Breve Análise do Portátil Dell XPS 15 9570 (i7, UHD, GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q)
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD (XPS 15 9570 Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i7-8750H 6 x 2.2 - 4.1 GHz, Coffee Lake-H
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q - 4 GB VRAM, Análises do: 1418 MHz, Memoría: 1752 MHz, GDDR5, 398.36, Optimus
Memória
16 GB
, DDR4-2666, Dual-Channel, até 32 GB
Pantalha
15.60 polegadas 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, capacitiva, LQ156D1, IPS, Brilhante: sim
placa mãe
Intel CM246
Disco rígido
Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G, 512 GB
, 462 GB livre
peso
2.014 kg, Suprimento de energia: 439 g
Preço
2100 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (18.4 - 201, n=60, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (25.8 - 266, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
LQ156D1 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 494 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 457.3 cd/m² Minimum: 24 cd/m²iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 489 cd/m²
Contraste: 1453:1 (Preto: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.8% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
71.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
79.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
98.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
79.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.1
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD LQ156D1, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh Sharp SHP149A LQ156M1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) APPA040, , 2880x1800, 15.4" | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA AUO30EB, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE AU Optronics B156ZAN03.1, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Razer Blade 15 GTX 1060 LGD05C0, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -12% | 12% | -11% | 12% | -14% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 79.1 | 66 -17% | 98.7 25% | 67.8 -14% | 85.9 9% | 64.4 -19% |
| sRGB Coverage | 98.8 | 96.5 -2% | 99.9 1% | 94.1 -5% | 100 1% | 93.4 -5% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 79.2 | 66.7 -16% | 86.6 9% | 67.9 -14% | 99.1 25% | 65.5 -17% |
| Response Times | -1% | 3949% | -6% | 17% | 67% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 46.4 ? | 49 ? -6% | 43.2 ? 7% | 56 ? -21% | 44 ? 5% | 13.6 ? 71% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 32 ? | 30 ? 6% | 31.2 ? 2% | 29 ? 9% | 22.8 ? 29% | 12 ? 62% |
| PWM Frequency | 980 ? | 961 ? -2% | 117000 ? 11839% | |||
| Screen | 10% | 26% | -8% | 3% | 4% | |
| Brightness middle | 494 | 413 -16% | 520 5% | 440 -11% | 357.6 -28% | 304.3 -38% |
| Brightness | 457 | 378 -17% | 492 8% | 389 -15% | 350 -23% | 293 -36% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 86 -2% | 88 0% | 83 -6% | 85 -3% | 80 -9% |
| Black Level * | 0.34 | 0.29 15% | 0.39 -15% | 0.34 -0% | 0.35 -3% | 0.38 -12% |
| Contrast | 1453 | 1424 -2% | 1333 -8% | 1294 -11% | 1022 -30% | 801 -45% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.2 | 2.44 53% | 1.2 77% | 5.04 3% | 4.12 21% | 1.79 66% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 17.5 | 4.46 75% | 2.3 87% | 6.99 60% | 9.91 43% | 3.69 79% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 2.48 8% | 1.3 52% | 4.98 -84% | 1.8 33% | 1.1 59% |
| Gamma | 2.1 105% | 2.43 91% | 2.18 101% | 2.48 89% | 2.17 101% | 2.27 97% |
| CCT | 7038 92% | 7006 93% | 6738 96% | 7777 84% | 6613 98% | 6665 98% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 71.2 | 62 -13% | 61 -14% | 87.5 23% | 59.8 -16% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 98.8 | 96 -3% | 94 -5% | 100 1% | 92.8 -6% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.48 | 2.04 | 4.23 | |||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -1% /
4% | 1329% /
864% | -8% /
-9% | 11% /
7% | 19% /
9% |
* ... smaller is better
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 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. » 84 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 46.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 23.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 78 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 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 detected | 980 Hz | ≤ 25 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 980 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 25 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 980 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit Red: Default, Yellow: -0.115V
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3631 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 5284 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4418 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4966 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11 | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Razer Blade 15 GTX 1060 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Average Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | -5% | -6% | 27% | 17% | 4% | |
| Write 4K | 79.1 | 89.4 13% | 94.8 20% | 125 58% | 97.9 24% | 114 ? 44% |
| Read 4K | 37.89 | 44.64 18% | 26.45 -30% | 44.68 18% | 41.32 9% | 35.6 ? -6% |
| Write Seq | 1119 | 830 -26% | 1037 -7% | 1059 -5% | 1594 42% | 684 ? -39% |
| Read Seq | 1852 | 1774 -4% | 1280 -31% | 772 -58% | 1353 -27% | 1612 ? -13% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 361.1 | 310.6 -14% | 277.6 -23% | 507 40% | 305.6 -15% | 401 ? 11% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 257.9 | 266.4 3% | 333.9 29% | 614 138% | 354.1 37% | 427 ? 66% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1131 | 831 -27% | 1037 -8% | 1763 56% | 2033 80% | 830 ? -27% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 3096 | 2962 -4% | 3135 1% | 2171 -30% | 2543 -18% | 2950 ? -5% |
Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
Sequential Read:
1805 MB/s
Sequential Write:
523 MB/s
512K Read:
807 MB/s
512K Write:
499.7 MB/s
4K Read:
29.02 MB/s
4K Write:
79.4 MB/s
4K QD32 Read:
279 MB/s
4K QD32 Write:
351.9 MB/s
| 3DMark 06 1024x768 Score | 34786 pontos | |
| 3DMark Vantage P Result | 34180 pontos | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 9414 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 41456 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 6753 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 3431 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 2513 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | 4K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 297 | 214 | 187.8 | 74.6 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 130.9 | 87.2 | 48.2 | 26 | 17.1 |
| Rainbow Six Siege (2015) | 263.6 | 162.2 | 92.7 | 62.5 | 29.3 |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 99.9 | 73.6 | 47.3 | 39.9 | 16.8 |
| The Division (2016) | 114.2 | 83.4 | 42.5 | 34.8 | 15.7 |
| Battlefield 1 (2016) | 89.5 | 85.2 | 51.7 | 49.8 | 21.1 |
| For Honor (2017) | 113.6 | 63.8 | 65.5 | 49.5 | 19.2 |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 68.6 | 42.7 | 40 | 23.4 | 14.5 |
| Assassin´s Creed Origins (2017) | 58 | 41 | 33 | 27 | 13 |
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 92.3 | 42 | 34.3 | 30.4 | |
| Far Cry 5 (2018) | 91 | 48 | 44 | 38 | 13 |
| The Crew 2 (2018) | 60 | 49.1 | 45.3 | 42 | 14 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 29.9 / 29.9 / 30.3 dB |
| Carga |
| 36.5 / 40.4 dB |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 29.9 dB(A) | ||
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, i7-8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) Radeon Pro 560X, i7-8850H, Apple SSD AP0512 | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i9-8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Razer Blade 15 GTX 1060 GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i7-8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD) GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Lite-On CX2-8B512-Q11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -3% | -5% | -6% | -4% | -7% | -10% | |
| off / environment * | 29.9 | 30.3 -1% | 29.6 1% | 30.25 -1% | 28 6% | 28.1 6% | 28.4 5% |
| Idle Minimum * | 29.9 | 30.3 -1% | 30.1 -1% | 30.25 -1% | 28.6 4% | 28.1 6% | 29 3% |
| Idle Average * | 29.9 | 30.3 -1% | 30.1 -1% | 30.25 -1% | 29.9 -0% | 33 -10% | 29 3% |
| Idle Maximum * | 30.3 | 30.3 -0% | 30.1 1% | 31.8 -5% | 30.5 -1% | 33.5 -11% | 32.2 -6% |
| Load Average * | 36.5 | 37.1 -2% | 46.8 -28% | 44.7 -22% | 42.5 -16% | 42.2 -16% | 47.1 -29% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 40.4 | 43.3 -7% | 36 11% | 44.8 -11% | 45.3 -12% | 52 -29% | |
| Load Maximum * | 40.4 | 43 -6% | 46.8 -16% | 42 -4% | 44.8 -11% | 45.7 -13% | 47.1 -17% |
* ... smaller is better
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.8 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 31.3 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 55.7 °C / 132 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 48.5 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.1 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 38 °C / 100 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.6 °C / 94.3 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-5.8 °C / -10.5 F).
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 55.7 °C / 132 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 48.5 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.1 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 38 °C / 100 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.6 °C / 94.3 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-5.8 °C / -10.5 F).
Consumo de energia
| desligado | 0.34 / 1.3 Watt |
| Ocioso | 9.48 / 16.1 / 16.9 Watt |
| Carga |
90.8 / 134.4 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, Apple SSD AP0512, IPS, 2880x1800, 15.4" | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Razer Blade 15 GTX 1060 i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q | Average of class Multimedia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 45% | 31% | 23% | -13% | -19% | 20% | 24% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 9.48 | 2.9 69% | 3.4 64% | 6.1 36% | 11.7 -23% | 14.9 -57% | 5.8 ? 39% | 6.54 ? 31% |
| Idle Average * | 16.1 | 5.8 64% | 11 32% | 10.2 37% | 18.5 -15% | 17.5 -9% | 11.2 ? 30% | 11.3 ? 30% |
| Idle Maximum * | 16.9 | 7.5 56% | 14.9 12% | 13.4 21% | 22.8 -35% | 19.2 -14% | 13.5 ? 20% | 13.3 ? 21% |
| Load Average * | 90.8 | 77.5 15% | 78.9 13% | 82 10% | 97.5 -7% | 103.2 -14% | 86.9 ? 4% | 70.7 ? 22% |
| Load Maximum * | 134.4 | 107 20% | 91.2 32% | 122 9% | 111.1 17% | 132.7 1% | 122.4 ? 9% | 116.1 ? 14% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 84 | 102.9 | 123.1 |
* ... smaller is better
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 97 Wh | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 97 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, 83 Wh | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 96 Wh | Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, 71 Wh | Razer Blade 15 GTX 1060 i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 80 Wh | Average of class Multimedia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 38% | 15% | 13% | -18% | -30% | 19% | |
| H.264 | 738 | 701 -5% | 581 -21% | 847 ? 15% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 576 | 942 64% | 614 7% | 523 -9% | 375 -35% | 402 -30% | 640 ? 11% |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 62 | 62 0% | 88 42% | 76.3 ? 23% | |||
| Load | 76 | 114 50% | 128 68% | 76 0% | 97.1 ? 28% |
Pro
+ Carcaça de alta qualidade com formato compacto
+ Boa utilização do desempenho
+ Boa acessibilidade dos componentes
+ Tela 4K decente
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ Veloz leitor de cartões SD
+ Desempenho decente de jogos
+ Bom alto-falantes
Contra
- Superfícies de toque suaves e o touchpad atrai digitais
- Ruído da bobina
- Altos desvios de cores
- Durações mais curtas em comparação com o SKU 1080p
- Desempenho Wi-Fi medíocre
Mais núcleos de CPU, gráficos mais rápidos e mais pixels - será que a especificação mais cara do XPS 15 9570 é a melhor opção? Não, pelo menos não para todos os usuários. A boa utilização do desempenho da CPU e GPU é definitivamente um aspecto positivo, o que nem sempre é o caso dos dispositivos finos. Você também pode otimizar ainda mais o desempenho da CPU, de modo que a opção Core i7 não é um problema se você precisar de muita energia da CPU. A escolha da GPU também não é tão difícil, porque a GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q é um pouco mais rápida e mais preparada para o futuro.
A escolha da tela é um problema maior. A tela táctil 4K UHD opcional é um pouco mais brilhante e suporta entradas tácteis (se isto é uma vantagem, depende de suas preferências pessoais), mas é refletiva e estamos surpreendidos com os elevados desvios de cor, que melhoram apenas um pouco com uma calibração. A tela 4K, portanto, não é a melhor opção para a edição de imagens/vídeo. Também aumenta um pouco o peso e consome muito mais energia, de modo que o tempo de duração da bateria é muito menor. Aproximadamente 9,5 horas não são ruins para um sistema de 15 polegadas, mas o XPS 15 com a tela mate de 1080p dura muito mais tempo. As outras medições da tela de 1080p (brilho, contraste, etc.) também são boas, então a versão mais barata é provavelmente a melhor escolha para muitos usuários.
O desempenho adicional do processador e da placa gráfica é definitivamente uma vantagem, mas a tela táctil 4K opcional deixa impressões mistas. Ele consome muita energia e desvios de cor maciços impedem uma melhor pontuação.
Nosso modelo de teste também sofreu com o ruído da bobina e os ventiladores tendem a pulsar durante cargas de trabalho médias. No geral, este XPS 15 SKU ainda é um portátil multimídia muito bom, mas o modelo base foi um pacote mais equilibrado e obteve uma pontuação geral mais alta como resultado. A melhor configuração é provavelmente com a tela FHD em combinação com o Core i7 e a GTX 1050 Ti. Vamos ter uma análise separada do modelo Core i9 e verificar se o preço adicional vale a pena.
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
- 09/17/2018 v6 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
Multimedia - Médio equilibrado
Price comparison
