Breve Análise do Portátil HP EliteBook 735 G6: Apesar do AMD Picasso, não é uma má escolha
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 86 % v7 (old) | 06/2020 | HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA R5 PRO 3500U, Vega 8 | 1.5 kg | 17.7 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 | |
| 88.8 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | Lenovo ThinkPad X395 R3 PRO 3300U, Vega 6 | 1.3 kg | 16.9 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 | |
| 86.4 % v6 (old) | 09/2018 | HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA R7 2700U, Vega 10 | 1.3 kg | 17 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 | |
| 86.8 % v7 (old) | 09/2019 | Dell Latitude 7300-P99G i7-8665U, UHD Graphics 620 | 1.4 kg | 18.45 mm | 13.30" | 1920x1080 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 87 %
iluminação com acumulador: 295 cd/m²
Contraste: 1633:1 (Preto: 0.18 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.8
ΔE Greyscale 5.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
61.5% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
43% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
61.7% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
41.53% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 1.96
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA CMN139E, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Lenovo ThinkPad X395 LP133WF7-SPB1, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA BOE074A, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Dell Latitude 7300-P99G B133HAK, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 54% | 64% | 52% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 41.53 | 64.1 54% | 71.1 71% | 64.6 56% |
| sRGB Coverage | 61.7 | 95.2 54% | 96.3 56% | 91.5 48% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 43 | 65.8 53% | 71.4 66% | 65.5 52% |
| Response Times | -33% | -13% | -3% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 38 ? | 55 ? -45% | 42 ? -11% | 39 ? -3% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 26.4 ? | 32 ? -21% | 28 ? -6% | 27 ? -2% |
| PWM Frequency | 26040 | 20500 ? -21% | ||
| Screen | 38% | 20% | 10% | |
| Brightness middle | 294 | 356 21% | 464 58% | 341 16% |
| Brightness | 277 | 336 21% | 426 54% | 306 10% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 88 1% | 85 -2% | 79 -9% |
| Black Level * | 0.18 | 0.16 11% | 0.42 -133% | 0.31 -72% |
| Contrast | 1633 | 2225 36% | 1105 -32% | 1100 -33% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.8 | 3.6 47% | 4.49 34% | 6.43 5% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 23.8 | 5.5 77% | 8.77 63% | 10.33 57% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.8 | 1.11 77% | 1.27 74% | 2.36 51% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.9 | 4.7 20% | 6.44 -9% | 6.9 -17% |
| Gamma | 1.96 112% | 2.92 75% | 2.41 91% | 2.23 99% |
| CCT | 6979 93% | 6222 104% | 6922 94% | 8338 78% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 39.6 | 61 54% | 63 59% | 59 49% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 61.5 | 96 56% | 96 56% | 91 48% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 20% /
32% | 24% /
22% | 20% /
16% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 26.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 62 % 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 | ||
| 38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18 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. » 51 % 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)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 26040 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 26040 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 26040 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 8706 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single 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 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (327 - 3345, n=65, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Latitude 7300-P99G | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (611 - 637, n=2) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X395 | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (72.4 - 307, n=60, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Latitude 7300-P99G | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (140 - 144, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X395 | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (579 - 8541, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (1328 - 1349, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Dell Latitude 7300-P99G | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (128 - 790, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Latitude 7300-P99G | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (354 - 369, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (786 - 805, n=2) | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (159 - 2271, n=63, last 2 years) | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (2669 - 6403, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (3432 - 3516, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (11775 - 77867, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (15910 - 16531, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (621 - 2350, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U () | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (2557 - 14728, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U () | |
| HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (0.97 - 25.1, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (3.36 - 3.6, n=2) | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U () | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (38.5 - 220, n=57, last 2 years) | |
| R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U () | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (0.413 - 1.456, n=58, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3311 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4558 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3389 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA | |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G | Lenovo ThinkPad X395 Samsung SSD PM981a MZVLB256HBHQ | HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G | Dell Latitude 7300-P99G Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Average WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 60% | -7% | 89% | 13% | |
| Write 4K | 116 | 129.4 12% | 97.3 -16% | 141.1 22% | 118.5 ? 2% |
| Read 4K | 39.81 | 41.6 4% | 44.58 12% | 46.37 16% | 42 ? 6% |
| Write Seq | 1300 | 2334 80% | 883 -32% | 1994 53% | 1123 ? -14% |
| Read Seq | 803 | 2151 168% | 1050 31% | 2275 183% | 1208 ? 50% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 187.6 | 234 25% | 167.3 -11% | 493.3 163% | 324 ? 73% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 305.9 | 325.7 6% | 337.4 10% | 429 40% | 322 ? 5% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1299 | 2348 81% | 789 -39% | 2992 130% | 1091 ? -16% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 1741 | 3563 105% | 1606 -8% | 3562 105% | 1729 ? -1% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 3007 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 9703 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 1662 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 643 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 30.4 | 19.5 | ||
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 64.5 | 50.7 | 27.7 | 25.5 |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 21 | 16.4 | 14.4 | |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) | 24 | |||
| Total War: Three Kingdoms (2019) | 26.8 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 29.6 / 29.6 / 30.9 dB |
| Carga |
| 33.9 / 33.9 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: 29.6 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.5 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.8 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.7 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29.7 °C / 85.5 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (-1.4 °C / -2.6 F).
HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo ThinkPad X395 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (71 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 64% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 51% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.39 / 0.52 Watt |
| Ocioso | 5.6 / 8.1 / 9.6 Watt |
| Carga |
34.3 / 48.6 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA R5 PRO 3500U, Vega 8, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Lenovo ThinkPad X395 R3 PRO 3300U, Vega 6, Samsung SSD PM981a MZVLB256HBHQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA R7 2700U, Vega 10, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Dell Latitude 7300-P99G i7-8665U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 14% | -9% | 8% | -4% | -9% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 5.6 | 4 29% | 5.5 2% | 2.5 55% | 5.68 ? -1% | 4.43 ? 21% |
| Idle Average * | 8.1 | 6.3 22% | 9.4 -16% | 6.6 19% | 8.75 ? -8% | 7.58 ? 6% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9.6 | 9.3 3% | 11.6 -21% | 8.7 9% | 10.1 ? -5% | 9.43 ? 2% |
| Load Average * | 34.3 | 34 1% | 39 -14% | 35.4 -3% | 37.8 ? -10% | 45.8 ? -34% |
| Load Maximum * | 48.6 | 42 14% | 45.6 6% | 68.1 -40% | 46.2 ? 5% | 68.7 ? -41% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA R5 PRO 3500U, Vega 8, 50 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X395 R3 PRO 3300U, Vega 6, 48 Wh | HP EliteBook 735 G5 3UN62EA R7 2700U, Vega 10, 50 Wh | Dell Latitude 7300-P99G i7-8665U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 33% | -33% | 32% | 48% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 492 | 655 33% | 332 -33% | 650 32% | 729 ? 48% |
| Reader / Idle | 1103 | 550 | 1808 ? | ||
| H.264 | 620 | 663 | 917 ? | ||
| Load | 227 | 85 | 115 | 116.5 ? |
Pro
Contra
O HP EliteBook 735 G6 não é uma grande atualização em relação ao seu predecessor. A maior diferença são as mais recentes CPUs Ryzen 3000 da série Picasso. Em termos de desempenho, as novas CPUs não são uma melhoria real, mas, em troca, a duração da bateria melhorou significativamente. O fato de isto ainda não ser uma vantagem real deve-se a que a concorrência ainda está claramente à frente nesta área.
Os outros pontos fortes do HP EliteBook 735 G5 permanecem no sucessor; em particular, a carcaça de alumínio de alta qualidade e estável e os bons alto-falantes devem ser mencionados aqui. A conectividade também é convincente, exceto pelo leitor de cartões SD ausente. Isto é especialmente uma vantagem em comparação com o modelo sucessor já apresentado, o HP EliteBook 835 G7, porque o última carece de uma porta Ethernet RJ45 e de uma porta de acoplamento lateral. Um ponto fraco do HP EliteBook 735 G6 é a tela, pelo menos na configuração base. É recomendado optar pelo painel de 400 cd/m², no mínimo, aqui.
Embora já esteja ultrapassado, o HP EliteBook 735 G6 ainda pode ser um bom dispositivo de trabalho em 2020.
Atualmente se deveria comprar o EliteBook 735 G6? Fazemos uma recomendação com limitações. Se o desempenho da CPU for de alta prioridade, você provavelmente deveria optar pelo EliteBook 835 G7 sucessor, sem dúvida. Se, por outro lado, você já tem uma porta de acoplamento lateral HP em seu escritório em casa, ou se você precisa frequentemente do Ethernet RJ45, então o EliteBook 735 G6 definitivamente ainda pode valer a pena - especialmente se o preço baixar durante as próximas semanas.
HP EliteBook 735 G6 7KN29EA
- 06/10/2020 v7 (old)
Benjamin Herzig
Price comparison
