Breve Análise do Portátil HP EliteBook 820 G4 (7500U, Full HD)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 E7270 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G3 | |
| Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 E7270 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G3 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET (jseb) | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET (jseb) | |
| iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
| Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz | |
| iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
| Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 81 %
iluminação com acumulador: 328 cd/m²
Contraste: 1124:1 (Preto: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.49 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6.16 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
65% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
42% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
46.04% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
65.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
44.45% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.32
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5" | HP EliteBook 820 G3 TN LED, 1366x768, 12.5" | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA TN LED, 1366x768, 12.5" | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5" | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 IPS LED, 1920x1080, 12.5" | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz IPS, 2304x1440, 12" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -12% | 7% | 1% | 52% | -11% | 48% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 44.45 | 38.9 -12% | 47.15 6% | 44.71 1% | 67.9 53% | 39.7 -11% | 66.8 50% |
| sRGB Coverage | 65.5 | 58.5 -11% | 71 8% | 66.1 1% | 98 50% | 59.2 -10% | 95.4 46% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 46.04 | 40.2 -13% | 48.71 6% | 46.23 0% | 69.8 52% | 41.07 -11% | 68 48% |
| Response Times | -39% | -18% | 1% | -14% | -11% | -18% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 35 ? | 58 ? -66% | 50 ? -43% | 32.8 ? 6% | 42 ? -20% | 38.4 ? -10% | 41.2 ? -18% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 26 ? | 29.2 ? -12% | 24 ? 8% | 27.2 ? -5% | 28 ? -8% | 28.8 ? -11% | 30.4 ? -17% |
| PWM Frequency | 217 ? | ||||||
| Screen | -33% | -24% | 4% | 13% | -12% | 26% | |
| Brightness middle | 326 | 244 -25% | 241 -26% | 337 3% | 300 -8% | 353 8% | 387 19% |
| Brightness | 304 | 240 -21% | 240 -21% | 322 6% | 280 -8% | 334 10% | 358 18% |
| Brightness Distribution | 81 | 84 4% | 83 2% | 91 12% | 87 7% | 91 12% | 88 9% |
| Black Level * | 0.29 | 0.6 -107% | 0.54 -86% | 0.32 -10% | 0.31 -7% | 0.47 -62% | 0.47 -62% |
| Contrast | 1124 | 407 -64% | 446 -60% | 1053 -6% | 968 -14% | 751 -33% | 823 -27% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.49 | 9 -39% | 8.04 -24% | 5.71 12% | 4.9 24% | 7.79 -20% | 1.6 75% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 15.95 | 15.73 1% | 13.9 13% | 15.39 4% | 8.91 44% | 15.19 5% | 4 75% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.16 | 9.48 -54% | 9.52 -55% | 5.15 16% | 6.69 -9% | 7.38 -20% | 1 84% |
| Gamma | 2.32 95% | 2.44 90% | 2.42 91% | 2.38 92% | 2.33 94% | 2.43 91% | 2.26 97% |
| CCT | 7575 86% | 11116 58% | 11362 57% | 6881 94% | 6487 100% | 6158 106% | 6680 97% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 42 | 37.18 -11% | 45.03 7% | 42.38 1% | 63 50% | 37.72 -10% | 61.6 47% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 65 | 58.63 -10% | 71.12 9% | 65.62 1% | 98 51% | 58.87 -9% | 82.2 26% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -28% /
-29% | -12% /
-17% | 2% /
3% | 17% /
17% | -11% /
-11% | 19% /
25% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | ||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 7 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 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. » 59 % 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 | ||
| 35 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 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. » 44 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| Geekbench 3 | |
| 32 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| 32 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| Geekbench 4.0 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| PCMark 7 Score | 5376 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3660 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4631 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4824 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET Samsung PM951 NVMe MZVLV512 | HP EliteBook 820 G3 Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE Liteonit LCH-512V2S | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ512G8NY | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 Liteon L8H-256V2G | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz Apple SSD AP0256 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | 23% | -44% | -48% | -50% | -29% | |
| Read Seq | 1315 | 1255 -5% | 499.6 -62% | 518 -61% | 498.4 -62% | 754 -43% |
| Write Seq | 594 | 1240 109% | 403 -32% | 423.3 -29% | 286.7 -52% | 638 7% |
| Read 512 | 661 | 1131 71% | 322.9 -51% | 414.8 -37% | 616 -7% | |
| Write 512 | 594 | 811 37% | 372.4 -37% | 379.9 -36% | 678 14% | |
| Read 4k | 42.87 | 51 19% | 27.22 -37% | 21.17 -51% | 24.89 -42% | 14.6 -66% |
| Write 4k | 151.6 | 134.1 -12% | 83.6 -45% | 86.3 -43% | 88 -42% | 20.5 -86% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 568 | 549 -3% | 316.5 -44% | 227.3 -60% | 280.5 -51% | 464 -18% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 491.7 | 343.9 -30% | 273.1 -44% | 174.7 -64% | 241.9 -51% | 315 -36% |
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 7375 pontos | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1645 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 56060 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 6084 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 822 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 370 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 70.3 | 36.2 | 21.3 | 10.4 |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 41.9 | 25.9 | 21.3 | 6.9 |
| Battlefield 4 (2013) | 33 | 26.9 | 17.4 | 6.1 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 30.7 / 30.7 / 30.7 dB |
| Carga |
| 35.3 / 33.7 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: 30.7 dB(A) | ||
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook 820 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 2% | -2% | 2% | -10% | 4% | |
| off / environment * | 30.7 | 29.2 5% | 28.9 6% | 29 6% | 31.2 -2% | 28.9 6% |
| Idle Minimum * | 30.7 | 29.2 5% | 30.5 1% | 29 6% | 31.2 -2% | 28.9 6% |
| Idle Average * | 30.7 | 29.2 5% | 30.5 1% | 29 6% | 31.2 -2% | 28.9 6% |
| Idle Maximum * | 30.7 | 29.2 5% | 30.5 1% | 29 6% | 31.2 -2% | 28.9 6% |
| Load Average * | 35.3 | 35.6 -1% | 38.2 -8% | 35.1 1% | 43.3 -23% | 31.3 11% |
| Load Maximum * | 33.7 | 37 -10% | 38.4 -14% | 37.8 -12% | 43.3 -28% | 37.6 -12% |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37 °C / 99 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 38.9 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.7 °C / 78 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 27.8 °C / 82 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 (+0.5 °C / 0.9 F).
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook 820 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz 6Y30, HD Graphics 515 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -9% | -29% | -27% | 3% | -27% | -15% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 37 | 39.6 -7% | 42.8 -16% | 47.5 -28% | 40.6 -10% | 44.3 -20% | 39 -5% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 38.9 | 40.1 -3% | 54.3 -40% | 43.6 -12% | 37 5% | 52.6 -35% | 44 -13% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 26.3 | 29.4 -12% | 33.2 -26% | 34.9 -33% | 24.5 7% | 32.3 -23% | 32 -22% |
| Idle Bottom * | 27 | 30.6 -13% | 36.5 -35% | 35.9 -33% | 24.9 8% | 35.1 -30% | 32 -19% |
* ... smaller is better
HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 45% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 31% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 61% 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
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.44 / 0.49 Watt |
| Ocioso | 2.7 / 4.8 / 6.6 Watt |
| Carga |
28.5 / 29 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook 820 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz 6Y30, HD Graphics 515 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -14% | -70% | -19% | -37% | -18% | 17% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 2.7 | 3.5 -30% | 5.4 -100% | 3.5 -30% | 3.2 -19% | 3.8 -41% | 2.7 -0% |
| Idle Average * | 4.8 | 5.4 -13% | 7.5 -56% | 5.5 -15% | 7.8 -63% | 6.7 -40% | 2.7 44% |
| Idle Maximum * | 6.6 | 6.2 6% | 13 -97% | 6.7 -2% | 8.7 -32% | 7.2 -9% | 7.2 -9% |
| Load Average * | 28.5 | 27.3 4% | 41.2 -45% | 28.9 -1% | 42.2 -48% | 27.2 5% | 22 23% |
| Load Maximum * | 29 | 39.5 -36% | 44.7 -54% | 42.1 -45% | 35.7 -23% | 30.2 -4% | 20.5 29% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 49 Wh | HP EliteBook 820 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 44 Wh | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), 44 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 46 Wh | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 52 Wh | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 55 Wh | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz 6Y30, HD Graphics 515, 41.4 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -28% | -55% | -27% | -39% | -19% | -1% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1346 | 826 -39% | 553 -59% | 953 -29% | 1050 -22% | ||
| H.264 | 532 | 495 -7% | 258 -52% | 466 -12% | 512 -4% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 566 | 373 -34% | 281 -50% | 501 -11% | 345 -39% | 508 -10% | 501 -11% |
| Load | 205 | 144 -30% | 83 -60% | 92 -55% | 153 -25% | 231 13% |
Pro
Contra
Inclusive se o HP EliteBook 820 G4 é, mais que nada, uma atualização Kaby Lake, poderia ser interessante para os proprietários do predecessor. No entanto, isto não se deve ao baixo ganho de desempenho do Kaby Lake em comparação com Skylake.
Durações de bateria bastante mais longas, tornam o computador (mais) atraente.
Sem importar a carga, o computador permanece frio e funciona de forma silenciosa a maior parte do tempo. Este último se aplica desde que a ventoinha pare ou funciona a uma velocidade muito baixa. De outra forma, você pode ouvir um baixo ruído de assobio. Isto não deveria acontecer em computadores desta faixa de preços; ainda mais, porque já criticamos isso no antecessor.
O muito veloz NVMe-SSD garante u sistema responsivo. É possível substituir o SSD. Isto requer remover o lado inferior do portátil - que não precisa de muito esforço. A carcaça e o teclado permaneceram iguais: A HP fornece a qualidade com a que já estamos acostumados.
Não é muito frequentemente que podemos dizer algo bom das telas dos portáteis empresariais da HP. No entanto, as coisas mudaram desta vez: A HP incorporou um painel IPS brilhante, rico em contraste e com ângulos de visão estáveis. Inclusive as cores são bastante boas de fábrica.
HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET
- 02/24/2017 v6 (old)
Sascha Mölck
Price comparison
