Notebookcheck Logo

Breve Análise do Portátil HP Omen 17: Jogos de gama alta com algumas limitações pequenas

Um fator de custo.

Despite its high price, the current high-end configuration of the HP Omen 17 is still significantly cheaper than other RTX 2080 laptops. Find out whether the HP Omen 17 can keep up with its competition in aspects other than performance in our detailed review.
Coffee Lake Gaming Geforce Laptop / Notebook
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng (Omen 17-cb Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i9-9880H 8 x 2.3 - 4.8 GHz, Coffee Lake-H
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile - 8 GB VRAM, Análises do: 1380 MHz, Memoría: 1750 MHz, GDDR6, ForceWare 430.86
Memória
32 GB 
, 2x 16 GB DDR4-2666 SO-DIMM, Dual-Channel, todos os slots ocupados
Pantalha
17.30 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, CMN175D, IPS, Full-HD, 144 Hz, G-Sync, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
Intel HM370
Disco rígido
2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0), 1024 GB 
, + TOSHIBA MQ04ABD200, 2 TB HDD @5400 rpm. Slots: 2x M.2 Typ 2280 & 1x 2,5 inch
Placa de Som
Intel Cannon Point PCH - cAVS
Conexões
3 USB 3.0, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, Conexões Audio: 1 conector para fones, 1 conector para microfone, Card Reader: SD,SDHC,SDXC
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek Gaming GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit/s), Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 27 x 405 x 295
Bateria
70 Wh, 4550 mAh Lítio-Ion, 8 células
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 2.0 Bang & Olufsen, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Adaptador de CA de 330 watts, guia de início rápido, Command Center, 24 Meses Garantia
peso
3.3 kg, Suprimento de energia: 1.146 kg
Preço
2879 EUR
Links
HP página inicial
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Size Comparison

❌
418 mm 295 mm 41 mm 4.3 kg402.6 mm 319.2 mm 42 mm 3.9 kg397 mm 330 mm 42 mm 4.2 kg405 mm 295 mm 27 mm 3.3 kg397 mm 268.5 mm 27.5 mm 2.7 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g
Left: DC-in, RJ45-LAN, HDMI, Mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB 3.0, Thunderbolt 3, audio jack out, audio jack in
Left: DC-in, RJ45-LAN, HDMI, Mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB 3.0, Thunderbolt 3, audio jack out, audio jack in
Right: SD card reader, USB 3.0
Right: SD card reader, USB 3.0
SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
190 MB/s +150%
Average of class Gaming
  (19 - 202, n=89, last 2 years)
95.5 MB/s +26%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
76 MB/s
MSI GE75 9SG
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27.14 MB/s -64%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
206 MB/s +154%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.8 - 269, n=90, last 2 years)
119.3 MB/s +47%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
81 MB/s
MSI GE75 9SG
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
33.17 MB/s -59%
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
749 MBit/s
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
730 MBit/s -3%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
712 MBit/s -5%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
680 MBit/s -9%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
629 MBit/s -16%
iperf3 receive AX12
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
690 MBit/s +2%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
675 MBit/s
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s 0%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
661 MBit/s -2%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
652 MBit/s -3%
343
cd/m²		355
cd/m²		328
cd/m²
342
cd/m²		360
cd/m²		343
cd/m²
337
cd/m²		336
cd/m²		335
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
CMN175D tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 360 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 342.1 cd/m² Minimum: 23 cd/m²
iluminação: 91 %
iluminação com acumulador: 360 cd/m²
Contraste: 1385:1 (Preto: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.91 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 0.78
ΔE Greyscale 2.72 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
65.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
63.7% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.37
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
CMN175D, IPS, 1920x1080		MSI GE75 9SG
Chi Mei N173HCE-G33, AHVA, 1920x1080		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Chi Mei N173HCE-G33 (CMN175C), IPS, 1920x1080		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
AU Optronics B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B), IPS, 3840x2160		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
LG Philips 173WFG, IPS, 1920x1080
Display
-3%
-2%
30%
2%
Display P3 Coverage
63.7
61.5
-3%
62.3
-2%
86.3
35%
66.3
4%
sRGB Coverage
96
92
-4%
93.4
-3%
100
4%
96.9
1%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
65.8
63.5
-3%
64.3
-2%
99.1
51%
66.5
1%
Response Times
34%
23%
-115%
15%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
17.6 ?(8.4, 9.2)
7.2 ?(3.8, 3.4)
59%
8 ?(4.4, 3.6)
55%
41.6 ?(20.4, 21.2)
-136%
13.2 ?(8, 5.2)
25%
Response Time Black / White *
11.2 ?(6, 5.2)
6.6 ?(3.2, 3.4)
41%
10 ?(5.2, 4.8)
11%
21.6 ?(9.6, 12)
-93%
10.8 ?(6, 4.8)
4%
PWM Frequency
25510 ?(44)
26040 ?(10)
2%
26040 ?(20)
2%
Screen
-2%
-3%
-37%
-36%
Brightness middle
360
400.7
11%
396
10%
343
-5%
335.2
-7%
Brightness
342
372
9%
373
9%
328
-4%
297
-13%
Brightness Distribution
91
89
-2%
89
-2%
82
-10%
82
-10%
Black Level *
0.26
0.34
-31%
0.33
-27%
0.31
-19%
0.66
-154%
Contrast
1385
1179
-15%
1200
-13%
1106
-20%
508
-63%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.91
1.33
30%
2.04
-7%
5.03
-163%
2.02
-6%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
4.08
3.51
14%
3.85
6%
7.91
-94%
7.23
-77%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
0.78
1.39
-78%
0.82
-5%
0.86
-10%
1.17
-50%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.72
1.3
52%
2.83
-4%
6.29
-131%
3.2
-18%
Gamma
2.37 93%
2.24 98%
2.49 88%
2.38 92%
2.16 102%
CCT
6692 97%
6735 97%
7113 91%
6389 102%
6746 96%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60
58.2
-3%
59
-2%
88
47%
61.3
2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
96
92.1
-4%
94
-2%
100
4%
96.9
1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
10% / 4%
6% / 1%
-41% / -34%
-6% / -23%

* ... 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
11.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 ms rise
↘ 5.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 27 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
   ↔    Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
17.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.4 ms rise
↘ 9.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 28 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 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 25510 Hz ≤ 44 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 25510 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 44 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 25510 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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
HWiNFO
GPU-Z
LatencyMon
01052103154205256307358409451050115512601365147015751680178518901995Tooltip
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng Intel Core i9-9880H, Intel Core i9-9880H: Ø1291 (1278.24-1450)
MSI GE75 9SG Intel Core i9-9880H, Intel Core i9-9880H: Ø1619 (1602.44-1728.31)
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG Intel Core i9-9900K, Intel Core i9-9900K: Ø1998 (1943.92-2022.14)
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing Intel Core i9-9900K, Intel Core i9-9900K: Ø1887 (1858.65-1934.33)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080 Intel Core i9-9900K, Intel Core i9-9900K: Ø1875 (1847.15-1952.27)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (176.6 - 318, n=195, last 2 years)
276 Points +40%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
212 Points +8%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
207 Points +5%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Intel Core i9-9900K
207 Points +5%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Core i9-9880H
197 Points
Average Intel Core i9-9880H
  (181 - 198, n=11)
190.1 Points -4%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
189 Points -4%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (905 - 5663, n=198, last 2 years)
3394 Points +134%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
2022 Points +39%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
1979 Points +36%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Intel Core i9-9900K
1944 Points +34%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
1721 Points +19%
Average Intel Core i9-9880H
  (1317 - 1721, n=11)
1506 Points +4%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Core i9-9880H
1450 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
197 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1450 Points
Cinebench R20 CPU (Multi Core)
2953 Points
Cinebench R20 CPU (Single Core)
467 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 10 - Score
Average of class Gaming
  (5776 - 9852, n=168, last 2 years)
7774 Points +19%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
7050 Points +8%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
7006 Points +7%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0)
6599 Points +1%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)
6558 Points
MSI GE75 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
6306 Points -4%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)		MSI GE75 9SG
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0)		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
-13%
-11%
11%
5%
Write 4K
103.8
116.1
12%
101.4
-2%
183.2
76%
111.1
7%
Read 4K
41.67
44.98
8%
40.57
-3%
52.4
26%
45.47
9%
Write Seq
2639
2370
-10%
2229
-16%
1790
-32%
2454
-7%
Read Seq
2702
1465
-46%
2528
-6%
1743
-35%
2212
-18%
Write 4K Q32T1
487.3
337.5
-31%
379.6
-22%
550
13%
622
28%
Read 4K Q32T1
555
453.6
-18%
421.9
-24%
648
17%
695
25%
Write Seq Q32T1
2967
2399
-19%
2439
-18%
3236
9%
2675
-10%
Read Seq Q32T1
3102
3087
0%
3199
3%
3538
14%
3184
3%
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
AS SSD
hddimg
2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3102 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2967 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 555 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 487.3 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 2702 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2639 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 41.67 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 103.8 MB/s
3DMark 11 Performance
25017 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
44234 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
19351 pontos
3DMark Time Spy Score
9177 pontos
Ajuda
3DMark | 3DMark 11
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (781 - 53059, n=196, last 2 years)
31245 Points +37%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
27080 Points +19%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
  (22504 - 27319, n=16)
25211 Points +10%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
25126 Points +10%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
24623 Points +8%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
23089 Points +1%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
22820 Points
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (224 - 22717, n=191, last 2 years)
13034 Points +37%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
10720 Points +13%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
10243 Points +8%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
  (9411 - 10992, n=15)
10046 Points +6%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
9754 Points +3%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
9480 Points
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Average of class Gaming
  (1029 - 72178, n=186, last 2 years)
43521 Points +37%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
38485 Points +21%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
  (31826 - 38809, n=17)
35286 Points +11%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
34050 Points +7%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
33396 Points +5%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
31826 Points
05101520253035404550556065707580859095100Tooltip
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0): Ø94 (88-99)
MSI GE75 9SG GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR: Ø89.4 (84-96)
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0): Ø95.9 (90-101)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080 GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0): Ø96.3 (88-103)
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Average of class Gaming
  (18.4 - 216, n=168, last 2 years)
126.9 fps +38%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K
101.1 fps +10%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K
100 fps +9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
  (82.2 - 105, n=16)
95.6 fps +4%
MSI GE75 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H
95.3 fps +4%
SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9900K
94.5 fps +3%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, i9-9880H
91.7 (76min) fps
baixomédiaaltoultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 173 91.7
Hitman 2 (2018) 81.2 78.5
Farming Simulator 19 (2018) 153 140
Just Cause 4 (2018) 117 100
Apex Legends (2019) 144 144
Far Cry New Dawn (2019) 105 93
Metro Exodus (2019) 81.9 67.7
Anthem (2019) 102 96
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) 167 98.3
The Division 2 (2019) 125 95
Anno 1800 (2019) 78.8 45.3
Rage 2 (2019) 118 117
F1 2019 (2019) 153 142

Barulho

Ocioso
34 / 35 / 36 dB
HDD
33 dB
Carga
51 / 51 dB
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
  
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 30 dB(A)
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GE75 9SG
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
5%
-5%
1%
-1%
16%
off / environment *
30
28.2
6%
30
-0%
30
-0%
28.1
6%
24 ?(19.5 - 27.9, n=157, last 2 years)
20%
Idle Minimum *
34
30.4
11%
33
3%
30
12%
28.1
17%
25.5 ?(22.8 - 35, n=158, last 2 years)
25%
Idle Average *
35
30.4
13%
34
3%
33
6%
28.6
18%
27.2 ?(23 - 37.5, n=158, last 2 years)
22%
Idle Maximum *
36
33.4
7%
44
-22%
35
3%
51
-42%
30.2 ?(23 - 47, n=158, last 2 years)
16%
Load Average *
51
37.1
27%
47
8%
44
14%
51
-0%
42.5 ?(25.2 - 62.9, n=158, last 2 years)
17%
Witcher 3 ultra *
47
54.2
-15%
53
-13%
55
-17%
51
-9%
Load Maximum *
51
56.4
-11%
59
-16%
58
-14%
51
-0%
53.4 ?(43 - 67.5, n=158, last 2 years)
-5%

* ... smaller is better

Carga Máxima
 47 °C45 °C47 °C 
 44 °C47 °C47 °C 
 34 °C38 °C36 °C 
Máximo: 47 °C
Médio: 42.8 °C
54 °C46 °C54 °C
41 °C41 °C37 °C
28 °C28 °C31 °C
Máximo: 54 °C
Médio: 40 °C
alimentação elétrica  45 °C | Temperatura do quarto 23 °C | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 42.8 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 47 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 40.5 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 54 °C / 129 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.2 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 42.6 °C / 109 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 38 °C / 100.4 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-9.1 °C / -16.4 F).
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GE75 9SG
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
-15%
3%
-1%
-6%
2%
Maximum Upper Side *
47
48.8
-4%
51
-9%
45
4%
47
-0%
46.1 ?(28.2 - 60, n=156, last 2 years)
2%
Maximum Bottom *
54
52
4%
57
-6%
45
17%
58.8
-9%
49.2 ?(33.6 - 66, n=156, last 2 years)
9%
Idle Upper Side *
32
36.2
-13%
26
19%
36
-13%
31
3%
31.2 ?(22.4 - 42.8, n=156, last 2 years)
2%
Idle Bottom *
30
44.4
-48%
28
7%
33
-10%
35
-17%
32.2 ?(22.6 - 43.6, n=156, last 2 years)
-7%

* ... smaller is better

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.637254142.13134.331.44030.635.3502931.76328.331.7802634.810027.735.112524.937.416027.146.820023.352.625022.163.631520.563.440019.764.150019.170.363018.36780017.464.6100017.261.1125018.562.7160017.662.7200017.564.1250017.568315017.558400017.662.1500017.860.3630017.470.4800017.570.71000017.568.41250017.465.51600017.568.2SPL30.278.1N1.444.2median 17.6median 63.6Delta1.5640.744.538.440.538.738.838.740.53742.135.443.434.946.734.253.33457.132.461.83265.93269.131.47130.366.329.571.729.382.929.285.329.280.428.976.528.580.728.886.628.583.128.377.628.174.928.275.328.171.72874.92880.927.679.627.775.240.892.9497.9median 28.9median 75.315hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Omen 17-cb0020ngMSI GE75 9SG
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 30% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 18% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

MSI GE75 9SG audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.1 / 0.1 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 26 / 29 / 38 Watt
Carga midlight 106 / 287 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GE75 9SG
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile		Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
19%
6%
-33%
-22%
25%
Idle Minimum *
26
13.9
47%
14
46%
39
-50%
23.3
10%
13.5 ?(2 - 39, n=157, last 2 years)
48%
Idle Average *
29
18.8
35%
18
38%
45
-55%
33.5
-16%
18.9 ?(8 - 55.6, n=157, last 2 years)
35%
Idle Maximum *
38
23.1
39%
23
39%
55
-45%
38.4
-1%
26.7 ?(9 - 101.1, n=157, last 2 years)
30%
Load Average *
106
112.3
-6%
114
-8%
122
-15%
114.1
-8%
106.6 ?(32.1 - 201, n=155, last 2 years)
-1%
Witcher 3 ultra *
228
231
-1%
283
-24%
259
-14%
339.5
-49%
Load Maximum *
287
291.5
-2%
443
-54%
346
-21%
485.1
-69%
249 ?(55.3 - 418, n=157, last 2 years)
13%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
4h 10min
WiFi Websurfing
3h 16min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 03min
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, 70 Wh		MSI GE75 9SG
i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, 65 Wh		MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, 90 Wh		SCHENKER XMG Ultra 17 Turing
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, 82 Wh		Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
i9-9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, 90 Wh		Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
50%
34%
-21%
-23%
84%
Reader / Idle
250
409
64%
165
-34%
155
-38%
565 ?(155 - 1290, n=69, last 2 years)
126%
WiFi v1.3
196
294
50%
302
54%
135
-31%
127
-35%
376 ?(85 - 889, n=157, last 2 years)
92%
Load
63
52
-17%
65
3%
66
5%
85.3 ?(41 - 173, n=121, last 2 years)
35%
H.264
135
408 ?(129 - 837, n=80, last 2 years)

Pro

+ Amplo espaço de armazenamento
+ Painel de 144-Hz muito bom
+ Bom som
+ Muitas portas
+ Design elegante
+ G-Sync

Contra

- A CPU poderia fazer melhor uso do seu Turbo
- Duração da bateria relativamente curta
- Manutenção desconfortável
- Alto ruído do sistema
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

No final do dia, o HP Omen 17-cb0020ng consegue as melhores avaliações.

Vamos começar com os pontos positivos. Além da relativamente boa relação preço/desempenho em comparação com o concorrente RTX 2080 (concedido, o portátil de 17 polegadas é bastante caro, no entanto), também ficamos impressionados com o design da carcaça. O áudio e a seleção das portas (Thunderbolt 3), bem como a excelente tela de 144-Hz com suporte para G-Sync, todos contribuem em fazer deste dispositivo um bom portátil.

Ficamos menos impressionados com o nível de ruído do sistema durante o uso de aplicativos 3D, as opções de manutenção inferiores e a modesta velocidade da CPU sob carga de vários núcleos. A duração limitada da bateria completa a lista de aspectos bastante decepcionantes.

HP Omen 17-cb0020ng - 05/14/2020 v7 (old)
Florian Glaser

Acabamento
80 / 98 → 82%
Teclado
81%
Mouse
78%
Conectividade
67 / 80 → 84%
Peso
55 / 10-66 → 80%
Bateria
54 / 95 → 56%
Pantalha
89%
Desempenho do jogos
97%
Desempenho da aplicação
94%
Temperatura
82 / 95 → 86%
Ruído
62 / 90 → 69%
Audio
79%
Camera
45 / 85 → 53%
Médio
74%
85%
Gaming - Médio equilibrado

More articles related to this device

HP Omen 17-cb0020ng (Omen 17-cb Serie)

Price comparison

HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
HP Omen 17
Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil HP Omen 17: Jogos de gama alta com algumas limitações pequenas
Florian Glaser, 2019-08-28 (Update: 2019-08-30)