Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Eurocom Q6 (i7-8750H, GTX 1070 Max-Q, FHD)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 06/03/2018

Super fino e rápido. O Eurocom Q5 do ano passado sofreu algumas pequenas mudanças superficiais, mas é o novo processador que nos deixa emocionados. O Eurocom Q6 oferece os mesmos gráficos de nível GT70 1070 que o seu antecessor com a CPU Coffee-H Hexa-Core da Intel.

Eurocom Q6
Processador
Intel Core i7-8750H
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q - 16384 MB, Análises do: 1101 MHz, Memoría: 8008 MHz, GDDR5, 389.27, Optimus
Memória
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2666, 1333.3 MHz, PC4-21300, Dual-Channel, 15-17-17-35
Pantalha
15.6 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, LG Philips LGD05C0, IPS, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
Intel HM370
Disco rígido
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, 512 GB 
Placa de Som
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Conexões
5 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo, 3.5 mm microphone, Card Reader: Leitor SDXC
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/h/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 18.6 x 380 x 249
Bateria
55 Wh Lítio-Polímero
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 2 W stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Control Center 2.0, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
2.16 kg, Suprimento de energia: 650 g
Preço
1900 USD

 

Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x mini DisplayPort 1.2, 2x USB 3.1 Type-C (Gen. 1), 2x USB 3.0 (Source: Eurocom)
Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x mini DisplayPort 1.2, 2x USB 3.1 Type-C (Gen. 1), 2x USB 3.0 (Source: Eurocom)
Right: 3.5 mm microphone, 3.5 mm headset, USB 3.0, SDXC card reader, mini SIM, Gigabit RJ-45, Kensington Lock (Source: Eurocom)
Right: 3.5 mm microphone, 3.5 mm headset, USB 3.0, SDXC card reader, mini SIM, Gigabit RJ-45, Kensington Lock (Source: Eurocom)
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
194 MB/s ∼100% +14%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
191 MB/s ∼98% +12%
Eurocom Q6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
170.67 MB/s ∼88%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
242 MB/s ∼100% +17%
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
240 MB/s ∼99% +16%
Eurocom Q6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
207.24 MB/s ∼86%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s ∼100% +2%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
660 MBit/s ∼98% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
658 MBit/s ∼98%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
662 MBit/s ∼100% +7%
Eurocom Q6
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
620 MBit/s ∼94%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
587 MBit/s ∼89% -5%
298.7
cd/m²
307.4
cd/m²
318.6
cd/m²
302.9
cd/m²
326.6
cd/m²
332.1
cd/m²
293.6
cd/m²
312.9
cd/m²
318.5
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 332.1 cd/m² Médio: 312.4 cd/m² Minimum: 18.32 cd/m²
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 326.6 cd/m²
Contraste: 778:1 (Preto: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.54 | 0.8-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 1.63
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.64-98 Ø6.6
94.5% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 60.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.14
Eurocom Q6
LG Philips LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Eurocom Q5
ID: LGD04D4, Name: LG Philips LP156UD1-SPB1, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Aorus X5 v8
AU Optronics B156HAN07.0 (AUO70ED), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
15.4, 2880x1800
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
AU Optronics B156HAN08.0 (AUO80ED), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-145%
-20%
-174%
-20%
-10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
15.2 (8.4, 6.8)
32.4 (16, 16.4)
-113%
18.8 (10, 8.8)
-24%
42.4 (20.4, 22)
-179%
17.6 (9.2, 8.4)
-16%
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
-11%
Response Time Black / White *
10.4 (6, 4.4)
28.8 (18.8, 10)
-177%
12 (7.6, 4.4)
-15%
28 (14.8, 13.2)
-169%
12.8 (7.6, 5.2)
-23%
11.2 (6, 5.2)
-8%
PWM Frequency
Screen
-44%
13%
33%
6%
19%
Brightness middle
326.6
287.5
-12%
271
-17%
534
64%
254
-22%
313
-4%
Brightness
312
279
-11%
259
-17%
502
61%
262
-16%
300
-4%
Brightness Distribution
88
87
-1%
87
-1%
86
-2%
89
1%
78
-11%
Black Level *
0.42
0.65
-55%
0.27
36%
0.31
26%
0.22
48%
0.33
21%
Contrast
778
442
-43%
1004
29%
1723
121%
1155
48%
948
22%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.54
4.5
-77%
1.81
29%
1.8
29%
2.37
7%
1.29
49%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.7
8.9
-89%
3.33
29%
3.8
19%
4.71
-0%
2.04
57%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.63
1.84
-13%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.9
4.6
-142%
1.09
43%
2.4
-26%
1.58
17%
0.69
64%
Gamma
2.14 112%
2.39 100%
2.45 98%
2.27 106%
2.48 97%
2.43 99%
CCT
6562 99%
7393 88%
6435 101%
6563 99%
6785 96%
6550 99%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60.9
59
-3%
61
0%
77.92
28%
60
-1%
60
-1%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
94.5
92.3
-2%
93
-2%
99.94
6%
92
-3%
94
-1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-95% / -60%
-4% / 8%
-71% / -2%
-7% / 2%
5% / 14%

* ... 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
10.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 ms rise
↘ 4.4 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.4 ms rise
↘ 6.8 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. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.6 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: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 10727 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 588200) Hz was measured.

010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
192 Points ∼93% +13%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼85% +3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (163 - 177, n=20)
172 Points ∼83% +1%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
170 Points ∼83% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
170 Points ∼83%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
168 Points ∼82% -1%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
162 Points ∼79% -5%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
152 Points ∼74% -11%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
149 Points ∼72% -12%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
140 Points ∼68% -18%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
131 Points ∼64% -23%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
1359 Points ∼46% +29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1129 Points ∼38% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (964 - 1176, n=20)
1076 Points ∼37% +2%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
1053 Points ∼36% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
1050 Points ∼36%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
770 Points ∼26% -27%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
738 Points ∼25% -30%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
678 Points ∼23% -35%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
660 Points ∼22% -37%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
604 Points ∼21% -42%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
514 Points ∼17% -51%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
2.16 Points ∼92% +11%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
2 Points ∼85% +3%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
1.98 Points ∼85% +2%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1.92 - 2, n=15)
1.961 Points ∼84% +1%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.95 Points ∼83%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.84 Points ∼79% -6%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.73 Points ∼74% -11%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
1.72 Points ∼74% -12%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
1.68 Points ∼72% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1.55 Points ∼66% -21%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
1.52 Points ∼65% -22%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
14.98 Points ∼63% +29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
12.5 Points ∼52% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (10.5 - 13.4, n=15)
12.2 Points ∼51% +5%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.82 Points ∼49% +2%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.62 Points ∼49%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
8.47 Points ∼35% -27%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.14 Points ∼34% -30%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
7.67 Points ∼32% -34%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
7.49 Points ∼31% -36%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
6.2 Points ∼26% -47%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
5.92 Points ∼25% -49%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
7243 Points ∼67%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
6730 Points ∼62%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
6482 Points ∼60%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (6292 - 6481, n=6)
6418 Points ∼59%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
6062 Points ∼56%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5877 Points ∼54%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
5550 Points ∼51%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
5433 Points ∼50%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
4330 Points ∼40%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
38810 Points ∼78%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (29952 - 35307, n=6)
33266 Points ∼67%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
25561 Points ∼51%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
23585 Points ∼47%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
23052 Points ∼46%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
21824 Points ∼44%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
20639 Points ∼41%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
20061 Points ∼40%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
17971 Points ∼36%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
353.153 s * ∼4%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
331.085 s * ∼4%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
253.57 s * ∼3%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
252.12 s * ∼3%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
225.617 s * ∼3%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
215.4 s * ∼3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (125 - 160, n=2)
143 s * ∼2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
120.923 s * ∼1%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (8.98 - 10645, n=14)
3071 Seconds * ∼14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
693.994 Seconds * ∼3%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
654.006 Seconds * ∼3%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
561.342 Seconds * ∼2%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
547.965 Seconds * ∼2%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
545.92 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
467.526 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
465.128 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.95 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
11.62 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
76.28 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
170 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1050 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
118.53 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Ajuda
PCMark 10 - Score
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
6620 Points ∼85% +23%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
6154 Points ∼79% +15%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5362 Points ∼69%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5119 Points ∼66% -5%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
5095 Points ∼66% -5%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5953 Points ∼91% +4%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5751 Points ∼88%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
5621 Points ∼86% -2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
5181 Points ∼80% -10%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
4891 Points ∼75% -15%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5773 Points ∼95% +24%
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
5225 Points ∼86% +13%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
4665 Points ∼77% 0%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
4644 Points ∼76%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
3829 Points ∼63% -18%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4644 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5751 pontos
Ajuda
Eurocom Q6
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Eurocom Q5
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Eurocom Sky X4C
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
AS SSD
-39%
13%
24%
2%
Copy Game MB/s
633.24
682.33
8%
1054.98
67%
Copy Program MB/s
363.41
301.53
-17%
467.16
29%
Copy ISO MB/s
1768.37
1967.04
11%
1908.08
8%
Score Total
3894
2536
-35%
4001
3%
4615
19%
4122
6%
Score Write
1693
939
-45%
1705
1%
1703
1%
2051
21%
Score Read
1477
1092
-26%
1529
4%
1945
32%
1346
-9%
Access Time Write *
0.039
0.046
-18%
0.028
28%
0.03
23%
0.035
10%
Access Time Read *
0.049
0.119
-143%
0.036
27%
0.032
35%
0.073
-49%
4K-64 Write
1402.71
742.09
-47%
1366.04
-3%
1374.74
-2%
1760.16
25%
4K-64 Read
1194.78
847.34
-29%
1230.69
3%
1645.75
38%
1170.26
-2%
4K Write
96.21
80.44
-16%
136.19
42%
129.64
35%
107.15
11%
4K Read
29.62
23.36
-21%
49.3
66%
44.83
51%
48.94
65%
Seq Write
1943.43
1163.11
-40%
2029.39
4%
1988.74
2%
1834.04
-6%
Seq Read
2522.91
2212.97
-12%
2493.24
-1%
2541.23
1%
1266.1
-50%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3321 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1985 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 317.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 245.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1150 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1096 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 47.29 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 114 MB/s
3DMark
3840x2160 Fire Strike Ultra Graphics
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
4232 Points ∼42% +27%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (3210 - 3662, n=6)
3335 Points ∼33% 0%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
3324 Points ∼33%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
3262 Points ∼32% -2%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
2299 Points ∼23% -31%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
1025 Points ∼10% -69%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
22555 Points ∼56% +53%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
21422 Points ∼53% +46%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
18505 Points ∼46% +26%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
17046 Points ∼42% +16%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (14146 - 16165, n=12)
14911 Points ∼37% +1%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
14694 Points ∼36%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
14557 Points ∼36% -1%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% -22%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11483 Points ∼28% -22%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
9608 Points ∼24% -35%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
4645 Points ∼11% -68%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
14080 Points ∼80% +36%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
11707 Points ∼67% +13%
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
11498 Points ∼65% +11%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
10351 Points ∼59%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
9607 Points ∼55% -7%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
9319 Points ∼53% -10%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (7458 - 10663, n=12)
9164 Points ∼52% -11%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
8343 Points ∼47% -19%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼45% -24%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7696 Points ∼44% -26%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5808 Points ∼33% -44%
1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
32126 Points ∼63% +75%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
28918 Points ∼57% +57%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
24425 Points ∼48% +33%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
21925 Points ∼43% +19%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (17680 - 20240, n=12)
18902 Points ∼37% +3%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
18684 Points ∼37% +2%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
18363 Points ∼36%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% -17%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14550 Points ∼29% -21%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
12472 Points ∼24% -32%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5779 Points ∼11% -69%
3DMark 11 Performance
15801 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
34682 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
12903 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
6588 pontos
Ajuda
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 327.9246.7230.8132.1fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 236.2165.29748.9fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 202.7166.297.882.4fps
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0)
76.8 fps ∼100% +57%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK, LiteOn CX2-8B256
64.2 fps ∼84% +31%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
60 fps ∼78% +23%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (46 - 53.7, n=13)
51 fps ∼66% +4%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
48.9 fps ∼64%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
46 fps ∼60% -6%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
37 fps ∼48% -24%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
36.8 fps ∼48% -25%
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK, LiteOn CX2-8B256
151.7 fps ∼100% +15%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
132.1 fps ∼87%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
130.5 fps ∼86% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (110 - 132, n=7)
126 fps ∼83% -5%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
100.4 fps ∼66% -24%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
82.4 fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (79.7 - 85.9, n=5)
82.3 fps ∼100% 0%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
79.7 fps ∼97% -3%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
57 fps ∼69% -31%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
45.3 fps ∼55% -45%
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra

Barulho

Ocioso
30.4 / 30.5 / 33.3 dB
Carga
42.3 / 50.8 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: 28.3 dB(A)
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Noise
-3%
-11%
-7%
1%
-5%
off / environment *
28.3
29
-2%
30
-6%
29
-2%
30
-6%
29
-2%
Idle Minimum *
30.4
31.5
-4%
33
-9%
30
1%
30
1%
30
1%
Idle Average *
30.5
33.8
-11%
35
-15%
31
-2%
31
-2%
31
-2%
Idle Maximum *
33.3
33.8
-2%
40
-20%
35
-5%
34
-2%
33
1%
Load Average *
42.3
41.7
1%
45
-6%
49
-16%
43
-2%
49
-16%
Witcher 3 ultra *
43.3
41.7
4%
50
-15%
51
-18%
42
3%
50
-15%
Load Maximum *
50.8
54.2
-7%
55
-8%
54
-6%
44
13%
52
-2%

* ... smaller is better

 49 °C45.2 °C40 °C 
 45.4 °C43.2 °C33.2 °C 
 33.6 °C37.6 °C27.6 °C 
Máximo: 49 °C
Médio: 39.4 °C
41.4 °C52.6 °C53 °C
33 °C44 °C48.6 °C
31.2 °C37 °C39.4 °C
Máximo: 53 °C
Médio: 42.2 °C
alimentação elétrica  46.4 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
The maximum temp on the upper side is 49 °C, compared to the average of 35.9 °C ranging from 21.1 °C to 71 °C for class Gaming.
Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.25 / 1.6 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 11.6 / 16.3 / 21.5 Watt
Carga midlight 100.7 / 150.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Eurocom Q6
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Eurocom Q5
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Aorus X5 v8
8850H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Omen 15t-ce000
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Power Consumption
15%
-60%
11%
-2%
-24%
Idle Minimum *
11.6
9
22%
25
-116%
7
40%
15.4
-33%
16
-38%
Idle Average *
16.3
13.5
17%
31
-90%
11
33%
22.4
-37%
19
-17%
Idle Maximum *
21.5
13.7
36%
33
-53%
20
7%
22.4
-4%
26
-21%
Load Average *
100.7
87.8
13%
102
-1%
98
3%
78.1
22%
103
-2%
Load Maximum *
150.3
158.6
-6%
239
-59%
182
-21%
133.52
11%
223
-48%
Witcher 3 ultra *
140.1
129
8%
194
-38%
132
6%
97.5
30%
164
-17%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
5h 06min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
3h 39min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 12min
Eurocom Q6
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 55 Wh
Eurocom Q5
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 55 Wh
Aorus X5 v8
8850H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 92.24 Wh
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 82 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh
HP Omen 15t-ce000
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 70 Wh
Battery Runtime
12%
9%
48%
133%
2%
Reader / Idle
306
466
52%
294
-4%
507
66%
762
149%
298
-3%
WiFi v1.3
219
258
18%
362
65%
513
134%
208
-5%
Load
72
47
-35%
87
21%
81
13%
156
117%
83
15%

Pro

+ Novo software Control Center 2.0; controles de ventilador melhorados
+ Temperatura relativamente fria da GPU durante os jogos
+ tons de cinza e cores precisas, de fábrica
+ Cobertura sRGB quase completa
+ Sem PWM; tempos de resposta rápidos
+ Fácil de fazer manutenção
+ Suporte para 4G LTE
+ Duas baias de armazenamento
+ Painel IPS de 144 Hz
+ Fino

Contra

- Temperaturas muito altas da CPU durante os jogos
- Incapaz de sustentar o Turbo Boost máximo
- Teclas WASD mornas durante os jogos
- Marcos e formato grandes
- Sem retro iluminação RGB por tecla
- Reprodução pobre dos baixos
- Duração da bateria média
- Sem Thunderbolt 3
In review: Eurocom Q6. Test model provided by Eurocom US
In review: Eurocom Q6. Test model provided by Eurocom US

Nossos comentários gerais para o Q5 ainda se aplicam aqui, para o Q6. Os usuários potenciais interessados no Q6 devem aproveitar ao máximo o sistema, utilizando a sua baia SATA III acessível de 2,5 polegadas e conectividade 4G LTE, pois eles são incomuns no mundo dos portáteis para jogos super-finos.

O maior desafio para o Q6 é que ele não oferece muito mais do que o Q5 em termos de recursos e desempenho em jogos. Isso não é necessariamente ruim porque o Q5 é um sistema para jogos respeitável para começar, mas o Q6 está sendo lançado no mesmo trimestre que os pesos pesados como o MSI GS60 e Gigabyte Aero 15X. Ambas as alternativas oferecem marcos estreitos, as mesmas opções de CPU e GPU, e painéis similares de 144 Hz, sendo ao mesmo tempo mais leves e mais portáteis pelo mesmo preço de ~$2.000. Mesmo os recém-chegados com "marcos grossos", como o Asus Zephyrus M GM501 ou Aorus X5 v8 oferecem Thunderbolt 3, iluminação RGB por tecla, ou ambos. Em suma, a série Eurocom Q está começando a mostrar sua idade e corre o risco de ficar ainda mais para trás, caso a atualização do próximo ano seja outra atualização menor. O preço do Q6 terá que cair se deseja ser mais competitivo em relação aos modelos mais recentes da MSI, Asus, Aorus e Razer.

O desempenho é sólido, se não um pouco quente demais. Pelo preço, no entanto, o Q6 está perdendo muito os luxos modernos que as alternativas estão oferecendo, como Thunderbolt 3, iluminação RGB por tecla e aberturas estreitas. A série está paralisada no momento, enquanto os concorrentes estão ampliando com designs mais frescos e mais recursos.

Eurocom Q6 - 06/22/2018 v6
Allen Ngo

Acabamento
76 / 98 → 78%
Teclado
81%
Mouse
83%
Conectividade
66 / 81 → 81%
Peso
62 / 10-66 → 93%
Bateria
73%
Pantalha
90%
Desempenho do jogos
96%
Desempenho da aplicação
97%
Temperatura
79 / 95 → 83%
Ruído
75 / 90 → 83%
Audio
45%
Camera
50 / 85 → 59%
Impressão
-1%
Médio
69%
83%
Gaming - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Eurocom Q6 (i7-8750H, GTX 1070 Max-Q, FHD)
Allen Ngo, 2018-06- 3 (Update: 2018-06-17)