Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Portátil HP EliteBook 725 G4 (A12-9800B, Full-HD)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 E7270 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell Latitude 12 E7270 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 13 2016 (2.9 GHz) | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET (jseb) | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 13 2016 (2.9 GHz) | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET (jseb) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 329 cd/m²
Contraste: 1732:1 (Preto: 0.19 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.69 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 4.23 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
72% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
46% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
50.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
72.3% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
49.16% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.21
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 IPS, 1920x1080, 12.50 | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA TN LED, 1366x768, 12.50 | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET IPS, 1920x1080, 12.50 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 IPS, 1920x1080, 13.30 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 IPS LED, 1920x1080, 12.50 | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE IPS, 1920x1080, 12.50 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -3% | -9% | 37% | -19% | -9% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 49.16 | 47.15 -4% | 44.45 -10% | 67.9 38% | 39.7 -19% | 44.71 -9% |
| sRGB Coverage | 72.3 | 71 -2% | 65.5 -9% | 98 36% | 59.2 -18% | 66.1 -9% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 50.8 | 48.71 -4% | 46.04 -9% | 69.8 37% | 41.07 -19% | 46.23 -9% |
| Response Times | -3% | 9% | -3% | -1% | 9% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 47 ? | 50 ? -6% | 35 ? 26% | 42 ? 11% | 38.4 ? 18% | 32.8 ? 30% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 24 ? | 24 ? -0% | 26 ? -8% | 28 ? -17% | 28.8 ? -20% | 27.2 ? -13% |
| PWM Frequency | 217 ? | |||||
| Screen | -85% | -56% | -29% | -73% | -49% | |
| Brightness middle | 329 | 241 -27% | 326 -1% | 300 -9% | 353 7% | 337 2% |
| Brightness | 310 | 240 -23% | 304 -2% | 280 -10% | 334 8% | 322 4% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 83 -6% | 81 -8% | 87 -1% | 91 3% | 91 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.19 | 0.54 -184% | 0.29 -53% | 0.31 -63% | 0.47 -147% | 0.32 -68% |
| Contrast | 1732 | 446 -74% | 1124 -35% | 968 -44% | 751 -57% | 1053 -39% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.69 | 8.04 -199% | 6.49 -141% | 4.9 -82% | 7.79 -190% | 5.71 -112% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.47 | 13.9 -211% | 15.95 -257% | 8.91 -99% | 15.19 -240% | 15.39 -244% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.23 | 9.52 -125% | 6.16 -46% | 6.69 -58% | 7.38 -74% | 5.15 -22% |
| Gamma | 2.21 100% | 2.42 91% | 2.32 95% | 2.33 94% | 2.43 91% | 2.38 92% |
| CCT | 6011 108% | 11362 57% | 7575 86% | 6487 100% | 6158 106% | 6881 94% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 46 | 45.03 -2% | 42 -9% | 63 37% | 37.72 -18% | 42.38 -8% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 72 | 71.12 -1% | 65 -10% | 98 36% | 58.87 -18% | 65.62 -9% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -30% /
-58% | -19% /
-38% | 2% /
-13% | -31% /
-52% | -16% /
-34% |
* ... smaller is better
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 17933 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | ||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 10 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. » 48 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 47 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 27 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 20 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 78 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.8 ms). | ||
| Geekbench 3 | |
| 32 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| 32 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA | |
| Geekbench 4.0 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 13 2016 (2.9 GHz) | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 13 2016 (2.9 GHz) | |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 | |
| PCMark 7 Score | 4143 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 2665 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 3313 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 3885 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Hitachi Travelstar Z7K500 HTS725050A7E630 | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET Samsung PM951 NVMe MZVLV512 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ512G8NY | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 Liteon L8H-256V2G | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE Liteonit LCH-512V2S | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -96% | 101% | -8% | 26% | 12% | |
| Read Seq | 1963 | 125.3 -94% | 1315 -33% | 518 -74% | 498.4 -75% | 499.6 -75% |
| Write Seq | 1409 | 124.3 -91% | 594 -58% | 423.3 -70% | 286.7 -80% | 403 -71% |
| Read 512 | 949 | 40.95 -96% | 661 -30% | 414.8 -56% | 322.9 -66% | |
| Write 512 | 890 | 57.6 -94% | 594 -33% | 379.9 -57% | 372.4 -58% | |
| Read 4k | 29.75 | 0.495 -98% | 42.87 44% | 21.17 -29% | 24.89 -16% | 27.22 -9% |
| Write 4k | 47.35 | 1.13 -98% | 151.6 220% | 86.3 82% | 88 86% | 83.6 77% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 139.7 | 1.129 -99% | 568 307% | 227.3 63% | 280.5 101% | 316.5 127% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 100.2 | 1.133 -99% | 491.7 391% | 174.7 74% | 241.9 141% | 273.1 173% |
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 5635 pontos | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1753 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 39764 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 3955 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 866 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 442 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 338 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 54.9 | 29.8 | 20.9 | 10.7 |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 46.8 | 35.8 | 22.7 | 7.8 |
| Battlefield 4 (2013) | 28.7 | 20.7 | 13.7 | 5.1 |
| Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014) | 21.7 | 14.7 | ||
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 14 | 9.2 | ||
| Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) | 12 | 11 | ||
| Just Cause 3 (2015) | 16 | 13.2 | ||
| The Division (2016) | 17.4 | 10.6 | ||
| Mirror's Edge Catalyst (2016) | 16.9 | 11.7 | ||
| Dishonored 2 (2016) | 11 | 8.8 | ||
| Resident Evil 7 (2017) | 31.9 | 12.2 | ||
| For Honor (2017) | 20.6 | 7.1 | ||
| Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 11.9 | 5.3 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 30.4 / 30.4 / 30.4 dB |
| Carga |
| 31.7 / 34.4 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) | ||
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 PRO A12-9800B, Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -5% | -2% | -13% | 2% | -0% | |
| off / environment * | 30.4 | 28.9 5% | 30.7 -1% | 31.2 -3% | 28.9 5% | 29 5% |
| Idle Minimum * | 30.4 | 30.5 -0% | 30.7 -1% | 31.2 -3% | 28.9 5% | 29 5% |
| Idle Average * | 30.4 | 30.5 -0% | 30.7 -1% | 31.2 -3% | 28.9 5% | 29 5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 30.4 | 30.5 -0% | 30.7 -1% | 31.2 -3% | 28.9 5% | 29 5% |
| Load Average * | 31.7 | 38.2 -21% | 35.3 -11% | 43.3 -37% | 31.3 1% | 35.1 -11% |
| Load Maximum * | 34.4 | 38.4 -12% | 33.7 2% | 43.3 -26% | 37.6 -9% | 37.8 -10% |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.1 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.5 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 30.7 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26.7 °C / 80.1 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (+1.6 °C / 2.8 F).
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 PRO A12-9800B, Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -38% | -7% | -4% | -35% | -35% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 36.5 | 42.8 -17% | 37 -1% | 40.6 -11% | 44.3 -21% | 47.5 -30% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 34.1 | 54.3 -59% | 38.9 -14% | 37 -9% | 52.6 -54% | 43.6 -28% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 24.8 | 33.2 -34% | 26.3 -6% | 24.5 1% | 32.3 -30% | 34.9 -41% |
| Idle Bottom * | 25.8 | 36.5 -41% | 27 -5% | 24.9 3% | 35.1 -36% | 35.9 -39% |
* ... smaller is better
HP EliteBook 725 G4 audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 72% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
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%
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
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
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 | 0.66 / 1.3 Watt |
| Ocioso | 4.5 / 6.3 / 8.3 Watt |
| Carga |
27.6 / 34.5 Watt |
   
| |
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 PRO A12-9800B, Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo) | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -35% | 19% | -11% | 7% | 5% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 4.5 | 5.4 -20% | 2.7 40% | 3.2 29% | 3.8 16% | 3.5 22% |
| Idle Average * | 6.3 | 7.5 -19% | 4.8 24% | 7.8 -24% | 6.7 -6% | 5.5 13% |
| Idle Maximum * | 8.3 | 13 -57% | 6.6 20% | 8.7 -5% | 7.2 13% | 6.7 19% |
| Load Average * | 27.6 | 41.2 -49% | 28.5 -3% | 42.2 -53% | 27.2 1% | 28.9 -5% |
| Load Maximum * | 34.5 | 44.7 -30% | 29 16% | 35.7 -3% | 30.2 12% | 42.1 -22% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 725 G4 PRO A12-9800B, Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge), 49 Wh | HP EliteBook 725 G3-P4T48EA Pro A10-8700B, Radeon R6 (Carrizo), 44 Wh | HP EliteBook 820 G4 Z2V72ET i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 49 Wh | Toshiba Portege Z30-C-138 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 52 Wh | Dell Latitude 12 E7270 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 55 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X260-20F6007RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 46 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2016 (2.9 GHz) 6267U, Iris Graphics 550, 49.2 Wh | Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz 6Y30, HD Graphics 515, 41.4 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -26% | 66% | -9% | 36% | 20% | 14% | 56% | |
| Reader / Idle | 700 | 553 -21% | 1346 92% | 1050 50% | 953 36% | |||
| H.264 | 344 | 258 -25% | 532 55% | 466 35% | 483 40% | 512 49% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 380 | 281 -26% | 566 49% | 345 -9% | 508 34% | 501 32% | 566 49% | 501 32% |
| Load | 123 | 83 -33% | 205 67% | 153 24% | 92 -25% | 66 -46% | 231 88% |
Pro
Contra
O EliteBook 725 G4 é a versão "barata" do EliteBook 820 G4. Os aparelhos têm uma aparência similar desde o exterior. O 725 G4 também tem uma carcaça de alta qualidade e um bom teclado. A diferença de preços entre ambos os aparelhos deve-se às APUs AMD mais econômicas (e de desempenho ais fraco).
A CPU parte da APU instalada aqui é claramente inferior ao processador Intel processador instalado no modelo irmão. No entanto, a APU tem suficiente poder de cômputo para aplicativos de escritório e Internet. Por outro lado, a GPU AMD é superior à sua contraparte da Intel.
O EliteBook 725 G4 é feito para usuários que dão menos importância ao desempenho da CPU e duração da bateria.
O portátil dificilmente esquenta muito e normalmente funciona silenciosamente. No entanto, isto acaba assim que a ventoinha começa a girar. Ela produz um assobio meio silencioso - assim como a ventoinha no modelo irmão baseado em Intel. Isto não deve ocorrer em aparelhos nesta faixa de preços, especialmente porque os predecessores 725 G3 e 820 G3 apresentaram um ruído similar.
Um incrivelmente veloz SSD garante um sistema veloz. Substituir o SSD seria possível removendo a bandeja inferior do portátil. A HP equipou o EliteBook com um painel IPS que, em geral, é convincente. É um modelo brilhante, de alto contraste e com ângulos de visão estáveis que apresentam uma boa reprodução de cores no estado de fábrica.
Além disso, nosso modelo de teste aloja um modem LTE. Por isso, acessar a Internet ou a rede de uma empresa está garantido. A duração da bateria também é boa. No entanto, o aparelho claramente fica atrás de seu modelo irmão aqui, e os usuários que dependem da duração de bateria mais longa possível devem optar pelo EliteBook 820 G4. Uma garantia de três anos completa o pacote.
HP EliteBook 725 G4
-
03/20/2017 v6(old)
Sascha Mölck