Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 04/25/2017

Não é um conto épico. O novo Samsung Odyssey poderia ter sido um sucesso. Em vez disso, é o seu sistema de nível de entrada médio, sem recursos sobressalentes para separá-lo da enorme quantidade de aparelhos de jogos, exceto pelo seu horrendo ruído de ventoinha.

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Processador
Intel Core i7-7700HQ 2.8 GHz
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 2048 MB, Análises do: 1354 MHz, Memoría: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 375.63, Optimus
Memória
16384 MB 
, PC4-19200 DDR4, 1300 MHz, 15-15-15-35, Dual-Channel, 2x SODIMM
Pantalha
15.6 polegadas 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 141 PPI, IPS, ID: BOE0689, Name: NV156FHM-N46, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
Intel HM175
Disco rígido
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, 128 GB 
, Secundário: HD de 1 TB Seagate ST1000M035-1RK172
Placa de Som
Conexant @ Intel Skylake PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexões
2 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: Leitor SD
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 23.9 x 378 x 260.1
Bateria
43 Wh, 3780 mAh Lítio-Polímero
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 1,5 W estéreo, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Samsung Recovery, Samsung Settings, Samsung Update, WiFi Sharing, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
2.5 kg, Suprimento de energia: 747 g

 

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: SD reader, 2x USB 2.0, Kensington Lock
Right: SD reader, 2x USB 2.0, Kensington Lock
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI, USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI, USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
120.5 MB/s ∼100% +468%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78.8 MB/s ∼65% +272%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
21.2 MB/s ∼18%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
252.6 MB/s ∼100% +1311%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
86.9 MB/s ∼34% +385%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
17.9 MB/s ∼7%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
659 MBit/s ∼100% +92%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
541 MBit/s ∼82% +58%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
343 MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
524 MBit/s ∼100% +54%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
513 MBit/s ∼98% +50%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
341 MBit/s ∼65%
245.6
cd/m²
251.5
cd/m²
234.9
cd/m²
246.8
cd/m²
255.9
cd/m²
241
cd/m²
245.9
cd/m²
261.4
cd/m²
257.8
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Máximo: 261.4 cd/m² Médio: 249 cd/m² Minimum: 4.69 cd/m²
iluminação: 90 %
iluminação com acumulador: 255.9 cd/m²
Contraste: 533:1 (Preto: 0.48 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.9 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 5.6 | - Ø
70.1% sRGB (Argyll) 44.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.21
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Asus FX502VM-AS73
TN LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
LGD04D4, , 15.6, 3840x2160
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
Sharp SHP1453 LQ156M1, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte P55W v7
LG Philips LP156WF6 (LGD046F), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Apple APPA030, IPS, 15.4, 2880x1800
Response Times
30%
24%
-48%
16%
-43%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
38.8
28.4
27%
30.4
22%
54
-39%
37
5%
46
-19%
Response Time Black / White *
33.6
22.4
33%
24.8
26%
52.4
-56%
25
26%
56
-67%
PWM Frequency
19230
Screen
-7%
11%
45%
29%
59%
Brightness
249
205
-18%
255
2%
392
57%
289
16%
401
61%
Brightness Distribution
90
92
2%
87
-3%
89
-1%
87
-3%
90
0%
Black Level *
0.48
0.69
-44%
0.51
-6%
0.26
46%
0.29
40%
0.3
37%
Contrast
533
304
-43%
508
-5%
1538
189%
990
86%
1400
163%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.9
4.7
20%
3.9
34%
4.9
17%
4.92
17%
3.33
44%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.6
1.8
68%
4.5
20%
7.2
-29%
3.66
35%
2.73
51%
Gamma
2.21 109%
2.23 108%
2.43 99%
2.11 114%
2.32 103%
2.48 97%
CCT
7250 90%
6975 93%
7257 90%
6911 94%
6482 100%
6457 101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
44.8
36.2
-19%
59.5
33%
64.2
43%
54
21%
78.09
74%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
70.1
56.6
-19%
98.9
41%
82
17%
99.97
43%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
12% / 1%
18% / 14%
-2% / 27%
23% / 26%
8% / 39%

* ... 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
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 18.8 ms rise
↘ 14.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 84 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (27.2 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.8 ms rise
↘ 18 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 37 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (44 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 detected 19230 Hz99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 19230 Hz (Likely 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 19230 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 59 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 2255 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
190 Points ∼85% +23%
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
184 Points ∼83% +19%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
162 Points ∼73% +5%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
155 Points ∼70%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
143 Points ∼64% -8%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
134 Points ∼60% -14%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
131 Points ∼59% -15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
899 Points ∼48% +22%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
897 Points ∼48% +22%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼40% +1%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
738 Points ∼40%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
724 Points ∼39% -2%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
678 Points ∼36% -8%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
566 Points ∼30% -23%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
2.19 Points ∼100% +20%
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
2.08 Points ∼95% +14%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼83%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.77 Points ∼80% -3%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
1.67 Points ∼76% -9%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
1.5 Points ∼68% -18%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
1.49 Points ∼68% -19%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
9.91 Points ∼50% +21%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
9.78 Points ∼49% +20%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.18 Points ∼41% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.17 Points ∼41%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
7.94 Points ∼40% -3%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
7.47 Points ∼37% -9%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
6.02 Points ∼30% -26%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
7222 Points ∼81% +21%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5954 Points ∼67%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5747 Points ∼65% -3%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
5550 Points ∼63% -7%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
5126 Points ∼58% -14%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
28189 Points ∼70% +25%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22512 Points ∼56%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22217 Points ∼55% -1%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
21755 Points ∼54% -3%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
20111 Points ∼50% -11%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
236 s * ∼3% -12%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
211.321 s * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
176.329 s * ∼2% +17%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
579.909 Seconds * ∼3% -12%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
565.334 Seconds * ∼3% -9%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
519.371 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
440.036 Seconds * ∼2% +15%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
6832
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
22512
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
5954
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
67.51 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.17 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.83 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
102.86 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
738 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
155 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
5317 Points ∼82% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
5305 Points ∼81%
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache
4884 Points ∼75% -8%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
4680 Points ∼72% -12%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
2722 Points ∼42% -49%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
7220 Points ∼78% +35%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
5362 Points ∼58%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
4317 Points ∼46% -19%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
4765 Points ∼80% +19%
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
4013 Points ∼67% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
4001 Points ∼67%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
3770 Points ∼63% -6%
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache
3659 Points ∼61% -9%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4001 pontos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5362 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5305 pontos
Ajuda
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Asus FX502VM-AS73
SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-46%
19%
-93%
94%
Write 4k QD32
176.4
99.74
-43%
405.5
130%
1.04
-99%
398.1
126%
Read 4k QD32
521.4
369.9
-29%
288.3
-45%
1.06
-100%
509.1
-2%
Write 4k
143.1
70.91
-50%
135.1
-6%
1.05
-99%
134.1
-6%
Read 4k
47.16
29.36
-38%
31.97
-32%
0.57
-99%
45.14
-4%
Write 512
195.8
137.8
-30%
472.3
141%
51.11
-74%
1119
472%
Read 512
460.5
343.5
-25%
705.5
53%
39.06
-92%
977.4
112%
Write Seq
798.4
138.2
-83%
311
-61%
89.64
-89%
1106
39%
Read Seq
1518
502.5
-67%
1115
-27%
93.48
-94%
1684
11%
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Sequential Read: 1518 MB/s
Sequential Write: 798.4 MB/s
512K Read: 460.5 MB/s
512K Write: 195.8 MB/s
4K Read: 47.16 MB/s
4K Write: 143.1 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 521.4 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 176.4 MB/s
3DMark
Fire Strike Extreme Graphics
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5348 Points ∼39% +99%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼26% +31%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
3199 Points ∼24% +19%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2714 Points ∼20% +1%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2685 Points ∼20%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
2507 Points ∼19% -7%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼15% -26%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11261 Points ∼29% +88%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
7791 Points ∼20% +30%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7321 Points ∼19% +22%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
6797 Points ∼17% +13%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6013 Points ∼15% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
5990 Points ∼15%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
5323 Points ∼14% -11%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼11% -31%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
3638 Points ∼9% -39%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
50205 Points ∼31% +32%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
46362 Points ∼28% +22%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
40922 Points ∼25% +8%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
38001 Points ∼23%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
37840 Points ∼23% 0%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
33304 Points ∼20% -12%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
32344 Points ∼20% -15%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
25986 Points ∼16% -32%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
25900 Points ∼16% -32%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
8873 Points ∼56% +19%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
7998 Points ∼50% +8%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7952 Points ∼50% +7%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7440 Points ∼47%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6999 Points ∼44% -6%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
6712 Points ∼42% -10%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
6361 Points ∼40% -15%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
4501 Points ∼28% -40%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼28% -40%
1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14450 Points ∼28% +86%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9824 Points ∼19% +27%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
9768 Points ∼19% +26%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
8571 Points ∼17% +10%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7760 Points ∼15%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7457 Points ∼15% -4%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
7128 Points ∼14% -8%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% -38%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
4384 Points ∼9% -44%
3DMark 11 Performance
7872 pontos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
84774 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
20291 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5455 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
2678 pontos
Ajuda
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 63.6fps
Metro: Last Light (2013) 7843.8fps
Thief (2014) 7340.4fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 4320.8fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 91794725fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 115fps
Fallout 4 (2015) 41.534.2fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 70.138.733.4fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 54.734.129.6fps
Doom (2016) 47.543.5fps
Overwatch (2016) 95.354.2fps
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243Tooltip
The Witcher 3 high

Barulho

Ocioso
28.1 / 29.1 / 29.1 dB
HDD
29.1 dB
Carga
49.2 / 49.2 dB
 
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 28.1 dB(A)
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Radeon Pro 460, 6920HQ, Apple SSD SM1024L
Noise
-4%
-3%
-1%
-7%
3%
off / environment *
28.1
28.7
-2%
28.9
-3%
28.4
-1%
30
-7%
29
-3%
Idle Minimum *
28.1
30.6
-9%
32.3
-15%
29
-3%
33
-17%
30.3
-8%
Idle Average *
29.1
30.6
-5%
32.3
-11%
29
-0%
34
-17%
30.3
-4%
Idle Maximum *
29.1
31
-7%
32.3
-11%
32.2
-11%
35
-20%
30.3
-4%
Load Average *
49.2
46.2
6%
43.2
12%
47.1
4%
39
21%
35.1
29%
Load Maximum *
49.2
52.3
-6%
45.2
8%
47.1
4%
50
-2%
46
7%

* ... smaller is better

 58.4 °C51.2 °C45.2 °C 
 48.2 °C47 °C29.2 °C 
 26.8 °C27 °C26.2 °C 
Máximo: 58.4 °C
Médio: 39.9 °C
43.4 °C40.6 °C54.2 °C
24.2 °C33.8 °C35.2 °C
25.8 °C25 °C26.2 °C
Máximo: 54.2 °C
Médio: 34.3 °C
alimentação elétrica  43 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.139.82539.4363135.835.6403735.95035.6356333.633.48032.332.710031.232.612530.431.116030.23020029.230.925028.23631527.74840027.753.25002747.963026.345.880025.647100025.849125024.949.5160024.551.8200024.650250024.451.6315024.156.440002461.650002459.2630023.958.5800023.861.81000023.959.71250023.863.11600023.957.4SPL3769N2.922.2median 24.9Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01USmedian 50Delta28.435.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHzmedian 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (63.07 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 99% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 10%, average was 17%, worst was 32%
Compared to all devices tested
» 91% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 9%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.28 / 0.78 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 6.7 / 8.9 / 10.8 Watt
Carga midlight 81.8 / 122.7 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01USAsus FX502VM-AS73Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71Gigabyte P55W v7Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Power Consumption
-57%
0%
-12%
-28%
14%
Idle Minimum *
6.7
14.9
-122%
6.6
1%
7.7
-15%
8
-19%
3
55%
Idle Average *
8.9
15.1
-70%
9
-1%
11.7
-31%
13
-46%
9.9
-11%
Idle Maximum *
10.8
15.2
-41%
10.7
1%
12
-11%
18
-67%
12.5
-16%
Load Average *
81.8
105.8
-29%
77.5
5%
80.5
2%
76
7%
70.6
14%
Load Maximum *
122.7
148.8
-21%
130
-6%
128.4
-5%
143
-17%
90.8
26%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
10h 12min
Navegar com WLAN v1.3
4h 23min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 16min
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 43 Wh
Asus FX502VM-AS73
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 64 Wh
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 56 Wh
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 48 Wh
Gigabyte P55W v7
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 63 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
6920HQ, Radeon Pro 460, 76 Wh
Battery Runtime
-17%
10%
-20%
30%
52%
Reader / Idle
612
363
-41%
565
-8%
440
-28%
789
29%
Load
76
64
-16%
84
11%
47
-38%
98
29%
52
-32%
WiFi v1.3
263
277
5%
334
27%
276
5%
346
32%
619
135%

Pro

+ Temperaturas relativamente baixas durante jogos
+ Poderoso desempenho da CPU e GPU sem afogamentos
+ NVMe M.2 SSD + baia SATA III
+ Utilidade de monitor de sistema
+ Interior acessível
+ Boa resposta das teclas

Contra

- Tempos e resposta médios da tela; sem opções de telas de 120 Hz/5 ms ou G-Sync
- Ventoinhas barulhentas durante os jogos; sem software de controle de ventoinha
- Baixa capacidade da bateria; duração média da bateria
- A tampa poderia ser mais rígida; carcaça crepitante
- Teclas WASD mornas durante os jogos
- Sem USB Type-C, nem DisplayPort
- Alto falantes fracos, baixos fracos
- Leitor de cartões SD muito lento
- Forte barulho das teclas
In review: Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
In review: Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US

Nossas impressões sobre o primeiro portátil Odyssey não uma grande mistura. Por um lado, o sistema se desempenha de forma admirável, sem afogamentos da CPU ou GPU e funciona com temperaturas operacionais aceitavelmente baixas para um portátil de jogos. Sua habilidade de manter as velocidades Turbo Boost é algo com o que os portáteis de jogos super finos tendem a ter dificuldade, portanto, o Odyssey, pelo menos conseguiu obter o desempenho de forma apropriada.

Fora o seu bom desempenho, o Odyssey luta contra outros fatores. O mais notório pe o ruído da ventoinha durante os jogos, inclusive para um portátil de jogos. Com quase 50 dB(A), este nível se espera de GPUs mais poderosas como a GTX 1070 ou GTX 1080 - não da GTX 1050. O controle manual da ventoinha teria sido de muita utilidade para permitir que o usuário regule o ruído e as temperaturas para uma experiência de jogo muito mais agradável.

Os recortes de orçamento também se tornam mais evidentes a medida que passamos mais tempo com o portátil. O leitor de cartões SD é lento, os recursos de conectividade são barebones, a VRAM da GPU é da metade, a capacidade da bateria é pequena, e tanto o contraste quanto as cores não são tão profundos  quanto em alternativas mais caras. As teclas WASD extra mornas também são uma estranha decisão no design; um fabricante de carros nunca projetaria volantes desconfortavelmente quentes, pelo mesmo motivo que um portátil de jogos nunca deveria ter teclas WASD quentes.

O HP Pavilion 15t com a mesma CPU e GPU também é vendido na faixa de preços de $1100 a $1200 USD como o nosso Odyssey. Enquanto o Samsung o supera em desempenho, é bastante ordinário quase em todos os outros aspectos e não oferece o suficiente para se destacar sobre outros portáteis com GTX 1050.

O primeiro portátil de jogos Odyssey da Samsung finalmente está disponível e.. é enjoado e nada especial. Os desempenhos da CPU e GPU são ótimos e sem afogamentos, mas o ruído da ventoinha é severo.

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US - 04/24/2017 v6
Allen Ngo

Acabamento
63 / 98 → 64%
Teclado
67%
Mouse
69%
Conectividade
49 / 81 → 60%
Peso
60 / 66 → 89%
Bateria
78%
Pantalha
81%
Desempenho do jogos
89%
Desempenho da aplicação
94%
Temperatura
85 / 95 → 89%
Ruído
80 / 90 → 89%
Audio
50%
Camera
37 / 85 → 43%
Médio
69%
77%
Gaming - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)
Allen Ngo, 2017-04-25 (Update: 2017-04-28)