Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Portátil Acer Predator Helios 500 (GTX 1070, i7-8750H)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 82 %
iluminação com acumulador: 340 cd/m²
Contraste: 479:1 (Preto: 0.7 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.99 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 1.93
ΔE Greyscale 5.2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
91% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
59% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
65.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
91.3% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
64.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.49
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY AUO_B173HAN03, , 1920x1080, 17.30 | Asus G703 AUO B173HAN03.0 (AUO309D), , 1920x1080, 17.30 | MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan CMN N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), , 1920x1080, 17.30 | HP Omen X 17-ap0xx AU Optronics B173HW01, , 1920x1080, 17.30 | Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 ID: AUO169D, Name: AU Optronics B173HAN01.6, , 1920x1080, 17.30 | Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ AU Optronics B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B), , 3840x2160, 17.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 2% | 27% | -2% | -1% | 31% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 64.4 | 65.5 2% | 90.9 41% | 63.7 -1% | 64 -1% | 86.4 34% |
| sRGB Coverage | 91.3 | 92.4 1% | 100 10% | 88.2 -3% | 89.7 -2% | 99.9 9% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 65.6 | 66.6 2% | 86.2 31% | 64.2 -2% | 64.9 -1% | 99.1 51% |
| Response Times | -25% | 41% | -233% | -238% | -221% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 14 ? | 17.6 ? -26% | 8 ? 43% | 44 ? -214% | 36.8 ? -163% | 50 ? -257% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 9 ? | 11.2 ? -24% | 5.6 ? 38% | 31.6 ? -251% | 37.2 ? -313% | 25.6 ? -184% |
| PWM Frequency | 26000 ? | |||||
| Screen | 18% | 35% | 24% | 27% | 34% | |
| Brightness middle | 335 | 274 -18% | 240 -28% | 343 2% | 367.4 10% | 343 2% |
| Brightness | 300 | 268 -11% | 248 -17% | 332 11% | 363 21% | 328 9% |
| Brightness Distribution | 82 | 80 -2% | 83 1% | 83 1% | 86 5% | 84 2% |
| Black Level * | 0.7 | 0.29 59% | 0.22 69% | 0.35 50% | 0.32 54% | 0.29 59% |
| Contrast | 479 | 945 97% | 1091 128% | 980 105% | 1148 140% | 1183 147% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.99 | 3.99 20% | 2.14 57% | 3.35 33% | 3.8 24% | 4.01 20% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.32 | 7.33 21% | 5.04 46% | 5.62 40% | 10.4 -12% | 6.03 35% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.93 | 1.79 7% | 1.54 20% | 2.5 -30% | ||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.2 | 4.14 20% | 1.62 69% | 2.4 54% | 3.5 33% | 4.7 10% |
| Gamma | 2.49 88% | 2.58 85% | 2.28 96% | 2.35 94% | 2.18 101% | 2.4 92% |
| CCT | 7719 84% | 7352 88% | 6846 95% | 6495 100% | 6467 101% | 6451 101% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 59 | 60 2% | 77 31% | 57 -3% | 58.1 -2% | 88 49% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 91 | 92 1% | 100 10% | 88 -3% | 89.3 -2% | 100 10% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -2% /
9% | 34% /
34% | -70% /
-13% | -71% /
-14% | -52% /
-0% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 4 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 20 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 14 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 7 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 7 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 22 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 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 17924 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 5431 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 5872 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 5589 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY SK hynix SSD Canvas SC300 HFS256GD9MNE-6200A | Asus G703 2x Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP NVMe (RAID 0) | MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0) | HP Omen X 17-ap0xx Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 Samsung SSD PM951 MZVLV256HCHP | Average SK hynix SSD Canvas SC300 HFS256GD9MNE-6200A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 157% | 96% | 67% | 17% | 0% | |
| Write 4K | 79.2 | 160.7 103% | 111.8 41% | 148.8 88% | 155.1 96% | 79.2 ? 0% |
| Read 4K | 39.69 | 54.8 38% | 42.09 6% | 46.64 18% | 44.22 11% | 39.7 ? 0% |
| Write Seq | 950 | 2738 188% | 2288 141% | 1216 28% | 311.2 -67% | 950 ? 0% |
| Read Seq | 1087 | 3346 208% | 3321 206% | 1461 34% | 1247 15% | 1087 ? 0% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 189.6 | 612 223% | 308.3 63% | 444 134% | 310.3 64% | 189.6 ? 0% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 304 | 709 133% | 364.9 20% | 535 76% | 551 81% | 304 ? 0% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 948 | 3082 225% | 2440 157% | 1210 28% | 311.5 -67% | 948 ? 0% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 1488 | 3505 136% | 3485 134% | 3450 132% | 1560 5% | 1488 ? 0% |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 15019 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 5741 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Dirt Rally - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:4x MS | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (84.7 - 119, n=3) | |
| The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
| Average of class Gaming (8.61 - 216, n=225, last 2 years) | |
| Asus G703 | |
| MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (48.2 - 68.4, n=41) | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 | |
| Fallout 4 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (95.4 - 122, n=9) | |
| Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (79.1 - 102.5, n=25) | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 | |
| Resident Evil 7 - 1920x1080 Very High / On AA:FXAA+T | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (130 - 162.3, n=6) | |
| Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG) - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (70 - 95, n=5) | |
| F1 2017 - 1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x | |
| HP Omen X 17-ap0xx | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (88 - 102, n=5) | |
| Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 | |
| Call of Duty WWII - 1920x1080 Extra / On AA:Filmic T2X SM | |
| Asus G703 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (95 - 122, n=6) | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset | |
| Asus G703 | |
| MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (90.7 - 104, n=5) | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance - 1920x1080 Ultra High Preset | |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY | |
| Asus G703 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile (54.2 - 82, n=5) | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
| Dirt Rally (2015) | 119 | |||
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 110 | 57 | ||
| Fallout 4 (2015) | 133 | 122 | ||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 108 | 90 | ||
| Battlefield 1 (2016) | 127 | 118 | ||
| Resident Evil 7 (2017) | 163 | 147 | ||
| Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017) | 131 | 95 | ||
| F1 2017 (2017) | 140 | 97 | ||
| Call of Duty WWII (2017) | 130 | 95 | ||
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 113 | 92 | ||
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 59 | 82 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 31.2 / 35.3 / 35.3 dB |
| HDD |
| 31 dB |
| Carga |
| 44.4 / 45.2 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: 30.4 dB(A) | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.6 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 40.4 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.2 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.1 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 31 °C / 87.8 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-2.1 °C / -3.8 F).
Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (65 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 6% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (65.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 77% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 5.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | reduced highs - on average 5.2% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.28 / 0.82 Watt |
| Ocioso | 20.4 / 26.5 / 37 Watt |
| Carga |
129 / 216 Watt |
   
| |
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, SK hynix SSD Canvas SC300 HFS256GD9MNE-6200A, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30 | Acer Predator Helios 300 i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G7, AH-IPS, WLED, 1920x1080, 17.30 | Asus G703 i7-7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, 2x Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP NVMe (RAID 0), IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30 | MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0), TN, 1920x1080, 17.30 | HP Omen X 17-ap0xx i7-7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30 | Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, Samsung SSD PM951 MZVLV256HCHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30 | Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.30 | Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile | Average of class Gaming | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 43% | -22% | -37% | 6% | 42% | -3% | 4% | 17% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 20.4 | 7 66% | 26 -27% | 31 -52% | 21.6 -6% | 10.6 48% | 23 -13% | 21 ? -3% | 13.7 ? 33% |
| Idle Average * | 26.5 | 13 51% | 30 -13% | 35 -32% | 26.4 -0% | 16 40% | 33 -25% | 26.4 ? -0% | 19.1 ? 28% |
| Idle Maximum * | 37 | 20 46% | 37 -0% | 45 -22% | 26.6 28% | 16.4 56% | 40 -8% | 31.8 ? 14% | 26.8 ? 28% |
| Load Average * | 129 | 81 37% | 123 5% | 130 -1% | 95.6 26% | 75.9 41% | 94 27% | 117.7 ? 9% | 110.9 ? 14% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 186 | 127 32% | 257 -38% | 268 -44% | 221.7 -19% | 111.2 40% | 177 5% | ||
| Load Maximum * | 216 | 162 25% | 341 -58% | 374 -73% | 199.6 8% | 163.8 24% | 228 -6% | 219 ? -1% | 250 ? -16% |
* ... smaller is better
| Battery Runtime | |||
| Resolução | Configurações | Valor | |
| 1920x1080 | Witcher 3 ultra 150cd | 66 min | |
| WiFi Websurfing | 174 min | ||
| Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, 72 Wh | Acer Predator Helios 300 i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, 48 Wh | Asus G703 i7-7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, 71 Wh | MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, 75 Wh | HP Omen X 17-ap0xx i7-7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, 99 Wh | Razer Blade Pro RZ09-0220 i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, 70 Wh | Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, 88 Wh | Average of class Gaming | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 54% | -24% | -20% | 54% | 103% | 19% | 62% | |
| Reader / Idle | 253 | 611 142% | 200 -21% | 225 -11% | 348 38% | 721 185% | 323 28% | 544 ? 115% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 174 | 279 60% | 151 -13% | 333 91% | 419 141% | 218 25% | 368 ? 111% | |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 66 | 81.6 ? 24% | ||||||
| Load | 88 | 54 -39% | 54 -39% | 63 -28% | 117 33% | 72 -18% | 91 3% | 84.2 ? -4% |
| H.264 | 281 | 143 | 174 | 399 ? |
Pro
Contra
Com o seu Predator Helios 500, a Acer mais uma vez criou uma poderosa usina energética para jogos, com mais vantagens do que desvantagens quando se trata de jogos. No entanto, até mesmo esta máquina de jogos de 17 polegadas está longe de ser perfeita e, portanto, exige uma análise detalhada.
A tela, por exemplo, tem jogo escrito por toda parte. 144 Hz e tempos de resposta incrivelmente rápidos são uma grande vantagem. A precisão da cor foi excelente uma vez que o monitor passou pelo nosso processo de calibração manual. No entanto, não cobriu sRGB completamente e sua taxa de contraste de apenas 500: 1 foi muito baixa. Assim, os pretos pareciam bastante acinzentados para o observador.
As emissões globais foram mais do que aceitáveis, considerando o nível de desempenho do dispositivo. Os usuários ainda podem escolher se querem ou não um melhor desempenho de resfriamento (Cool Boost) e uma GPU com um ligeiro overclock (GPU turbo). Com o controle automático do ventilador ativado, o dispositivo era silencioso o suficiente para se integrar perfeitamente à maioria dos ambientes de escritório, e os ventiladores até desligavam completamente de vez em quando.
A qualidade de construção não era perfeita, mas a carcaça de plástico era rígida o suficiente. Particularmente gostamos das duas portas Thunderbolt 3, mas lamentamos a perda do leitor de cartões SD.
A manutenção é fácil e a capacidade de atualização é excelente. Entre outros, os usuários podem atualizar RAM (até 64 GB) e armazenamento (2x M.2 SSD RAID, HD de 2,5 polegadas). Infelizmente, o suporte M.2 é limitado a SATA e não inclui o protocolo NVMe mais rápido.
O sistema de som foi excelente, mas não tão brilhante quanto o do seu irmão maior, o Predator 17. Os dispositivos de entrada com luz de fundo foram muito bons, e o peso geral foi bastante baixo, considerando o nível de desempenho do portátil.
No lado negativo, o consumo de energia no modo ocioso do portátil foi muito alto e a duração da bateria foi bastante pobre. Nem a webcam nem o microfone eram adequados para um portátil tão caro e teria sido mais apropriado para um portátil de $400.
Se por algum motivo você achar que esses handicaps são demais para aceitar ou se o preço está muito alto, então o Acer Predator Helios 300, que começa com pouco mais de $1.000 (GTX 1050 Ti) ou $1.300 (GTX 1060), pode valer a pena dar uma olhada mais de perto. Pelo menos podemos garantir que este portátil em particular foi muito mais eficiente em termos energéticos do que a unidade de teste de hoje.
Também vamos rever o outro SKUs Helios 500, o modelo topo de gama equipado com o Core i9-8950HK da Intel (2,9 - 4,8 GHz), em breve.
Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-51-79BY
-
05/29/2018 v6(old)
Sebastian Jentsch
Pricecompare
