Breve Análise do Portátil Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Core i7-8750H, GeForce RTX 2070) Tongfang GK7CP7S
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) | |
Average of class Gaming (19 - 202, n=89, last 2 years) | |
Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
MSI GE75 8SF (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Average of class Gaming (25.8 - 269, n=90, last 2 years) | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
MSI GE75 8SF (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) |
|
iluminação: 90 %
iluminação com acumulador: 304 cd/m²
Contraste: 1169:1 (Preto: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.65 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 1.5
ΔE Greyscale 2.75 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
92% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
66.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
92.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
65.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.46
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 BOEhydis NV173FHM-N44 (BOE07B6), IPS, 1920x1080 | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW B173HAN04.0 (AUO409D), AHVA, 1920x1080 | MSI GE75 8SF Chi Mei N173HCE-G33, IPS, 1920x1080 | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH AU Optronics B173HAN03.2, IPS, 1920x1080 | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX B173HAN04.0 (AUO409D), IPS, 1920x1080 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | -5% | -1% | -2% | -4% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 65.2 | 62.9 -4% | 63.1 -3% | 64 -2% | 62.9 -4% |
sRGB Coverage | 92.2 | 87.1 -6% | 94.4 2% | 90.4 -2% | 87.8 -5% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 66.5 | 63.7 -4% | 65.2 -2% | 64.8 -3% | 63.9 -4% |
Response Times | 7% | 872% | 5% | 41% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 18.8 ? | 17.6 ? 6% | 9.6 ? 49% | 15.6 ? 17% | 7.2 ? 62% |
Response Time Black / White * | 12 ? | 11.2 ? 7% | 10.4 ? 13% | 12.8 ? -7% | 9.6 ? 20% |
PWM Frequency | 971 ? | 25770 ? 2554% | |||
Screen | -6% | 19% | -42% | 4% | |
Brightness middle | 304 | 295 -3% | 370.4 22% | 299.1 -2% | 288 -5% |
Brightness | 289 | 291 1% | 348 20% | 273 -6% | 287 -1% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 96 7% | 89 -1% | 81 -10% | 91 1% |
Black Level * | 0.26 | 0.24 8% | 0.29 -12% | 0.27 -4% | 0.2 23% |
Contrast | 1169 | 1229 5% | 1277 9% | 1108 -5% | 1440 23% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.65 | 3.2 -21% | 1.26 52% | 5.07 -91% | 2.33 12% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.11 | 6.64 -9% | 3.02 51% | 10.55 -73% | 5.34 13% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.5 | 2.52 -68% | 1.21 19% | 3.31 -121% | 2.47 -65% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.75 | 2.16 21% | 1.4 49% | 6.8 -147% | 1.19 57% |
Gamma | 2.46 89% | 2.46 89% | 2.2 100% | 2.46 89% | 2.41 91% |
CCT | 6763 96% | 6872 95% | 6747 96% | 7805 83% | 6710 97% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 60 | 57 -5% | 59.7 0% | 58.5 -2% | 57 -5% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 92 | 87 -5% | 94.4 3% | 89.9 -2% | 88 -4% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -1% /
-4% | 297% /
166% | -13% /
-29% | 14% /
7% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
12 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 6.8 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. » 28 % 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 | ||
18.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 9.6 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. » 29 % 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)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 971 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 971 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 971 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. |
Cinebench R11.5 | |
CPU Single 64Bit | |
Average of class Gaming (2.62 - 3.73, n=17, last 2 years) | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 | |
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX | |
CPU Multi 64Bit | |
Average of class Gaming (10.4 - 64.3, n=18, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 1TB | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8 | MSI GE75 8SF Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1 | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AS SSD | -57% | -80% | -41% | -16% | |
Seq Read | 2359 | 1315 -44% | 949 -60% | 1153 -51% | 911 -61% |
Seq Write | 2469 | 927 -62% | 823 -67% | 1328 -46% | 2347 -5% |
4K Read | 53.5 | 52.4 -2% | 25.36 -53% | 35.05 -34% | 53 -1% |
4K Write | 117.6 | 122.8 4% | 67.1 -43% | 96 -18% | 122.5 4% |
4K-64 Read | 1579 | 326.5 -79% | 748 -53% | 727 -54% | 1577 0% |
4K-64 Write | 2048 | 727 -65% | 650 -68% | 1212 -41% | 1734 -15% |
Access Time Read * | 0.048 | 0.11 -129% | 0.173 -260% | 0.063 -31% | 0.08 -67% |
Access Time Write * | 0.03 | 0.045 -50% | 0.059 -97% | 0.04 -33% | 0.031 -3% |
Score Read | 1869 | 510 -73% | 869 -54% | 878 -53% | 1721 -8% |
Score Write | 2413 | 942 -61% | 799 -67% | 1441 -40% | 2091 -13% |
Score Total | 5248 | 1715 -67% | 2109 -60% | 2784 -47% | 4771 -9% |
* ... smaller is better
3DMark 11 Performance | 18150 pontos | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 29348 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 15686 pontos | |
Ajuda |
The Witcher 3 | |
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
Average of class Gaming (35.6 - 449, n=125, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX | |
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 | |
Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW | |
MSI GE75 8SF | |
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
Average of class Gaming (18.4 - 216, n=168, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX | |
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH | |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 | |
Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW | |
MSI GE75 8SF |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | QHD | 4K | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 137 | 73 | 49.5 | |||
Apex Legends (2019) | 143 | 134 | 132 | 88.2 | 45.4 | |
Far Cry New Dawn (2019) | 94 | 92 | 82 | 74 | 42 | |
Metro Exodus (2019) | 87.9 | 66.4 | 54.1 | 42 | 26.1 | |
Anthem (2019) | 88.8 | 85.4 | 79.8 | 62 | 35.5 | |
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) | 143 | 117 | 75.2 | 62.1 | ||
The Division 2 (2019) | 113 | 95 | 78 | 60 | 33 |
Barulho
Ocioso |
| 29 / 32 / 33 dB |
Carga |
| 42 / 49 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 dB(A) |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | MSI GE75 8SF GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | -6% | -5% | 6% | -2% | 7% | |
off / environment * | 29 | 29 -0% | 28.3 2% | 28.3 2% | 29 -0% | 24 ? 17% |
Idle Minimum * | 29 | 29 -0% | 33.5 -16% | 31.5 -9% | 29 -0% | 25.5 ? 12% |
Idle Average * | 32 | 32 -0% | 33.6 -5% | 31.6 1% | 32 -0% | 27.2 ? 15% |
Idle Maximum * | 33 | 40 -21% | 35 -6% | 31.6 4% | 33 -0% | 30.2 ? 8% |
Load Average * | 42 | 46 -10% | 38 10% | 32.3 23% | 47 -12% | 42.5 ? -1% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 49 | 51 -4% | 50 -2% | 43 12% | 49 -0% | |
Load Maximum * | 49 | 52 -6% | 56.9 -16% | 45.5 7% | 51 -4% | 53.4 ? -9% |
* ... smaller is better
(-) 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 56 °C / 133 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.6 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 39.2 °C / 103 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (35 °C / 95 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-6.1 °C / -11 F).
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | MSI GE75 8SF GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | -14% | 9% | 4% | 1% | -1% | |
Maximum Upper Side * | 47 | 59 -26% | 41.2 12% | 38.6 18% | 53 -13% | 46.1 ? 2% |
Maximum Bottom * | 56 | 54 4% | 46 18% | 43.6 22% | 50 11% | 49.2 ? 12% |
Idle Upper Side * | 28 | 33 -18% | 26.2 6% | 30.2 -8% | 27 4% | 31.2 ? -11% |
Idle Bottom * | 30 | 35 -17% | 30.2 -1% | 35 -17% | 30 -0% | 32.2 ? -7% |
* ... smaller is better
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% 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 (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 62% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 42% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 9% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.5 / 1.8 Watt |
Ocioso | 13 / 16 / 21 Watt |
Carga |
96 / 191 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | MSI GE75 8SF GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -27% | -19% | -22% | -23% | -18% | |
Idle Minimum * | 13 | 19 -46% | 16.4 -26% | 20.2 -55% | 19 -46% | 13.5 ? -4% |
Idle Average * | 16 | 22 -38% | 21.9 -37% | 27.2 -70% | 22 -38% | 18.9 ? -18% |
Idle Maximum * | 21 | 29 -38% | 25.4 -21% | 28.7 -37% | 30 -43% | 26.7 ? -27% |
Load Average * | 96 | 102 -6% | 90.7 6% | 90.8 5% | 104 -8% | 106.6 ? -11% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 172 | 190 -10% | 203.3 -18% | 152.1 12% | 167 3% | |
Load Maximum * | 191 | 231 -21% | 222.9 -17% | 165.4 13% | 203 -6% | 249 ? -30% |
* ... smaller is better
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H, 46.74 Wh | Asus ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H, 66 Wh | MSI GE75 8SF GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile, i7-8750H, 65 Wh | Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H, 76 Wh | Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, i7-8750H, 76 Wh | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 15% | -5% | -15% | -2% | 67% | |
Reader / Idle | 315 | 372 18% | 298 -5% | 565 ? 79% | ||
WiFi v1.3 | 224 | 235 5% | 212 -5% | 190 -15% | 230 3% | 376 ? 68% |
Load | 55 | 67 22% | 52 -5% | 85.3 ? 55% | ||
Witcher 3 ultra | 52 | 78.3 ? |
Pro
Contra
O Schenker XMG Neo 17 é em grande parte um excelente portátil para jogos de 17 polegadas. A tela é um deleite com sua alta relação de contraste e taxa de atualização de 144 Hz, juntamente com seus marcos finos. Além disso, impressionou nos nossos testes de jogos graças à sua GPU RTX 2070, enquanto o seu teclado RGB mecânico é um prazer para a digitação.
Além disso, o Neo 17 é quase livremente configurável e vem com uma tonelada de acessórios, o sempre são bem-vindos. A carcaça Tongfang Barebones é comparativamente compacta e leve também, embora seja bastante grossa.
No entanto, Schenker precisaria abordar várias áreas para alcançar as melhores pontuações. Em primeiro lugar, o sucessor do Neo 17 precisaria de pelo menos a opção para uma bateria maior, juntamente com um melhor trackpad e alto-falantes. Além disso, a empresa precisaria reposicionar a placa Wi-Fi para aproveitar ao máximo seu potencial e ajustar o controle do ventilador para utilizar o turbo da CPU no modo de ventilador balanceado. No geral, essas deficiências não impedem que o XMG Neo 17 receba uma pontuação média decente, mas o impedem de ser o portátil de jogos de 17 polegadas para bater este ano.
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17
- 05/14/2020 v7 (old)
Florian Glaser