18 Apr
Blog

Acer Aspire 5 2021 Review: Budget laptop takes a step back

Acer Aspire 5

"The horrific display on the Acer Aspire 5 ruins a decent, inexpensive laptop."

  • Solid connectivity

  • Superior expandability

  • Good keyboard and touchpad

  • Cruel display

  • Chassis is too flexible

  • Mediocre battery life

  • Poor performance

The Acer Aspire 5 has been one of our favorite laptops for a few years now and has earned a spot on our list of the best budget laptops. Currently, the 2020 version of the Aspire 5 is listed as the best Windows 10 laptop under $ 500, a major segment that the computer dominates. Acer has introduced a slightly redesigned Aspire 5 for 2021 that features the latest 11th generation Intel Core CPUs and makes some significant changes to the case design.

I received an entry-level model with a Core i3-1115G4 CPU with Intel UHD graphics, 8 GB of RAM, a 256 GB PCIe solid-state drive (SSD) and a 15.6-inch full HD display (1,920 x 1,080). This Aspire 5 configuration is priced at $ 480, which is in the sub-$ 500 segment that previous models owned. Can Acer keep its track record with the latest Aspire 5?

design

Acer has optimized the design of the Aspire 5 for 2021. The biggest change is a new hinge that angles the case back several degrees to allow better airflow and to support the keyboard. It's a welcome change from an otherwise mundane design.

As before, the lid is made of aluminum, while the rest of the housing is made of plastic and the rigidity is the same as before. The lid is curved quite a bit, while the keyboard deck and the bottom of the case are a bit stiffer, but still yield to light pressure. Some other budget laptops, like the Lenovo Yoga C640, Lenovo Flex 5 14, and Acer Swift 3, have solid build quality.

Acer Aspire 5Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Aesthetically, the Aspire 5 is pretty bland, with an all-black color scheme punctuated with some chrome-plated Acer logos. If you don't care about the looks of a laptop and are solely focused on the price, the Aspire 5 will satisfy your taste. But it is by no means noticeable. Other colors will be available, including a silver scheme, which is probably more attractive than my boring black review unit.

The Aspire 5 is not a small laptop as the bezels are still too big for modern machines. The side bezels aren't too thick, but the top and bottom bezels could be made smaller, resulting in a laptop that is wider and deeper than usual. The Aspire 5 weighs 3.64 pounds, down from 3.97 pounds in the previous version and is 0.70 inches thick, which is reasonable for a 15-inch laptop.

A particularly nice design feature that the Aspire 5 has in common is its expandability. Accessing the inside of the computer is relatively easy, allowing users to swap out RAM and SSD. Acer also includes a kit for adding a 2.5-inch drive to an empty bay, making it easy to expand storage with an SSD or rotating hard disk drive (HDD). This kind of expandability is rare and welcomed here.

Acer Aspire 5 side viewMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 USB portsMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 closed side viewMark Coppock / Digital Trends

As with many budget laptops that aren't as thin and light as some previous models, connectivity is mostly a strength. On the left, you get an Ethernet port, a full-size HDMI port, two USB-A 3.2 ports, and a USB-C 3.2 port (no Thunderbolt 4 support here). On the right side you will find a Kensington lock slot, a USB-A 2.0 port and a 3.5 mm audio jack. Wireless connectivity is cutting edge with Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1.

performance

Acer Aspire 5Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

My test device was equipped with a Core i3-1115G4, an 11th generation dual-core CPU that operates at a full TDP of 12 to 28 watts, but contains Intel UHD graphics instead of the newer Intel Iris Xe. According to our series of benchmarks, this is a slow laptop. Starting with Geekbench 5, only 1,215 points were achieved in single-core mode and 2,544 points in multi-core mode. This is well below the usual Tiger Lake value, which usually exceeds 1,500 in the single-core and 5,000 in the multi-core area. In fact, it is beaten by some newer Chromebooks running the Android version of Geekbench 5, which is usually on the slow side. Even the Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2 with an Intel Core i3-10110U got close to 1,003 and 2,179.

In our handbrake test, which encodes a 420MB video as H.265, the Aspire 5 took exactly five minutes, which is at best 50% slower than the slowest Tiger Lake laptops we tested. This is the first 11th generation Core i3 that we tested. Therefore, faster CPUs run on all of our comparison laptops. For example, the Lenovo ThinkPad X12 Detachable, a Windows 10 tablet with a Core i5-1130G7 (a slower Core i5), took just over three minutes to complete the test. The same applies to Cinebench R23, another video rendering test in which the Aspire 5 only manages 1,247 in single-core mode and 3,128 in multi-core mode. The difference between the Aspire 5 and the detachable ThinkPad X12 (1,125 and 3,663) wasn't that big, but most other Tiger Lake laptops were again significantly faster.

The Aspire 5 only achieved 3752 points in the PCMark 10 Complete test, our lowest score ever. In the Essentials part of the test, only 8,220 were achieved, in productivity 5,975 and in content creation only 2,921. The detachable ThinkPad X12 scored 4,443, 9,999, 5,936 and 4,157, respectively. As in our other tests, the Aspire 5 is well behind the field.

I found the Aspire 5 to be fast enough for basic tasks like surfing the Internet and working with office documents in real-life use. For $ 480, these aren't terrible results. We didn't test the previous versions of the Aspire 5 using the same set of benchmarks, so we can't directly compare their performance.

display

Acer Aspire 5 screenMark Coppock / Digital Trends

I'm not going to crush words here: this is the worst ad I've ever reviewed. This fact was evident when I first started the Acer Aspire 5 and logged into Windows 10. The display has a noticeable bluish cast which I believe is the result of a cruel contrast and elements on the screen may be difficult to see.

My colorimeter agreed. The brightness was very low at 211, which means you'll struggle to see the screen in a bright office setting. The contrast was confirmed to be extraordinarily poor at just 60: 1 (our threshold for a great display is 1000: 1 and an average budget display is 600: 1). The colors were also poor at just 53% of sRGB and 40% of AdobeRGB – both of which are the lowest in our database, and the typical midrange and premium displays score 95% and 70% or more, respectively. To add insult to injury, the accuracy was also among the worst I've seen with a DeltaE of 10.7 (less than 1.0 is considered excellent and most laptops are below 3.0 in the worst case) ). Only the gamma of the display was where it should be at 2.2.

Nobody will like this display.

In actual use, the colors were washed out, the black text was rather gray, and the display was completely uncomfortable. It's my new standard for "terrible display" and it left a terrible taste in my mouth as a result. Nobody is going to like this display unless they've never used a laptop before and I would pity them for getting such a poor impression of the state of the art. Acer has to get another panel because this is just terrible. The 2019 and 2020 versions of the Aspire 5 were much better.

The audio wasn't much better than the display. The volume was inadequate for all but the occasional YouTube videos, although there was no distortion when turned all the way up. The mids and highs were clear enough, and as always, there was little to no bass. The two speakers aren't bad, mind you, they just don't offer much better than budget quality.

Keyboard and touchpad

The Aspire 5 has a fairly typical island-style keyboard with backlighting, black keycaps and white letters. The keys are a bit small, but also offer a comfortable spacing with the dedicated (but tiny) numeric keypad. The switches are very light weight, with a nice push button and a comfortable bottom effect. This is one area where the Aspire 5 shines and offers a typing experience that is better than many budget laptops.

Acer Aspire 5 keyboardMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 close up of keyboard and screenMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 trackpadMark Coppock / Digital Trends

The touchpad is surprisingly good too, as it's pretty big and responsive. It is a Microsoft Precision touchpad and therefore offers reliable support for the multitouch gestures of Windows 10. It also exceeds the household norm.

Unsurprisingly there is no touch display, and as always, I miss it. There is also no Windows 10 Hello support, neither face recognition nor a fingerprint scanner. This is something we've been seeing on budget laptops lately, and so its omission is noticeable here.

Battery life

Acer has equipped the Aspire 5 with a 48-watt-hour battery, which is not much for a 15-inch laptop. Even with the slower CPU, I was disappointed with the battery life on this version.

In our web browsing test, which ran through a number of popular websites, the Aspire 5 managed just under seven hours, two hours less than the 2019 version with a Core i3, but three hours longer than the 2020 version with a Core i5. In general, that's not a terrible score, but the Aspire 5 is still in the lower bracket of our database. In our video loop test, in which a Full HD Avengers trailer is played until the battery is empty, the Aspire 5 achieved 9.5 hours. That's about 3.5 hours less than the 2020 version and less than 10 hours that we would like to see in this test. Again not a terrible result, but not great either.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Finally, I ran some PCMark 10 battery tests. The first, the gaming test, evaluates how long a laptop will last when the CPU and GPU are under stress. The Aspire 5 came in after 2.25 hours, an average score. In the application test, which is the best measure of the longevity of productivity, the Aspire 5 shut down after almost eight hours at the lower end of our database. The detachable ThinkPad X12, for example, managed over 10 hours.

Overall, the battery life of the Aspire 5 was mediocre. If you're doing typical productivity work, you can get through a work day for a fee. The laptop uses a proprietary charger, but you can charge USB-C in a pinch if you happen to have an adapter handy.

Our opinion

I would love to say that the 2021 Acer Aspire 5 retains its spot as our best budget under $ 500 laptop. Unfortunately not, thanks to slow performance and a poor display. The 2020 model is still on sale, and you'd better stick with it.

Is there a better alternative?

As I just mentioned, the 2020 Aspire 5 is a better choice than the 2021 version. You get a much better display and similar build quality for roughly the same money, and you won't be giving up much on performance and battery life.

If I were looking for a cheaper machine in this price range, I would consider a powerful Chromebook option, and there are plenty of that.

The Lenovo Flex 5 14 with its AMD Ryzen CPU is another alternative. The display is smaller at 14 inches but has better battery life, is much faster, and the display won't embarrass you in public.

How long it will take?

It's not the most rugged laptop, but I suspect it can be solidly used for a few years – and that's about what you would expect for the money. They have up-to-date components, including Wi-Fi 6, though Thunderbolt 4 isn't a bummer. The one-year guarantee is also no cause for celebration.

Should you buy it?

No. The display is really terrible which ruins the experience with this laptop.

Editor's recommendations




26 Mar
Blog

It Takes Two Review: Teamwork Makes the Dream Work

It takes two

"It Takes Two is a charming co-op adventure that combines the best ideas from Nintendo and Pixar."

  • Charming story

  • Tight platform

  • Varied level design

  • Thoughtful collaboration

  • Joyful interactivity

While video games can span a wide range of genres, there is one limit that remains largely unknown: the romantic comedy. Co-op platformer It Takes Two shows how much we missed thanks to the game industry's fear of cooties.

The adventure published by EA is the latest project from multiplayer studio Hazelight and director Josef Fares, the eclectic director of A Way Out. It Takes Two is a blatant rom-com about the restorative power of communication and teamwork instead of spreading grim science fiction or high fantasy. Imagine a 12 hour couples therapy session over Astro's playroom.

It Takes Two is a love work that has the heart of a Pixar movie and the soul of a Nintendo platformer. Even the most die-hard gamers could fall in love with the most inventive co-op game since Portal 2.

Marriage history

It doesn't take two starts with a traditional meeting. Instead, it starts with a married couple about to divorce. Cody and May are a contentious couple who decide to end it. When they deliver the news to their daughter, she does what any confused child in the situation would do: with the help of a magical book, their parents are accidentally trapped in the body of two tiny dolls.

What follows is a vibrant adventure in which the ex-lovebirds must solve their problems that have physically manifested themselves in platform challenges. The game takes full advantage of its magical, realistic premise to playfully transform local quarrels into clever video game tropes. The broken vacuum that Cody was too lazy to fix? It's become a Bowser-sized boss. The annoying wasp's nest in the backyard? The little couple have no choice but to go to war against them with a mini third person shooter.

The most straightforward comparison of the game isn't another platformer, it's Pixar's Inside Out. Both offer the same kind of illustrative storytelling, using cartoony set pieces to emphasize real experiences. Like a great Pixar movie, It Takes Two features memorable characters, moving emotional beats, and the occasional comedic wink that parents pray their kids didn't get it.

The game takes full advantage of its magical, realistic premise to playfully transform local quarrels into clever video game tropes.

The story can sometimes be narrative scattered. At every level there are lots of quick gameplay ideas that don't always sync up with a relationship parallel. Storylines seem to come out of the left field to justify moving the game to a snowy level or some elaborate musical set piece. Fortunately, every new mechanic is so enjoyable that it hardly matters how effective the game is as a therapy session.

Collaboration!

Despite the cinematic comparisons, the game works just as well as it does due to its interactivity. Lots of love stories tell audiences how important teamwork is, but It Takes Two brings physicality to these hours of life. The game can only be played with another human partner, so an actual unit is required to complete it. The players learn to communicate alongside May and Cody and to build their trust in each other.

It takes two

It's a high profile idea that comes with finesse. As a platformer, running and jumping feels as good as a Mario game. The puzzles are rarely challenging, but the solutions are ingenious enough to inspire satisfying Eureka moments. The levels themselves offer a constant flurry of fun ideas that never exceed their reception. Once players get bored with a traditional platform puzzle, it switches to a mini dungeon crawler that is completely different and just as fun.

Most impressive is how much thought has gone into making a co-op game that actually takes care of both players. May and Cody get completely different tools to play with in each level. In the opening chapter, Cody is given a set of nails that can be shot into wooden walls, while May is given a hammer head with which she can swing on these nails. The mechanics and uses of each item are completely different, giving each player their own unique experience. There's never a point where it feels like Player 1 got the "cool" item and their partner is a buddy.

Most impressive is how much thought has gone into making a co-op game that actually takes care of both players.

This is something that a lot of co-op games really struggle with. Nintendo neglects player two by making them either a mechanical clone of the protagonist or a helper with limited functionality. It Takes Two is entirely designed for both sides of the split screen, always making sure that you take turns who gets their big hero moment.

That's another thing that gets the game right when it comes to relationships. Both Cody and May are equally important to dynamics. Players have to work together to bring the characters together, but they are never left standing around while their partner is having all the fun. Give and take is never a person's expense.

"No shiny shit"

Before the game was released, EA did a Q&A with director Josef Fares. He had a choice phrase that he repeated several times when asked about his approach to game design: "No shiny shit."

The tariffs went on one of his signatures against the concept of "replayability" and emphasized that "It Takes Two" did not contain any hollow collectibles. Instead, his goal was to create an interactive world that was fun to explore without the haphazard hooks.

Feels like Fares just having fun making every little interaction.

This philosophy is reflected in the nine different levels of the game. When players are high up in a tree, they can stop to throw a stray paper airplane. There is no real incentive to do this. It's just for the love of the game. This is a breath of fresh air in the era of the open world card game where players are given a repetitive checklist of tasks to complete.

It takes two

The next thing that needs to make the game "collectibles" are mini-games that are spread over each level. These are simple competitive challenges like tug of war or snail racing that give players an easy break from the story. While they're not complex side quests, they provide a great excuse to break the pace and let partners blow off any potential frustration that has built up between tricky co-op mistakes.

Feels like Fares just having fun making every little interaction. The director is especially in love with his own games and that attitude is contagious. While his earlier work can feel a little too serious, It Takes Two is a broader representation of both his colorful personality and the immense skill at Hazelight. He jokes (probably) that he will give $ 1,000 to anyone who doesn't love the game. As much as I love the money, I certainly won't ask him to pay. He wins this bet.

Our opinion

It takes two is Hazelight and Josef Fares' most complete vision of co-op gaming to date. It uses clever interactivity to highlight the importance of good communication in video games and relationships alike. With Nintendo quality level design and an enchanting storyline that motivates the platform action, it's the rare multiplayer game that builds friendships rather than ending them.

Is there a better alternative?

No. It Takes Two is by far the best co-op game of its breed since Portal 2.

How long it will take?

The adventure lasts a surprisingly long 10-12 hours. May and Cody get completely different skills in each level, which makes playing them through the second time feel very tempting.

Should I buy it?

Yes. It's a joyful time from start to finish, and it comes with a Friend Pass that one of your friends will use to get a copy of the game. It's a two-on-one deal that ensures you have someone to play with.

Editor's recommendations




06 Feb
Blog

Acer Swift 3X Review: Intel’s Iris Xe Max Takes the Stage

Acer Swift 3x rating Iris xe max 1

"The Acer Swift 3X presents Intel's impressive Iris Xe Max in a top-class package."

  • Great job

  • Excellent battery life

  • Aesthetics are attractive

  • Rounded port selection

  • The display is overwhelming

  • The processing quality does not meet the premium standards

  • Bad gaming performance

Intel released its first discrete GPU in 20 years, the Iris Xe Max. However, that doesn't necessarily mean trying to compete with Nvidia for gaming laptops. It was not specifically designed to speed up games, but rather to work with the CPU and speed up a variety of other tasks. An interesting idea for thin and light laptops, right?

So far, the Iris Xe Max has come in three laptops, and we got one of them – the mid-range Acer Swift 3X – for review.

The Acer Swift 3X is not a cheap laptop in its Iris Xe Max configuration – at least not for a typical Swift laptop. At Amazon, it costs $ 1,240 with a Core i7-1165G7, 16 GB LPDDR4X RAM, 1 TB PCIe Solid State Drive (SSD) storage, and a 14-inch Full HD IPS display (1920 x 1080 ) in the aging school 16: 9 aspect ratio. You can spend $ 899 and get a version with only Iris Xe graphics, a Core i5-1135G7, 8 GB of RAM, and a 512 GB SSD.

Does the Iris Xe Max graphics make this laptop a must-have mid-range laptop?

performance

We start with the performance because in this test the rubber hits the road. Either the Iris Xe Max makes a difference to real-world tasks or it doesn't. This is the make-or-break test for the Acer Swift 3X. Reading the description of Intel's GPU will expose you to a variety of buzzwords and jargon, but we will skip most of them here. If you want to dig into the details of the new GPU, check out our guide to Intel's Discrete GPUs and our insight into the Iris Xe Max.

However, one term to keep in mind is deep link. This is Intel's term for technology that tightly ties the CPU and GPU (both Iris Xe and Iris Xe Max) together to enable some sophisticated functionality. Not all of them are yet activated or supported by today's software. So we focus on just one thing: Deep Link Dynamic Power Share. With this function, the system can "switch off" the GPU and supply the CPU with the entire system performance. With the Swift 3X and its 11th generation Core i7, more than 28 watts of power and heat can be delivered to the CPU if required, which should theoretically accelerate CPU-intensive tasks.

The Acer Swift 3X occasionally even questions the performance of H-series machines.

It works? Yes, it actually does. The Swift 3X was competitive in all of our performance benchmarks and occasionally took the crown for the fastest Tiger Lake laptop we tested. This makes it one of the fastest laptops in the U series and occasionally even challenges machines from the H series.

It can't compete with AMD's Ryzen 4000 (or the upcoming Ryzen 5000 laptops) in all cases, but it does show up a lot stronger than most non-Max laptops. However, is that enough to make Iris Xe Max an exciting development? Perhaps not at this point – the GPU on its own makes the Acer Swift 3X a fast laptop, but not without challengers in AMD and Apple, which are faster and either cheaper, thinner and lighter, or both. We'll have to wait and see what other features Iris Xe Max has to offer before we can speak of an unconditional success.

We start with Cinebench R23, where the Swift 3X scored 5944 points in multi-core mode and 1496 points in single-core mode. I tried the utility to switch from optimized mode to performance mode and I didn't see much of a difference unlike some others (e.g. the HP Command Center utility in the Specter x360 14) that have greater impact. This multi-core score is the fastest we've seen in an Intel U-Series CPU. It beats faster Core i7-1185G7 laptops like the MSI Prestige 14 Evo (5,789) and the Lenovo Yoga 9i 14 in its more effective performance mode (4,988).

Note that with a 45-watt Core i7-10750H, the Razer Blade scored 6,166, meaning the Swift 3X was in close proximity to a much faster CPU.

In Geekbench 5, the Swift 3X wasn't quite as strong – probably because Dynamic Power Share has the greatest impact on longer, sustained processes. The Swift 3X scored 1,551 points in the single-core test and 5,847 points in the multi-core test. The Prestige 14 Evo was slightly faster (1,593 and 5,904), as was the Intel Tiger Lake reference laptop, which is based on the same MSI computer (1,563 and 5,995). The Acer Swift 5 with the same CPU as the Swift 3X scored higher in the single-core test with 1,580 and almost as high in the multi-core test with 5,836. Interestingly, the Swift 3X managed to outperform the Lenovo Yoga 9i 15 with a Core i7-10750H (1,285 and 5,551).

In our handbrake test, which encodes a 420MB video as H.265, the Swift 3X finished the process in 2 minutes and 36 seconds, which is again (technically) the fastest among Intel U-series laptops. The Prestige 14 Evo – also with its faster CPU – took four seconds longer, which resulted in a virtual tie. Note that the Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 with an AMD Ryzen 4800U processor takes 2.2 minutes to complete. This means that while Iris Xe Max speeds up Tiger Lake's performance, it cannot compete with AMD on some tasks.

Finally, I ran the PCMark 10 Complete benchmark, where the Swift 3X scored 5,117 points. This is the second highest score in our laptop database, only behind the Lenovo Yoga 9i 15. The individual essentials, productivity and creation values ​​of the Swift 3X were not all individually highest, but were in the upper range. To examine the creation portion of the test, which focuses on photo editing, video rendering and playback, and video editing, the Swift 3X had the highest score (5,334) of any U-series laptops we tested – shown once again, Deep Link does its Job.

The closest was the Prestige Evo 14 with 5036 points. This is a good sign of performance in Adobe apps and other creative tools, which will only improve as more Deep Link features are introduced. Simply put, the Swift 3X did very well in this benchmark.

Intel didn't specifically design the Iris Xe Max to speed up modern games.

Intel's Iris Xe Max has a real impact on a laptop's performance even at this early stage. The Swift 3X screams through productivity tasks and is well suited for creative tasks for a U-series CPU. If you're looking for the fastest CPU performance in an Intel-based ultrabook, contrary to your intuition, you should choose a model that includes Intel's discrete GPU.

If you're looking for a gaming laptop, as mentioned in the introduction, Intel didn't specifically design the Iris Xe Max for speeding up modern games. With some titles it works well, with others Intel transfers the order to the Iris Xe, which is also on board. The Iris Xe Max did well in the 3DMark Time Spy benchmark with 1,889, which is a few hundred points above the typical Iris Xe GPU.

In Fortnite, however, the Max managed 34 fps (frames per second) with 1080p and high graphics and 22 fps with epic graphics. This is comparable to the Yoga 9i 14, which achieved 40 fps and 27 fps in performance mode, and the MSI Prestige 14 Evo, which achieved 42 fps and 28 fps. Fortnite is clearly a title that the Iris Xe Max doesn't shine on.

design

Acer didn't just copy the design of the non-Max Acer Swift 3 when creating the Swift 3X. There are some similarities, but the Swift 3X looks very different, including a choice between Steam Blue (my review unit) and Safari Gold instead of plain utility silver.

The hinge has also been redesigned and decorated in an “electric blue” that draws attention to the laptop lid. And the back corners have a nice angularity that adds to the aesthetics. However, it is not an attention seeker like the HP Specter x360 14. The bezels disappoint a bit. First, they're not as small as some other modern day laptops, with a screen-to-body ratio of 84% (many exceed 90%), and second, they're made of plastic rather than behind the glass. This gives the laptop a no-nonsense look when viewed from the front.

The Swift 3X isn't quite as slim as some of its 14-inch competitors, either.

The construction doesn't quite match the standard of many other premium laptops. The chassis is made entirely of aluminum, but the lid is quite flexible and the keyboard deck has some flex. However, the underside of the chassis is robust. The hinge is very stiff and requires both hands to open the laptop – in contrast to the Dell XPS 13, which can be easily opened with one hand – but holds the display firmly in place. Overall, I'd say the build quality is more in the mid-range than the premium range, which makes the laptop more attractive than the $ 1,200 on my review unit at a starting price of $ 899. The MSI Prestige 14 Evo, for example, is the same price – without the Iris Xe Max, of course – and feels a lot more solid than the Swift 3X.

The Swift 3X isn't quite as slim as some of its 14-inch competitors, either. It comes in at 0.71 inches thick and weighs 3.02 pounds. This compares to the Prestige 14 Evo at 0.63 inches at 2.85 pounds, the Asus ZenBook 14 UX425 at 0.54 inches and 2.58 pounds, and the Acer Swift 5 at 0.59 inches and 2.31 pounds. It's not that the Swift 3X is a humorous ultrabook – it just doesn't feel as thin and light as some of the other options.

Finally, the Swift 3X offers a solid range of connectivity options. On the left side of the case, you'll find a proprietary power port (which will likely provide enough juice for the Iris Xe Max), a full-size HDMI 2.0 port, a USB-A 3.2 port, and a USB-C port with Thunderbolt 4 On the right side you will find another USB-A 3.2 port and a 3.5 mm audio jack. What you won't find is an SD card reader. This is a bummer as this machine is at least partially geared towards creative types.

The wireless connection is provided via Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1.

display

The Swift 3X has a 14-inch Full HD 16: 9 IPS display which, according to my colorimeter, is generally a little below average for premium laptops. For example, the color gamut is a bit narrow at 95% of sRGB and 71% of AdobeRGB (premium laptops usually achieve 97% and 75%, respectively). However, the color accuracy is quite good at 1.18, with 1.0 or less being considered excellent.

At the same time, the brightness is 284 nits below our 300 NIT threshold, which ensures that a display with the typical bright office environment lighting is visible. And the worst contrast is at 740: 1, where many premium laptops are at 1000: 1 or more, or at least very close to it. The combination of brightness, low contrast and a narrow color gamut gives the display a subdued appearance.

Overall, the display is certainly good for productivity work and watching Netflix, but it won't blow your mind. Throw in the 16: 9 aspect ratio when many competitors are switching to higher ratios like 16:10 and 3: 2 and the Swift 3X's display isn't exactly impressive.

Audio is closer to par, with two downward-facing speakers that provide enough volume for YouTube videos but not enough for watching a Netflix movie with friends. The mids and highs are fine, but the bass is missing. You want to use headphones or bluetooth speakers for Netflix binging and listening to music.

Keyboard and touchpad

It appears that Acer pulled the keyboard from the previous Acer Swift 3. The Swift 3X has the same appearance, meaning the keycaps are smaller, which in my experience leads to a search for keys. The mechanism is very clicky and requires a bit of pressure to intervene, but offers a solid ground effect. It depends on preference, of course, but I would rate the keyboard as being behind the HP Specter x360 14 and Dell XPS 13 in terms of accuracy and general typing speed.

The touchpad is small but functional. The surface is pleasant to swipe and the keys respond, but are a bit loud. Thanks to the Microsoft Precision touchpad drivers, multi-touch gestures react quickly and precisely. There is no touch display which is a shame for me personally. I miss touch when it's not there, especially for scrolling long web pages and tapping the occasional on-screen button.

Windows 10 Hello login support without a password is provided by a fingerprint reader in the upper right corner of the keyboard deck. It was quick and accurate in my tests.

Battery life

You'd think that 59 watt hours of battery life in a 14-inch laptop and very fast CPU performance could result in poor battery life. You'd be wrong as the Swift 3X is way behind the nine hours of typical Evo spec use.

In our web benchmark, which runs through a number of popular websites before the laptop goes to sleep, the Swift 3X lasted 11.5 hours. The Lenovo Yoga 9i 14 outperformed this by more than an hour and the MSI Prestige 14 Evo by almost four hours. Next, I went through our video test grinding a Full HD Avengers trailer and the Swift 3X lasted about 15.75 hours, a strong score that is still nearly three hours less than the Yoga 9i 14 and 30 minutes less than the MSI Prestige 14 Evo was.

In the battery test for PCMark 10 applications, the Swift 3X lasted 14 hours, second only to the Yoga 9i 14 in our database and almost four hours longer than the Prestige 14 Evo. In the PCMark 10 gaming test, which stresses both the CPU and the GPU, the Swift 3X only lasted 1.5 hours, which was the worst, with the Prestige 14 Evo and Dell XPS 13 finishing second and third. Most other laptops lasted about an hour longer than the Swift 3X in this test.

Overall, the Swift 3X showed solid battery life that lasted a full day with no issues, at least as long as you don't push the CPU and GPU. Again, the Swift 3X exceeds the Intel Evo certification requirements of nine hours of typical use, which not every Evo-certified laptop we tested has achieved.

Our opinion

The Acer Swift 3X on its own is a pretty mundane, high-budget, low-midrange ultrabook without considering the inclusion of the Iris Xe Max. The components are okay for $ 1,200, but the build quality and keyboard aren't snuff-safe.

Take advantage of the great CPU performance of the Iris Xe Max and Deep Link, plus long battery life, and the Swift 3X becomes a more attractive option. It's a good choice for anyone who wants to occasionally encode video but don't want to spend the money on a laptop with a 45 watt CPU and faster discrete GPU.

Are there alternatives?

The MSI Prestige 14 Evo is almost as fast as the Swift 3X without the Iris Xe Max on board and costs the same. It's also thinner, lighter, better built, and better looking. However, the Swift 3X offers better battery life.

If you are looking for the ultimate in CPU performance, then you should take a look at an AMD Ryzen 4000 laptop (soon to be Ryzen 5000). One option today is the Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 with the Ryzen 7 4800U. It's cheaper than the Swift 3X, but it offers much faster CPU performance and extends battery life.

Finally, the Dell XPS 13 9310 remains a solid competitor, as is the case with every laptop we test in the 13- or 14-inch class. It has a smaller display, but a productivity-friendly aspect ratio of 16:10. The XPS 13 is also significantly better built, also offers a superior display, and can be configured with more RAM and storage.

How long it will take?

The Acer Swift 3X is not the most rugged notebook we've tested, but it should offer years of reliable service. The components are up to date which is a plus, but the 1 year warranty (industry standard) is, as usual, too short.

Should you buy it?

No. Iris Xe Max graphics offer the best CPU performance you can get in an Intel-based ultrabook. However, if CPU performance is most important to you, there are other, better options. And apart from the equipment of the Iris Xe Max, the Swift 3X cannot be particularly highlighted.

Editor's recommendations