Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Acer Predator Helios 700: Portátil para jogos inovador com muitos recursos

Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 09/11/2019

Mude isso, baby. O novíssimo Acer Predator Helios 700 é definitivamente um dos portáteis para jogos mais emocionantes de 2019. O posicionamento do teclado e do touchpad pode ser alterado graças a um mecanismo deslizante, que dá ao dispositivo de 17 polegadas acesso a uma grande quantidade de ar fresco para resfriar seu hardware de última geração. Descubra se essa ideia realmente funciona, em nossa análise.

Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M (Predator Helios 700 Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i7-9750H
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop) - 8192 MB, Análises do: 1440 MHz, Memoría: 1817 MHz, GDDR6, ForceWare 425.45
Memória
32768 MB 
, SO-DIMM DDR4-2666, dual channel, 2 de 4 slots ocupados
Pantalha
17.3 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics B173HAN03.1 (AUO319D), IPS, Full-HD G-Sync, 144 Hz, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
Intel HM370
Disco rígido
2x WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G-1014 (RAID 0), 1024 GB 
, slots: 2 M.2 2280 e 1 de 2,5 polegadas
Placa de Som
Realtek ALC1220 @ Intel Cannon Point PCH
Conexões
5 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: 1 conector para fones, 1 conector para microfone
Funcionamento em rede
Killer E3000 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW) (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.0
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 42 x 430 x 299
Bateria
72 Wh, 4670 mAh Lítio-Polímero, 4 células
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 5.1, Teclado: chiclet RGB, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Fonte de alimentação de 330 watts, capa de 2,5 polegadas, teclas MagForce, Predator Sense, 24 Meses Garantia
peso
4.8 kg, Suprimento de energia: 1.3 kg
Preço
3000 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Size Comparison

430 mm 299 mm 42 mm 4.8 kg418 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 kg
Left: RJ45-LAN, 2x USB-A 3.1 Gen2, microphone, headphones
Left: RJ45-LAN, 2x USB-A 3.1 Gen2, microphone, headphones
Right: USB-A 3.1 Gen2, USB-C 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3, Kensington lock
Right: USB-A 3.1 Gen2, USB-C 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3, Kensington lock
Back: DC-in, DisplayPort, HDMI
Back: DC-in, DisplayPort, HDMI
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
692 MBit/s ∼100%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
690 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
675 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
661 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
652 MBit/s ∼94% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=264)
605 MBit/s ∼87% -13%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
749 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
730 MBit/s ∼97% 0%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
729 MBit/s ∼97%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
712 MBit/s ∼95% -2%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
680 MBit/s ∼91% -7%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
629 MBit/s ∼84% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (144 - 749, n=264)
560 MBit/s ∼75% -23%
255
cd/m²
274
cd/m²
269
cd/m²
276
cd/m²
288
cd/m²
291
cd/m²
265
cd/m²
248
cd/m²
274
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
AU Optronics B173HAN03.1 (AUO319D)
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 291 cd/m² Médio: 271.1 cd/m² Minimum: 17 cd/m²
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 288 cd/m²
Contraste: 1440:1 (Preto: 0.2 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.79 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 1.89
ΔE Greyscale 6.92 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
92% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.46
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
AU Optronics B173HAN03.1 (AUO319D), IPS, 1920x1080
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
Response Times
-1%
50%
33%
-117%
14%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
17.6 (8.4, 9.2)
-5%
7.2 (3.8, 3.4)
57%
8 (4.4, 3.6)
52%
41.6 (20.4, 21.2)
-148%
13.2 (8, 5.2)
21%
Response Time Black / White *
11.6 (6, 5.6)
11.2 (6, 5.2)
3%
6.6 (3.2, 3.4)
43%
10 (5.2, 4.8)
14%
21.6 (9.6, 12)
-86%
10.8 (6, 4.8)
7%
PWM Frequency
25510 (44)
26040 (10)
26040 (20)
Screen
26%
22%
23%
11%
-6%
Brightness middle
288
360
25%
400.7
39%
396
38%
343
19%
335.2
16%
Brightness
271
342
26%
372
37%
373
38%
328
21%
297
10%
Brightness Distribution
85
91
7%
89
5%
89
5%
82
-4%
82
-4%
Black Level *
0.2
0.26
-30%
0.34
-70%
0.33
-65%
0.31
-55%
0.66
-230%
Contrast
1440
1385
-4%
1179
-18%
1200
-17%
1106
-23%
508
-65%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.79
1.91
67%
1.33
77%
2.04
65%
5.03
13%
2.02
65%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.89
4.08
66%
3.51
70%
3.85
68%
7.91
33%
7.23
39%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.89
0.78
59%
1.39
26%
0.82
57%
0.86
54%
1.17
38%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.92
2.72
61%
1.3
81%
2.83
59%
6.29
9%
3.2
54%
Gamma
2.46 89%
2.37 93%
2.24 98%
2.49 88%
2.38 92%
2.16 102%
CCT
8433 77%
6692 97%
6735 97%
7113 91%
6389 102%
6746 96%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60
60
0%
58.2
-3%
59
-2%
88
47%
61.3
2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
92
96
4%
92.1
0%
94
2%
100
9%
96.9
5%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
13% / 21%
36% / 26%
28% / 24%
-53% / -9%
4% / -3%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

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
11.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 ms rise
↘ 5.6 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 12 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
16.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.4 ms rise
↘ 8.4 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.8 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9418 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
GPU-Z
HWiNFO
AS SSD Benchmark
CrystalDiskMark
LatencyMon
010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070108010901100111011201130114011501160117011801190120012101220123012401250126012701280129013001310132013301340135013601370138013901400141014201430144014501460147014801490150015101520153015401550156015701580159016001610162016301640165016601670168016901700171017201730Tooltip
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1224 (1159.08-1279)
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)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
212 Points ∼100% +15%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
207 Points ∼98% +12%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Intel Core i9-9900K
207 Points ∼98% +12%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Core i9-9880H
197 Points ∼93% +6%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
189 Points ∼89% +2%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
Intel Core i7-9750H
185 Points ∼87%
Average of class Gaming
  (77 - 212, n=510)
156 Points ∼74% -16%
CPU Multi 64Bit
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
2022 Points ∼100% +58%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
1979 Points ∼98% +55%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
Intel Core i9-9900K
1944 Points ∼96% +52%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
1721 Points ∼85% +35%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
Intel Core i9-9880H
1450 Points ∼72% +13%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
Intel Core i7-9750H
1279 Points ∼63%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 2022, n=513)
824 Points ∼41% -36%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
185 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1279 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 10 - Score
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
7050 Points ∼100% +9%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
7006 Points ∼99% +9%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0)
6599 Points ∼94% +2%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)
6558 Points ∼93% +2%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9750H, 2x WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G-1014 (RAID 0)
6453 Points ∼92%
MSI GE75 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
6306 Points ∼89% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 7171, n=204)
5225 Points ∼74% -19%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
2x WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G-1014 (RAID 0)
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
-4%
-17%
-15%
6%
1%
Write 4K
115.3
103.8
-10%
116.1
1%
101.4
-12%
183.2
59%
111.1
-4%
Read 4K
41.79
41.67
0%
44.98
8%
40.57
-3%
52.38
25%
45.47
9%
Write Seq
2841
2639
-7%
2370
-17%
2229
-22%
1790
-37%
2454
-14%
Read Seq
2547
2702
6%
1465
-42%
2528
-1%
1743
-32%
2212
-13%
Write 4K Q32T1
498.6
487.3
-2%
337.5
-32%
379.6
-24%
549.7
10%
622
25%
Read 4K Q32T1
554.5
555.1
0%
453.6
-18%
421.9
-24%
647.8
17%
695.2
25%
Write Seq Q32T1
3123
2967
-5%
2399
-23%
2439
-22%
3236
4%
2675
-14%
Read Seq Q32T1
3476
3102
-11%
3087
-11%
3199
-8%
3538
2%
3184
-8%
2x WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G-1014 (RAID 0)
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3476 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 3123 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 554.5 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 498.6 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 2547 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2841 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 41.79 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 115.3 MB/s
3DMark 11 Performance
26029 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
42055 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
21258 pontos
3DMark Time Spy Score
9875 pontos
Ajuda
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
10720 Points ∼100% +1%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
10607 Points ∼99%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
10243 Points ∼96% -3%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
9754 Points ∼91% -8%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
9480 Points ∼88% -11%
Average of class Gaming
  (368 - 13013, n=147)
5728 Points ∼53% -46%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
27319 Points ∼100%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
27080 Points ∼99% -1%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
25126 Points ∼92% -8%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
24623 Points ∼90% -10%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
23089 Points ∼85% -15%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
22820 Points ∼84% -16%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=534)
11342 Points ∼42% -58%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
38485 Points ∼100% +2%
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
37768 Points ∼98%
MSI GE75 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
34050 Points ∼88% -10%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
33396 Points ∼87% -12%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
31826 Points ∼83% -16%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=609)
13365 Points ∼35% -65%
05101520253035404550556065707580859095100105110115120Tooltip
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9750H, 2x WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G-1014 (RAID 0): Ø107 (99-112)
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9750H
105 (min: 86) fps ∼100%
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
101.1 fps ∼96% -4%
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
100 fps ∼95% -5%
MSI GE75 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
95.3 fps ∼91% -9%
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
94.5 fps ∼90% -10%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
91.7 (min: 76) fps ∼87% -13%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=307)
49.7 fps ∼47% -53%
baixo média alto ultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 187105fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 108fps
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) 11778.6fps
Monster Hunter World (2018) 138112fps
FIFA 19 (2018) 301256fps
Apex Legends (2019) 144144fps
Far Cry New Dawn (2019) 10694fps
Metro Exodus (2019) 93.477.4fps
Anthem (2019) 108104fps
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) 171114fps
The Division 2 (2019) 134108fps
Anno 1800 (2019) 74.843.6fps
Rage 2 (2019) 125124fps
F1 2019 (2019) 155152fps

Barulho

Ocioso
30 / 34 / 45 dB
Carga
40 / 60 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)
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
9750H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GE75 9SG
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
1%
9%
-2%
3%
2%
off / environment *
30
30
-0%
28.2
6%
30
-0%
30
-0%
28.1
6%
Idle Minimum *
30
34
-13%
30.4
-1%
33
-10%
30
-0%
28.1
6%
Idle Average *
34
35
-3%
30.4
11%
34
-0%
33
3%
28.6
16%
Idle Maximum *
45
36
20%
33.4
26%
44
2%
35
22%
51
-13%
Load Average *
40
51
-28%
37.1
7%
47
-18%
44
-10%
51
-28%
Witcher 3 ultra *
57
47
18%
54.2
5%
53
7%
55
4%
51
11%
Load Maximum *
60
51
15%
56.4
6%
59
2%
58
3%
51
15%

* ... smaller is better

 35 °C37 °C33 °C 
 30 °C30 °C30 °C 
 29 °C29 °C27 °C 
Máximo: 37 °C
Médio: 31.1 °C
39 °C40 °C39 °C
34 °C40 °C39 °C
28 °C31 °C28 °C
Máximo: 40 °C
Médio: 35.3 °C
alimentação elétrica  52 °C | Temperatura do quarto 24 °C | Voltcraft IR-900
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.1 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 39.6 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 42.2 °C / 108 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.1 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
(+) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.4 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30 °C / 86 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-1.2 °C / -2.2 F).
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
9750H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GE75 9SG
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
-10%
-23%
-9%
-8%
-16%
Maximum Upper Side *
37
47
-27%
48.8
-32%
51
-38%
45
-22%
47
-27%
Maximum Bottom *
40
54
-35%
52
-30%
57
-43%
45
-13%
58.8
-47%
Idle Upper Side *
34
32
6%
36.2
-6%
26
24%
36
-6%
31
9%
Idle Bottom *
36
30
17%
44.4
-23%
28
22%
33
8%
35
3%

* ... smaller is better

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2036.336.22538.942.1313231.84029.529.85028.730.16327.532.68026.731.910025.636.312524.248.316028.257.620024.654.825023.560.93152262.440020.767.550019.265.863018.570.680017.973.2100017.868.8125019.171.7160018.170.4200017.471.1250017.469.2315017.369.7400017.573.2500017.467.5630017.270.7800017.373.21000017.470.11250017.265.51600017.256.3SPL30.482.6N1.459median 17.9median 68.8Delta2.65.639.84237.338.137.635.736.436.833.736.136.44432.935.1324232.754.230.966.230.46930.373.930.675.728.471.228.370.827.682.327.880.127.574.727.376.9277526.87626.47426.270.626.475.826.369.326.267.826.276.22672.425.97125.871.239.187.63.579.7median 27.3median 72.41.83.7hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAcer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785MAlienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 6% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.5% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 5.7 / 6.3 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 28 / 34 / 45 Watt
Carga midlight 98 / 307 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
9750H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GE75 9SG
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
8%
24%
13%
-21%
-12%
Idle Minimum *
28
26
7%
13.9
50%
14
50%
39
-39%
23.3
17%
Idle Average *
34
29
15%
18.8
45%
18
47%
45
-32%
33.5
1%
Idle Maximum *
45
38
16%
23.1
49%
23
49%
55
-22%
38.4
15%
Load Average *
98
106
-8%
112.3
-15%
114
-16%
122
-24%
114.1
-16%
Load Maximum *
307
287
7%
291.5
5%
443
-44%
346
-13%
485.1
-58%
Witcher 3 ultra *
263
228
13%
231
12%
283
-8%
259
2%
339.5
-29%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
3h 33min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
2h 48min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 03min
Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M
9750H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 72 Wh
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 70 Wh
MSI GE75 9SG
9880H, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 65 Wh
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 90 Wh
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 82 Wh
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
9900K, GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 90 Wh
Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
11%
75%
52%
-13%
-15%
52%
Reader / Idle
213
250
17%
409
92%
165
-23%
155
-27%
WiFi v1.3
168
196
17%
294
75%
302
80%
135
-20%
127
-24%
255 (78 - 622, n=355)
52%
Load
63
63
0%
52
-17%
65
3%
66
5%
H.264
135

Pro

+ Temperatura moderada
+ Muitas opções de retro iluminação
+ Excelente desempenho
+ Overclock opcional
+ Teclado bem feito
+ Ideias inovadoras
+ Ferramentas poderosas
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ Ótimo áudio
+ SSD RAID
+ G-Sync
+ 144 Hz

Contra

- Alto ruído do sistema em aplicativos 3D
- Som de inicialização irritante (pode ser desativado)
- Chassi grosso e pesado
- Relação tela-corpo ruim
- RPM flutuantes do ventilador
- Touchpad muito afundado na unidade base
- Alto consumo de energia
- Curta duração da bateria
- Sem leitor de cartões
Acer Predator Helios 700. Test unit provided by Cyberport.
Acer Predator Helios 700. Test unit provided by Cyberport.

O Predator Helios 700 é um portátil para jogos muito interessante da Acer que apresenta muitas ideias e inovações - de teclas WASD trocáveis a um mecanismo deslizante para os dispositivos de entrada - embora a Acer não use este sistema de resfriamento aprimorado para limitar as emissões de ruído, mas para melhorar o desempenho.

O fabricante faz overclock de sua GPU GeForce para tirar o máximo proveito dela. O dispositivo permanece confortavelmente frio, mesmo durante o overclock, mas fica muito barulhento. Não foi tanto o nível geral de ruído que nos incomodou, mas mais as taxas de RPM flutuantes, que muitas vezes eram infundadas. Em resumo: A Acer definitivamente deve trabalhar em seu sistema de resfriamento.

Outras fraquezas são o fato de que o touchpad é muito afundado na unidade base, o leitor de cartões ausente e a bateria com pouca duração. A carcaça nos deu uma impressão mista. Enquanto os gamers ficarão satisfeitos com as muitas portas, o bom teclado, os alto-falantes potentes e as muitas opções de iluminação de fundo, a construção pesada (sem marcos finos) e o alto peso não estão mais atualizados em 2019. Ficamos satisfeitos com a tela de 144 Hz de alto contraste, apesar de algumas fraquezas (precisão de cores, brilho e distribuição de brilho).

Em suma, os ventiladores da Acer que estão interessados em jogar todos os jogos modernos com altos detalhes e têm o dinheiro necessário disponível definitivamente devem dar uma olhada neste dispositivo de 17 polegadas. Qualquer pessoa pode preferir um portátil topo de linha mais clássico (e provavelmente mais barato) sem todos os sinos e assobios do Predator Helios 700 (por exemplo, o Helios 300 ou o Triton 500).

Cuidado: O Predator Helios 700 é um dos primeiros portáteis para jogos avaliado com base nas classificações estendidas (e mais difíceis) da v7 e, portanto, parece ter resultados piores do que sua concorrência de ponta testada recentemente. No futuro, todos os novos dispositivos gamers terão que passar na classificação v7.

Acer Predator Helios 700 PH717-71-785M - 09/04/2019 v7
Florian Glaser

Acabamento
72 / 98 → 73%
Teclado
87%
Mouse
78%
Conectividade
66 / 80 → 82%
Peso
40 / 10-66 → 54%
Bateria
51 / 95 → 53%
Pantalha
80%
Desempenho do jogos
97%
Desempenho da aplicação
94%
Temperatura
91 / 95 → 96%
Ruído
52 / 90 → 58%
Audio
79%
Médio
74%
83%
Gaming - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Acer Predator Helios 700
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Acer Predator Helios 700: Portátil para jogos inovador com muitos recursos
Florian Glaser, 2019-09-11 (Update: 2019-09-13)