Breve Análise do Portátil HP EliteBook 840 G5 (i5-8250U, SSD, Full HD)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 87 %
iluminação com acumulador: 414 cd/m²
Contraste: 1656:1 (Preto: 0.25 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 2.3
ΔE Greyscale 6.4 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
88.1% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
56.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
61.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
88.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
60.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.31
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA AUO3B3D, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 LP140QH2-SPB1, 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 LG LP140WF3, 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD AUO123D, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 7480 LG Philips LGD0557, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 B140QAN02.0, 2560x1440, 14" | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 18% | 2% | -7% | 7% | 41% | 8% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 60.2 | 72.8 21% | 66.1 10% | 55.8 -7% | 65.4 9% | 87.7 46% | 67.2 12% |
| sRGB Coverage | 88.2 | 97.9 11% | 84.8 -4% | 80.7 -9% | 92.3 5% | 100 13% | 90.8 3% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 61.3 | 74.1 21% | 62 1% | 57.7 -6% | 65.8 7% | 99.9 63% | 66.4 8% |
| Response Times | 10% | 21% | 18% | 3% | -25% | 16% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 42.4 ? | 38.4 ? 9% | 36 ? 15% | 39 ? 8% | 40.8 ? 4% | 59.2 ? -40% | 38 ? 10% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 31.6 ? | 28.4 ? 10% | 23.2 ? 27% | 23 ? 27% | 31.2 ? 1% | 34.4 ? -9% | 25 ? 21% |
| PWM Frequency | |||||||
| Screen | -5% | -6% | -54% | 6% | 30% | -1% | |
| Brightness middle | 414 | 352 -15% | 291 -30% | 346 -16% | 344 -17% | 578 40% | 275 -34% |
| Brightness | 387 | 343 -11% | 296 -24% | 317 -18% | 321 -17% | 533 38% | 253 -35% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 91 5% | 84 -3% | 86 -1% | 85 -2% | 84 -3% | 85 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.25 | 0.46 -84% | 0.32 -28% | 0.86 -244% | 0.32 -28% | 0.38 -52% | 0.25 -0% |
| Contrast | 1656 | 765 -54% | 909 -45% | 402 -76% | 1075 -35% | 1521 -8% | 1100 -34% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.5 | 3.3 40% | 4.3 22% | 8.64 -57% | 2.6 53% | 1.9 65% | 3.49 37% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.9 | 7.3 26% | 7.5 24% | 13.58 -37% | 7.8 21% | 3.8 62% | 6.77 32% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.3 | 0.8 65% | |||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.4 | 5.3 17% | 4.3 33% | 11.24 -76% | 2.6 59% | 3 53% | 4.91 23% |
| Gamma | 2.31 95% | 2.22 99% | 2.31 95% | 2.62 84% | 2.28 96% | 2.14 103% | 2.39 92% |
| CCT | 7811 83% | 6452 101% | 6529 100% | 12530 52% | 7050 92% | 6377 102% | 6271 104% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 56.9 | 68.4 20% | 55.46 -3% | 52 -9% | 65.82 16% | 88.8 56% | 59 4% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 88.1 | 98 11% | 84.77 -4% | 80 -9% | 92.27 5% | 100 14% | 91 3% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 8% /
2% | 6% /
-1% | -14% /
-35% | 5% /
5% | 15% /
25% | 8% /
3% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 31.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 13.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (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 (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 42.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 22.8 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. » 67 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| Cinebench R10 | |
| Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit | |
| Average of class Office (5904 - 13680, n=5, last 2 years) | |
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA | |
| Average Intel Core i5-8250U (5163 - 8153, n=13) | |
| Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit | |
| Average of class Office (22075 - 62930, n=5, last 2 years) | |
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA | |
| Average Intel Core i5-8250U (11245 - 28932, n=13) | |
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3652 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4726 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4832 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 2429 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Dell Latitude 7480 Intel SSDSCKKF256H6 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | 139% | -5% | 92% | -16% | 118% | -16% | |
| Read Seq | 1929 | 1540 -20% | 504 -74% | 1819 -6% | 486.5 -75% | 2327 21% | 518 -73% |
| Write Seq | 340 | 1613 374% | 497.8 46% | 1263 271% | 418.6 23% | 1808 432% | 267.2 -21% |
| Read 512 | 908 | 835 -8% | 396.7 -56% | 922 2% | 354.3 -61% | 419.3 -54% | 562 -38% |
| Write 512 | 286.1 | 1716 500% | 283.4 -1% | 804 181% | 306.8 7% | 1272 345% | 263.5 -8% |
| Read 4k | 30.94 | 66.9 116% | 35.73 15% | 61.4 98% | 29.25 -5% | 60.6 96% | 32.88 6% |
| Write 4k | 94.5 | 160.6 70% | 87.8 -7% | 157.1 66% | 90.5 -4% | 132.9 41% | 85.6 -9% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 244.7 | 444.9 82% | 399.1 63% | 513 110% | 280.2 15% | 340.7 39% | 351.3 44% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 351.3 | 343 -2% | 249.7 -29% | 410.2 17% | 252.8 -28% | 439.7 25% | 265.2 -25% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1791 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 61742 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 7535 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 941 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 440 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 364 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 41.9 | 26 | 21.4 | 7.3 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 14.8 | 9.4 | 5.3 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 18.1 | 10.9 | 6.3 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.8 / 28.8 / 33.1 dB |
| Carga |
| 35.2 / 35.2 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: 28.8 dB(A) | ||
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Dell Latitude 7480 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Intel SSDSCKKF256H6 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 HD Graphics 620, i7-7500U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -1% | 6% | -2% | 8% | 0% | -0% | |
| off / environment * | 28.8 | 28.9 -0% | 28.2 2% | 31 -8% | 28.9 -0% | 30.6 -6% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 28.8 | 28.9 -0% | 28.2 2% | 31 -8% | 28.6 1% | 28.9 -0% | 30.6 -6% |
| Idle Average * | 28.8 | 28.9 -0% | 28.2 2% | 31 -8% | 28.6 1% | 28.9 -0% | 30.6 -6% |
| Idle Maximum * | 33.1 | 28.9 13% | 28.2 15% | 31 6% | 28.6 14% | 32.5 2% | 31 6% |
| Load Average * | 35.2 | 36.9 -5% | 31.2 11% | 33.5 5% | 30.2 14% | 35.1 -0% | 34.5 2% |
| Load Maximum * | 35.2 | 38.9 -11% | 33 6% | 33.7 4% | 31.2 11% | 35.1 -0% | 32.4 8% |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.6 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.5 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.2 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26 °C / 78.8 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (+1.7 °C / 3.1 F).
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Dell Latitude 7480 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Intel SSDSCKKF256H6 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 HD Graphics 620, i7-7500U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -10% | -2% | -4% | -18% | -15% | -8% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 36.6 | 50.1 -37% | 42.6 -16% | 37 -1% | 39 -7% | 52.6 -44% | 39.1 -7% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 39.5 | 46.1 -17% | 34.4 13% | 39.4 -0% | 47.2 -19% | 48.2 -22% | 35 11% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 23.8 | 22.2 7% | 25.1 -5% | 25.9 -9% | 27.6 -16% | 23.6 1% | 29.4 -24% |
| Idle Bottom * | 24.7 | 22.6 9% | 24.6 -0% | 25.6 -4% | 32 -30% | 23 7% | 27.8 -13% |
* ... smaller is better
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 42% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, 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%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 60% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 65% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.39 / 0.49 Watt |
| Ocioso | 3.2 / 6.6 / 9.5 Watt |
| Carga |
36.2 / 65.6 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, TN, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 7480 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Intel SSDSCKKF256H6, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -8% | 6% | 21% | 15% | -18% | -6% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.2 | 3.1 3% | 4.11 -28% | 2.9 9% | 4.32 -35% | 3.8 -19% | 4.8 -50% |
| Idle Average * | 6.6 | 6.8 -3% | 7.87 -19% | 5.6 15% | 6.27 5% | 8.9 -35% | 7.9 -20% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9.5 | 10.1 -6% | 8.74 8% | 8.15 14% | 6.35 33% | 11.9 -25% | 10.7 -13% |
| Load Average * | 36.2 | 48.4 -34% | 30.2 17% | 30.6 15% | 29.82 18% | 47.5 -31% | 35 3% |
| Load Maximum * | 65.6 | 67.1 -2% | 32.4 51% | 31 53% | 30.64 53% | 52.5 20% | 31.6 52% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 51 Wh | Dell Latitude 7480 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Acer TravelMate P648-G2-M-73T0 i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 54 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 27% | -9% | 24% | 39% | 11% | 7% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1138 | 782 -31% | 1155 1% | 1662 46% | 1328 17% | 1087 -4% | |
| H.264 | 399 | 721 81% | 490 23% | 591 48% | 566 42% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 447 | 537 20% | 430 -4% | 571 28% | 719 61% | 519 16% | 672 50% |
| Load | 156 | 124 -21% | 117 -25% | 184 18% | 171 10% | 106 -32% | 115 -26% |
Pro
Contra
O HP EliteBook 840 G5 é um dispositivo empresarial de alta qualidade, agora em sua quinta geração. O sucessor do HP EliteBook 840 G4 recebeu um novo design e um processador Kaby Lake Refresh atualizado, embora isso não alcance todo o seu potencial. Os compradores também devem estar cientes de qual configuração eles compram, como o HP EliteBook 840 G5 também está disponível com processadores Intel de sétima geração.
Nossa unidade de teste está equipada com um Intel Core i5-8250U, 8 GB de RAM e um SSD de 256-GB, e o aparelho fornece um muito bom desempenho do sistema. A HP também decidiu oferecer apenas painéis IPS nesta versão, os quais possuem vantagens significativas. A um preço de $1400, o dispositivo oferece acabamento perfeito, bom desempenho e muitos recursos de segurança, que são indispensáveis para qualquer portátil de negócios.
O novo HP EliteBook 840 G5 é impressionante com o seu design elegante e acabamento perfeito. Os bons dispositivos de entrada são tão importantes quanto os muitos recursos de segurança que o EliteBook 840 G5 tem a oferecer.
O HP EliteBook 840 G5 perde vários pontos nas áreas de consumo de energia e tempo de duração da bateria. Sua competição prova que poderia ser melhor. Mas se você não tem que lidar com longos períodos de tempo sem acesso a tomadas, você ficará muito satisfeito com o HP EliteBook 840 G5. Ficamos muito mais incomodados com a falta do leitor de cartões SD, o que não faz o menor sentido. Felizmente, o parceiro de negócios oferece uma porta USB Type-C que suporta Thunderbolt.
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX66EA
- 04/03/2018 v6 (old)
Sebastian Bade
Price comparison
