Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Workstation HP ZBook Studio G5 (i7, P1000, 4K)
Connectivity
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Workstation (54.8 - 200, n=16, last 2 years) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Workstation (78.6 - 226, n=16, last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 418 cd/m²
Contraste: 1438:1 (Preto: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 1.9
ΔE Greyscale 5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
96% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
62.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
68.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
68.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.28
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA AUO30EB, , 3840x2160, 15.60 | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M Sharp SHP148D / LQ156D1, , 3840x2160, 15.60 | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS B156ZAN03.2, , 3840x2160, 15.60 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) APPA040, , 2880x1800, 15.40 | HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA CMN15E7, , 1920x1080, 15.60 | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA AUO30EB, , 3840x2160, 15.60 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 8% | 25% | 25% | -35% | -1% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 68.2 | 76.5 12% | 86.4 27% | 98.7 45% | 43.05 -37% | 67.8 -1% |
| sRGB Coverage | 96.2 | 98.4 2% | 99.9 4% | 99.9 4% | 64.7 -33% | 94.1 -2% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 68.8 | 76.4 11% | 99.1 44% | 86.6 26% | 44.5 -35% | 67.9 -1% |
| Response Times | 10% | 8% | 17% | 22% | 10% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 60.8 ? | 48 ? 21% | 55.6 ? 9% | 43.2 ? 29% | 41.6 ? 32% | 56 ? 8% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 32.8 ? | 33.6 ? -2% | 30.8 ? 6% | 31.2 ? 5% | 28.8 ? 12% | 29 ? 12% |
| PWM Frequency | 1000 | 117000 ? | 25770 ? | |||
| Screen | -6% | -12% | 28% | -36% | -5% | |
| Brightness middle | 417 | 451.7 8% | 397.6 -5% | 520 25% | 229 -45% | 440 6% |
| Brightness | 412 | 440 7% | 396 -4% | 492 19% | 212 -49% | 389 -6% |
| Brightness Distribution | 85 | 90 6% | 85 0% | 88 4% | 88 4% | 83 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.29 | 0.4 -38% | 0.25 14% | 0.39 -34% | 0.23 21% | 0.34 -17% |
| Contrast | 1438 | 1129 -21% | 1590 11% | 1333 -7% | 996 -31% | 1294 -10% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.4 | 3.11 29% | 4.95 -13% | 1.2 73% | 4.2 5% | 5.04 -15% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.7 | 8.62 -29% | 10.23 -53% | 2.3 66% | 18 -169% | 6.99 -4% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.9 | 3.07 -62% | 4.22 -122% | 4.2 -121% | 2.04 -7% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5 | 3.7 26% | 5.1 -2% | 1.3 74% | 2 60% | 4.98 -0% |
| Gamma | 2.28 96% | 2.11 104% | 2.234 98% | 2.18 101% | 2.23 99% | 2.48 89% |
| CCT | 7575 86% | 6492 100% | 7543 86% | 6738 96% | 6292 103% | 7777 84% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 62.3 | 69 11% | 87.6 41% | 41 -34% | 61 -2% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 96 | 98 2% | 100 4% | 64.5 -33% | 94 -2% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 4% /
-1% | 7% /
-2% | 23% /
25% | -16% /
-28% | 1% /
-3% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 32.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16.4 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 87 % 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 | ||
| 60.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 30 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 30.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 96 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17903 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3433 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4453 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4462 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M SK hynix PC400 512 GB | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB2T0HMLB | HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | Average Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 5% | 8% | -15% | -15% | 20% | |
| Write 4K | 102.7 | 97.8 -5% | 108 5% | 98.8 -4% | 94.8 -8% | 126.7 ? 23% |
| Read 4K | 38.32 | 41.21 8% | 37.24 -3% | 33.98 -11% | 26.45 -31% | 44 ? 15% |
| Write Seq | 1417 | 1312 -7% | 1476 4% | 395.7 -72% | 1037 -27% | 1617 ? 14% |
| Read Seq | 1289 | 1667 29% | 1367 6% | 2063 60% | 1280 -1% | 1716 ? 33% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 278.9 | 449.5 61% | 302.4 8% | 352.3 26% | 277.6 0% | 413 ? 48% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 348.8 | 327.4 -6% | 375 8% | 281.8 -19% | 333.9 -4% | 420 ? 20% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 1895 | 1385 -27% | 2433 28% | 355 -81% | 1037 -45% | 2076 ? 10% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 3352 | 2948 -12% | 3493 4% | 2775 -17% | 3135 -6% | 3130 ? -7% |
| SiSoft Sandra 2016 | |
| Image Processing | |
| Average NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (264 - 269, n=3) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA | |
| HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA | |
| GP Cryptography (Higher Security AES256+SHA2-512) | |
| Average NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (10.8 - 11, n=3) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA | |
| HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA | |
| GP Financial Analysis (FP High/Double Precision) | |
| HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA | |
| Average NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (23.2 - 23.8, n=3) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 6377 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 16596 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 4453 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 1560 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
| Average of class Workstation (34.9 - 298, n=28, last 2 years) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA | |
| Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA | |
| Average NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (26.1 - 29.9, n=3) | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | 4K | |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 249.7 | 152.2 | 133.7 | 51 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 88.7 | 54.4 | 29.5 | 16.1 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 100.1 | 57.5 | 32.3 | 27 | 10.6 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.6 / 28.6 / 30 dB |
| Carga |
| 38.1 / 42.5 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: 28.6 dB(A) | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.3 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 38.1 °C / 101 F, ranging from 22.2 to 69.8 °C for the class Workstation.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.1 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 41.3 °C / 106 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.2 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 34.8 °C / 95 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29.6 °C / 85.3 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.8 °C / 82 F (-1.8 °C / -3.3 F).
HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 45% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 73% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.16 / 0.69 Watt |
| Ocioso | 6.8 / 11.3 / 14.3 Watt |
| Carga |
78 / 126 Watt |
   
| |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.60 | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M E-2176M, Quadro P2000, SK hynix PC400 512 GB, IGZO, 3840x2160, 15.60 | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS E-2176M, Quadro P2000 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB2T0HMLB, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, Apple SSD AP0512, IPS, 2880x1800, 15.40 | HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA i5-8550U, Radeon Pro WX 3100, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.60 | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.60 | Average NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | Average of class Workstation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -26% | -8% | 15% | 37% | 5% | 9% | -22% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 6.8 | 9.8 -44% | 7.1 -4% | 3.4 50% | 3.2 53% | 6.1 10% | 5.09 ? 25% | 7.82 ? -15% |
| Idle Average * | 11.3 | 16.8 -49% | 14.4 -27% | 11 3% | 6.1 46% | 10.2 10% | 9.25 ? 18% | 12.7 ? -12% |
| Idle Maximum * | 14.3 | 16.9 -18% | 14.6 -2% | 14.9 -4% | 9.7 32% | 13.4 6% | 13 ? 9% | 18.7 ? -31% |
| Load Average * | 78 | 102.3 -31% | 93.9 -20% | 78.9 -1% | 62 21% | 82 -5% | 78.2 ? -0% | 96.5 ? -24% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 64 | 76.5 -20% | 77.9 -22% | 48 25% | ||||
| Load Maximum * | 126 | 114.5 9% | 88.3 30% | 91.2 28% | 71 44% | 122 3% | 132.7 ? -5% | 158.9 ? -26% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, 97 Wh | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M E-2176M, Quadro P2000, 97 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS E-2176M, Quadro P2000 Max-Q, 80 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, 83 Wh | HP ZBook 15u G5 2ZC05EA i5-8550U, Radeon Pro WX 3100, 56 Wh | HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 96 Wh | Average of class Workstation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -11% | -45% | 17% | 21% | -2% | -11% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1036 | 991 -4% | 1301 26% | 1027 -1% | 700 ? -32% | ||
| H.264 | 544 | 701 29% | 623 15% | 581 7% | 717 ? 32% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 582 | 501 -14% | 320 -45% | 614 5% | 514 -12% | 523 -10% | 541 ? -7% |
| Load | 131 | 110 -16% | 200 53% | 128 -2% | 81.3 ? -38% | ||
| Witcher 3 ultra | 88 |
Pro
Contra
O HP ZBook Studio G5 deu uma boa exibição em nossa análise – é por isso que conseguiu 87% e a avaliação "Bom". Ele compartilha a maioria de seus melhores recursos com o HP EliteBook 1050 G1.
Certamente isso não é uma grande surpresa, considerando que o ZBook Studio usa o mesmo chassi Unibody estável do HP EliteBook 1050 G1 – só que cinza, em vez de prata. Também igual: O teclado confortável, a bateria grande, a seleção de portas, a capacidade de atualização louvável, o ótimo desempenho da CPU e o touchpad. Nossa unidade de teste usa até mesmo o mesmo painel LCD AUO que o seu gêmeo EliteBook. A diferença é menos óbvia à primeira vista: O mais importante é a GPU diferente - enquanto o ZBook usa a Quadro P1000 otimizada para CAD, a HP utiliza a mais rápida GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q no EliteBook. Isso deixa o ZBook em desvantagem em termos de desempenho da GPU, pelo menos até que suas configurações Quadro P5000 estejam disponíveis. Além disso, deve-se notar que apenas o ZBook tem a opção de uma tela Dreamcolor, o HP EliteBook 1050 G1 infelizmente não é oferecido com esta tela.
A desvantagem em termos de desempenho da GPU persiste na comparação com o Lenovo ThinkPad P1 e o Dell Precision 5530: Ambos são oferecidos com a Quadro P2000, enquanto o ZBook não, pelo menos no momento. Outros pontos negativos adicionais são compartilhados com o EliteBook 1050. Isso inclui o peso maior em comparação com a concorrência, a má posição dos exaustores dos ventiladores e o afogamento de desempenho durante a operação com bateria. Por último, mas não menos importante, o ZBook Studio G5 também é um dispositivo muito caro.
Convincente: O ZBook Studio G5 é um workstation móvel sólida com poucos pontos fracos.
No geral, o ZBook certamente ganhou nossa recomendação. Se o preferir sobre o Lenovo ThinkPad P1 ou o Dell Precision 5530 é uma questão de gosto e requerimento de recursos.
HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA
-
03/26/2020 v7
Benjamin Herzig
Pricecompare
