HD 10 2019
IPS, 10.10, 1920x1200		Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
TFT-LCD, 10.10, 1920x1200		Chuwi HiPad
IPS, 10.10, 1920x1200		Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Sharp SHP14A6, IPS, 10.00, 1800x1200		Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
YF102, MS_9003, IPS, 10.10, 1920x1200
Display
-1%
-18%
Display P3 Coverage
67.9
66.5
-2%
54.2
-20%
sRGB Coverage
96.8
97.5
1%
81.4
-16%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
68.9
67.5
-2%
56
-19%
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 dE 2000 *
10.04
3.1
69%
2.9
71%
4.13
59%
1.3
87%
5.34
47%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
17.49
6.4
63%
5.8
67%
7.34
58%
3
83%
9.91
43%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
2.17
1.1
49%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
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%
10% / 34%
-3% / 4%

* ... 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. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
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
Grayscale before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
ColorChecker 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 52 % 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
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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 34 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.8 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17933 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) 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 sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles. Colors and contrast change only if viewing too far off center
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 R15
CineBench R20
CineBench R20
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170Tooltip
Chuwi Hi10 X UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø170.4 (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, Pentium 4415Y, 64 GB eMMC Flash; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø162.9 (162.13-163.67)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Cinebench R20: CPU (Single Core) | CPU (Multi Core)
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 -mmt1 | 7z b 4
Geekbench 5.5: Single-Core | Multi-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
406 Points +137%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U
350 Points +105%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
213 Points +25%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (161 - 254, n=12)
206 Points +20%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel Core M-5Y10a
190 Points +11%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
171 (168.8min - 171.36max) Points
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y
164 Points -4%
Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U
134 Points -22%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
121 (118.17min - 121.14max) Points -29%
HP x2 210 G2
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
97 Points -43%
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
92 Points -46%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
82.3 (81.02min - 82.28max) Points -52%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
157 Points +128%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U
154 Points +124%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel Core M-5Y10a
83 Points +21%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
78 Points +13%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
70.9 Points +3%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
68.8 Points
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (62 - 71, n=12)
68.1 Points -1%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y
65 Points -6%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
43.4 Points -37%
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
28 Points -59%
HP x2 210 G2
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
28 Points -59%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core)
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
403 Points +163%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U
296 Points +93%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
160 Points +5%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
153 Points
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (151 - 155, n=7)
152.6 Points 0%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
100 Points -35%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core)
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
948 Points +151%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel Core i3-8145U
657 Points +74%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (368 - 560, n=7)
440 Points +16%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
378 Points
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
273 Points -28%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
190 Points -50%
Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U
159 Points -58%
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
6277 Seconds * -83%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
4736 Seconds * -38%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
3436 Seconds *
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (2437 - 3527, n=7)
3032 Seconds * +12%
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
1264 Seconds * +63%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
3851 MIPS +79%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
2298 MIPS +7%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (2125 - 2459, n=7)
2209 MIPS +3%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
2150 MIPS
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
1653 MIPS -23%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
10942 MIPS +95%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (5620 - 7835, n=7)
6674 MIPS +19%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
5620 MIPS
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
4114 MIPS -27%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
3267 MIPS -42%
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
436 Points +7%
Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U
434 Points +6%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
409 Points
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (378 - 414, n=7)
403 Points -1%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
310 Points -24%
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (1082 - 1419, n=7)
1267 Points +17%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
1082 Points
Lhmzniy A9 15.6
Intel Celeron 3867U
873 Points -19%
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
797 Points -26%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
591 Points -45%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel Core i3-1005G1
3.122 fps +203%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (0.974 - 1.5, n=6)
1.211 fps +18%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y
1.09 fps +6%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
1.03 fps
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
0.79 fps -23%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
0.65 fps -37%
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
281 s * -75%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (155 - 178, n=5)
164.8 s * -2%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
161 s *
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
156 s * +3%
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel Celeron N3350
2.21 sec * -26%
Average Intel Celeron N4100
  (1.75 - 1.786, n=5)
1.761 sec * -1%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel Celeron N4100
1.75 sec *
LincPlus P1
Intel Celeron N4000
1.652 sec * +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

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 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8 | PCMark 10
PCMark 8
Home Score Accelerated v2
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G
2480 Points +49%
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (1670 - 2259, n=12)
1912 Points +14%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
1670 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1546 Points -7%
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, SanDisk DF4128
1264 Points -24%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y, 64 GB eMMC Flash
741 Points -56%
Work Score Accelerated v2
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G
3291 Points +20%
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (2590 - 3191, n=9)
2895 Points +6%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
2738 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1220 Points -55%
PCMark 10
Score
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (1502 - 1920, n=9)
1639 Points +7%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
1527 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
872 Points -43%
Essentials
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (3776 - 5199, n=9)
4374 Points +4%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
4208 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
2662 Points -37%
Productivity
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (2567 - 2993, n=9)
2761 Points +6%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
2599 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
1121 Points -57%
Digital Content Creation
Average Intel Celeron N4100, Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (886 - 1237, n=9)
994 Points +12%
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
886 Points
HP x2 210 G2
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350, 64 GB eMMC Flash
605 Points -32%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
1670 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
2738 points
PCMark 10 Score
1527 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.

DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
Chuwi Hi10 X
UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100, SanDisk DF4128
1981 μs *

* ... smaller is better

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%
Seq Read
258.5
289.8
12%
127.5
-51%
405.4
57%
Seq Write
120.8
126.7
5%
41.75
-65%
134.7
12%
4K Read
5.94
18.29
208%
5.51
-7%
19.3
225%
4K Write
12.4
35.07
183%
7.42
-40%
33.22
168%
4K-64 Read
25.96
40.27
55%
28.99
12%
242
832%
4K-64 Write
10.16
44.48
338%
12.91
27%
152.5
1401%
Access Time Read *
0.597
0.151
75%
0.454
24%
0.16
73%
Access Time Write *
1.105
0.233
79%
0.896
19%
0.104
91%
Score Read
58
88
52%
47
-19%
302
421%
Score Write
35
92
163%
28
-20%
199
469%
Score Total
117
225
92%
94
-20%
648
454%
Copy ISO MB/s
130.2
99.1
-24%
57.2
-56%
Copy Program MB/s
88.3
44.34
-50%
36.15
-59%
Copy Game MB/s
103.8
76.5
-26%
51.4
-50%
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%
62.5
-48%
Read Seq
259.7
268
3%
121.8
-53%
Write 4K Q32T1
15.17
62.9
315%
31.72
109%
Read 4K Q32T1
33.09
39.82
20%
48.64
47%
Write Seq Q32T1
108.8
131.3
21%
95.6
-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
hddimg
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

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
Ice Storm
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Time Spy
Time Spy
 
3DMark 11 | 3DMark
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance GPU
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1
2133 Points +347%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
1461 Points +206%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y
1257 Points +164%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a
795 Points +67%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000
648 Points +36%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (410 - 854, n=27)
558 Points +17%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100
477 Points
HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
349 Points -27%
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
297 Points -38%
1280x720 Performance Combined
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1
2375 Points +556%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
1301 Points +259%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y
1134 Points +213%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a
764 Points +111%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000
605 Points +67%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (362 - 983, n=27)
552 Points +52%
HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
392 Points +8%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100
362 Points
Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
357 Points -1%
3DMark
1280x720 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 +304%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
7496 Points +176%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y
6602 Points +143%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a
4498 Points +66%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000
3370 Points +24%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (2346 - 4958, n=20)
3365 Points +24%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100
2714 Points
HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
1841 Points -32%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Dell XPS 13 7390 2-in-1 Core i3
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), i3-1005G1
1521 Points +326%
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
942 Points +164%
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y
819 Points +129%
Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
Intel HD Graphics 5300, 5Y10a
509 Points +43%
Acer TravelMate Spin B1 B118-G2-RN-P7ED
Intel UHD Graphics 605, Pentium N5000
459 Points +29%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (307 - 637, n=21)
421 Points +18%
LincPlus P1
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4000
386 Points +8%
Jumper EZbook X3
Intel HD Graphics 500, Celeron N3350
364 Points +2%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100
357 Points
HP x2 210 G2
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), Z8350
234 Points -34%
1920x1080 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
Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Intel UHD Graphics 615, Pentium 4415Y
35452 Points
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
32448 Points
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (8277 - 19919, n=12)
13725 Points
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Dell Latitude 3400
Intel UHD Graphics 620, i3-8145U
310 Points +230%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 600
  (85 - 124, n=12)
107.5 Points +14%
Chuwi Hi10 X
Intel UHD Graphics 600, Celeron N4100
94 Points
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
low med. high ultra
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 19.1 12.4 5.9 5.7
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 3.94 3.48 3.18

Emissions

Temperature

AC adapter after running Prime95 for almost an hour
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
 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
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.5 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 30.2 °C / 86 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 19.6 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 36.8 °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 30.2 °C / 86 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 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-10.9 °C / -19.6 F).
System idle (front)
System idle (front)
System idle (back)
System idle (back)
Maximum stress (front)
Maximum stress (front)
Maximum stress (back)
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
System idle
Prime95 stress
Prime95 stress
Prime95+FurMark 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
Speaker grilles on two sides of the tablet
Pink noise at maximum volume. Bass is poor and maximum volume is on the low side
Pink noise at maximum volume. Bass is poor and maximum volume is on the low side
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.439.342.42539.338.139.33137.53937.54039.238.739.25039.335.639.36336.936.936.98035.734.935.710035.135.435.112534.533.834.516034.333.134.320034.132.734.125035.732.235.731539.131.739.140042.130.642.150046.83046.863048.429.248.48005228.952100059.728.659.7125060.228.560.2160058.427.958.4200056.127.956.1250053.627.853.6315054.627.854.6400057.527.657.550006627.666630062.727.662.7800054.827.654.81000049.327.549.3125004527.4451600049.827.349.8SPL7140.471N24.53.924.5median 49.8median 28.5median 49.8Delta9.41.59.435.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.72.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseChuwi Hi10 XApple 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 (44.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 98% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 21%, worst was 57%
Compared to all devices tested
» 95% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

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 (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

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
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
Prime95 initiated at 10s mark. Consumption cycles between 11 W and 14 W after about a minute into the stress test
Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.66 / 0.73 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.7 / 6.3 / 6.7 Watt
Load midlight 14 / 14.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, SanDisk DF4128, IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10		Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Pentium 4415Y, UHD Graphics 615, 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1800x1200, 10.00		Lenovo IdeaPad Miix 320-10ICR Pro LTE
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), SanDisk DF4128, IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10		HP x2 210 G2
Z8350, HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), 64 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1280x800, 10.10		Dell Venue 11 Pro 7140
5Y10a, HD Graphics 5300, Sandisk X110 M.2 SD6SP1M-128G, IPS, 1920x1080, 10.80
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
WiFi Websurfing
5h 36min
Chuwi Hi10 X
Celeron N4100, UHD Graphics 600, 24 Wh		Microsoft Surface Go MHN-00003
Pentium 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%
WiFi v1.3
336
448
33%
461
37%
551
64%
795
137%
Reader / Idle
771
777
2083
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
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 - 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

Pricecompare

Read all 5 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Chuwi Hi10 X Convertible Review: Metal Chassis for $230 USD
Allen Ngo, 2020-05- 5 (Update: 2020-05- 5)