Breve Análise do Portátil HP Pavilion 15 Power (i7-7700HQ, GTX 1050)
Os Top 10
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros
SD Card Reader | |
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US |
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US |
|
iluminação: 81 %
iluminação com acumulador: 256.6 cd/m²
Contraste: 1351:1 (Preto: 0.19 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
57.7% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
36.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
40.03% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
57.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
38.81% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.32
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV ID: AU Optronics AUO41ED, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 Chi Mei CMN N156HCE-EN1, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS LP156WF6-SPK3, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S BOE CQ NV156HFM-N42, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV AU Optronics AUO41ED, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 63% | 4% | 22% | -2% | ||
Display P3 Coverage | 38.81 | 65 67% | 40.56 5% | 47.11 21% | 38.03 -2% | |
sRGB Coverage | 57.9 | 90.8 57% | 59.4 3% | 70.4 22% | 56.5 -2% | |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 40.03 | 65.8 64% | 41.9 5% | 48.71 22% | 39.29 -2% | |
Response Times | 15% | -41% | -20% | -10% | -6% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 38.8 ? | 29.6 ? 24% | 58.8 ? -52% | 46 ? -19% | 38.8 ? -0% | 44.4 ? -14% |
Response Time Black / White * | 28 ? | 26.4 ? 6% | 36 ? -29% | 34 ? -21% | 33.6 ? -20% | 27.2 ? 3% |
PWM Frequency | 25510 ? | 21550 ? | 20000 ? | 19230 ? | ||
Screen | 2% | -29% | 2% | -28% | -31% | |
Brightness middle | 256.6 | 300.9 17% | 239 -7% | 277 8% | 255.9 0% | 209.7 -18% |
Brightness | 243 | 285 17% | 244 0% | 268 10% | 249 2% | 193 -21% |
Brightness Distribution | 81 | 92 14% | 88 9% | 91 12% | 90 11% | 75 -7% |
Black Level * | 0.19 | 0.24 -26% | 0.35 -84% | 0.26 -37% | 0.48 -153% | 0.19 -0% |
Contrast | 1351 | 1254 -7% | 683 -49% | 1065 -21% | 533 -61% | 1104 -18% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5 | 5 -0% | 7.3 -46% | 5.05 -1% | 5.9 -18% | 7.8 -56% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 20.1 | 10.2 49% | 24.7 -23% | 8.93 56% | 18.9 6% | 24.1 -20% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 7 -159% | 4.9 -81% | 2.97 -10% | 5.6 -107% | 7.3 -170% |
Gamma | 2.32 95% | 2.34 94% | 2.19 100% | 2.39 92% | 2.21 100% | 2.39 92% |
CCT | 6599 98% | 6578 99% | 7332 89% | 6466 101% | 7250 90% | 5771 113% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 36.7 | 59 61% | 35 -5% | 38 4% | 44.8 22% | 39.3 7% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 57.7 | 90 56% | 55 -5% | 59 2% | 70.1 21% | 56.5 -2% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 27% /
16% | -35% /
-31% | -5% /
-0% | -5% /
-15% | -13% /
-21% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16.4 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. » 68 % 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 | ||
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise | |
↘ 18.8 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. » 54 % 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 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
wPrime 2.10 - 1024m | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Y50 | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
MSI GP62-2QEi781FD | |
Eurocom Tornado F5 |
* ... smaller is better
PCMark 8 | |
Home Score Accelerated v2 | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US | |
Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 | |
Work Score Accelerated v2 | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 | |
Creative Score Accelerated v2 | |
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 |
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 4042 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 5328 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4964 pontos | |
Ajuda |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S Hynix HFS128G39TND | Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AS SSD | -103% | 289% | 1% | 145% | |
Copy Game MB/s | 204.3 | 1115 446% | 157.6 -23% | 240.5 18% | |
Copy Program MB/s | 176.6 | 502 184% | 111.1 -37% | 299.5 70% | |
Copy ISO MB/s | 297.3 | 1912 543% | 195 -34% | 1560 425% | |
Score Total | 828 | 942 14% | 2617 216% | 882 7% | 1592 92% |
Score Write | 210 | 48 -77% | 807 284% | 218 4% | 376 79% |
Score Read | 416 | 646 55% | 1232 196% | 444 7% | 852 105% |
Access Time Write * | 0.252 | 4.15 -1547% | 0.027 89% | 0.261 -4% | 0.031 88% |
Access Time Read * | 0.12 | 0.08 33% | 0.065 46% | 0.077 36% | 0.066 45% |
4K-64 Write | 130.7 | 15.3 -88% | 529 305% | 113.9 -13% | 176.4 35% |
4K-64 Read | 338.8 | 371.6 10% | 919 171% | 361.4 7% | 564 66% |
4K Write | 66.5 | 1.2 -98% | 139.4 110% | 90.8 37% | 124.1 87% |
4K Read | 25.83 | 47.1 82% | 48.57 88% | 32.29 25% | 44.75 73% |
Seq Write | 132.3 | 311.7 136% | 1392 952% | 130.2 -2% | 752 468% |
Seq Read | 509 | 2277 347% | 2649 420% | 507 0% | 2433 378% |
* ... smaller is better
3DMark 11 Performance | 7467 pontos | |
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 114747 pontos | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 20367 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 5451 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 2630 pontos | |
Ajuda |
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x | |
Aorus x3 Plus v7 | |
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
MSI GeForce GTX 1050 Ti | |
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB | |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV | |
HP Omen 15-ax007ng | |
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV | |
Asus N752VX-GC131T |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Guild Wars 2 (2012) | 43.3 | |||
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013) | 114 | |||
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 63.1 | |||
Metro: Last Light (2013) | 78.9 | 43.6 | ||
Thief (2014) | 73.8 | 41.4 | ||
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 69 | 40.2 | 21 | |
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) | 89 | 78 | 44 | |
Metal Gear Solid V (2015) | 60 | 60 | 60 | 48.2 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 94.9 | |||
Fallout 4 (2015) | 41.8 | 33.7 | ||
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 38.4 | 32.9 | ||
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) | 54.3 | 38.7 | 33.8 | |
Doom (2016) | 103.6 | 81.5 | 38.4 | 35.3 |
Overwatch (2016) | 92.2 | 55.5 | ||
Mafia 3 (2016) | 40.6 | 27.8 | ||
Prey (2017) | 144 | 83.3 | 60.7 | 49.9 |
Barulho
Ocioso |
| 32.1 / 32.2 / 32.2 dB |
Carga |
| 43.3 / 49.6 dB |
| ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min: , med: , max: BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 27.8 dB(A) |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A | Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR | HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | 9% | 7% | 3% | 1% | |
off / environment * | 27.8 | 28.2 -1% | 27.7 -0% | 28.1 -1% | 28.9 -4% |
Idle Minimum * | 32.1 | 28.2 12% | 30.5 5% | 28.1 12% | 32.3 -1% |
Idle Average * | 32.2 | 28.2 12% | 30.5 5% | 29.1 10% | 32.3 -0% |
Idle Maximum * | 32.2 | 28.2 12% | 30.6 5% | 29.1 10% | 32.3 -0% |
Load Average * | 43.3 | 39 10% | 40 8% | 49.2 -14% | 43.2 -0% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 45 | 40 11% | |||
Load Maximum * | 49.6 | 46.3 7% | 42.6 14% | 49.2 1% | 45.2 9% |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.6 °C / 112 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 60 °C / 140 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.2 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 34.4 °C / 94 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(-) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 41 °C / 105.8 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-12.2 °C / -22 F).
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (68.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 92% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 7% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 16% 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 | 0.05 / 0.54 Watt |
Ocioso | 9.4 / 9.7 / 16.8 Watt |
Carga |
76.5 / 105.6 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 6700HQ, GeForce GTX 970M, Lite-On CV1-8B128, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV 6700HQ, GeForce GTX 960M, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 7% | 4% | -30% | 12% | |
Idle Minimum * | 9.4 | 6.7 29% | 8.5 10% | 11.1 -18% | 5.3 44% |
Idle Average * | 9.7 | 8.9 8% | 9.1 6% | 14.1 -45% | 10.6 -9% |
Idle Maximum * | 16.8 | 10.8 36% | 9.7 42% | 18.4 -10% | 11.8 30% |
Load Average * | 76.5 | 81.8 -7% | 79.9 -4% | 96.5 -26% | 70.9 7% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 86.5 | 92.2 -7% | 97.7 -13% | ||
Load Maximum * | 105.6 | 122.7 -16% | 121.5 -15% | 159.5 -51% | 119.8 -13% |
* ... smaller is better
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 70 Wh | Lenovo Yoga 720-15IKB-80X7 i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 72 Wh | Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN-80WK001KUS i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, 45 Wh | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 52.5 Wh | Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 43 Wh | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 63.3 Wh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -1% | -52% | -31% | -38% | -5% | |
Reader / Idle | 971 | 1066 10% | 509 -48% | 612 -37% | 961 -1% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 481 | 484 1% | 240 -50% | 330 -31% | 263 -45% | 389 -19% |
Load | 110 | 96 -13% | 46 -58% | 76 -31% | 115 5% |
Pro
Contra
O Pavilion 15 Power é o portátil mais forte e mais facilmente recomendado em comparação com o Pavilion 15 padrão, se as CPUs da classe HQ e os gráficos Pascal são opções desejáveis. O chassi é uma atualização significativa até o ponto em que até a digitação se sente mais confortável e a luz de fundo é mais brilhante para uma experiência geral melhor. Os compradores devem estar cientes da rigidez média da tela, da dificuldade que apresenta a manutenção e da cobertura limitada de sRGB que torna o sistema desfavorável para o trabalho de edição de gráficos.
O preço é o principal problema para o Pavilion 15 Power. O XPS 15 9560 ainda é o portátil de 15 polegadas a derrotar e se, assumindo configurações semelhantes entre os dois sistemas (7700HQ, GTX 1050, FHD). HD de 1 TB, 8 GB de RAM), o XPS 15 atualmente custa $1200 USD em comparação com os $1040 USD do Pavilion na HP.com (ou $920 USD através da Cukusa.com). Os $200 ou $300 adicionais percorrem um longo caminho, dado que a Dell é inequivocamente superior ao Pavilion 15 Power em portabilidade, conectividade, qualidade da tela, manutenção e rigidez do chassi. Pode funcionar mais quente e fazendo um pouco mais de barulho em geral, mas a pequena lista de desvantagens é facilmente eclipsada pelos benefícios. Se o orçamento for apertado, no entanto, definitivamente vale a pena optar pelo antigo Pavilion 15t para o Pavilion 15 Power.
HP Pavilion 15 Power 1GK62AV
-
07/03/2017 v6 (old)
Allen Ngo