Notebookcheck

Revisão do laptop HP Omen 15: O forte processador AMD faz a Intel tremer

Cheio de surpresas. A versão AMD do HP Omen 15 pontua com componentes poderosos a um preço justo em papel. Na configuração de teste, o GeForce RTX 2060 é acompanhado por um Ryzen 7 4800H. Descubra aqui se o sistema de resfriamento funciona bem e que pontos fortes e fracos o equipamento de 15 polegadas tem de outra forma.
Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser (traduzido por DeepL / Ninh Duy), 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

O Omen 15 da HP tem um portfólio de hardware muito amplo. Não há apenas vários modelos Intel, mas também várias variantes AMD. Como placa gráfica é utilizado um chip mid-range ou high-end da geração Turing da Nvidia (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti para RTX 2070). Uma das melhores relações preço-desempenho é atualmente oferecida pelo Omen 15-en0375ng testado por nós, por cerca de 1.260 Euros (~$1530, quecontém umRyzen 7 4800He umGeForce RTX 2060comomencionado no início). As imagens geradas são exibidas em um painel IPS mate com 1.920 x 1.080 pixels. Além disso, há 2x 8 GB DDR4-3.200 RAM em modo de canal duplo e um SSD NVMe de 512 GB no formato M.2 com economia de espaço. O pacote é completado pelo Windows 10 Home 64 bit como sistema operacional

, , , , , ,
pesquisar relação.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
Processador
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H 8 x 2.9 - 4.2 GHz, 65 W PL2 / Short Burst, 54 W PL1 / Sustained, Renoir (Zen 2)
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile - 6144 MB, Análises do: 960 MHz, Memoría: 1375 MHz, GDDR6, ForceWare 452.41, Optimus
Memória
16384 MB 
, 2x 8 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-3200, Dual Channel
Pantalha
15.60 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, BOE0852, IPS, Full-HD, Brilhante: não, 60 Hz
placa mãe
AMD Promontory/Bixby FCH
Disco rígido
WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G, 512 GB 
, M.2 NVMe
Placa de Som
Realtek ALC245 @ AMD K17.6 - Audio Processor - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexões
4 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: Combo (Headset/Mic), Card Reader: SD
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek Gaming GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Realtek 8822CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 23 x 358 x 240
Bateria
70.9 Wh Lítio-Ion, 6 Cells
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 2.0 Bang & Olufsen, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, 200 W Power Supply, Setup Guide, Command Center, 24 Meses Garantia
peso
2.16 kg, Suprimento de energia: 525 g
Preço
1260 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Os concorrentes da Omen 15-en0375ng incluem outros jogadores de 15 polegadas de orçamento com RTX 2060, como o Schenker XMG Core 15, o Asus TUF A15, o Acer Predator Triton 300, o Aorus 5 KB, e o Lenovo Legion 5. Cada um destes cadernos aparece na tabela como dispositivo de comparação

Possible competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83 %
01/2021
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2.2 kg23 mm15.60"1920x1080
82 %
10/2020
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2 kg19.9 mm15.60"1920x1080
83 %
06/2020
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2.2 kg24.9 mm15.60"1920x1080
82 %
12/2020
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2.1 kg19.9 mm15.60"1920x1080
84 %
10/2020
Aorus 5 KB
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2.1 kg28 mm15.60"1920x1080
83 %
07/2020
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
i5-10300H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
2.5 kg26.1 mm15.60"1920x1080

O chassi é basicamente o mesmo que o Omen 15-ek0456ng que testamos há alguns meses, razão pela qual nos abstemos de analisar novamente o chassi, o equipamento e os dispositivos de entrada. No entanto, os modelos não são completamente idênticos. Por exemplo, a versão AMD tem uma etiqueta ou iluminação de teclado branca em vez de vermelha. Os compradores também terão que passar sem uma porta Thunderbolt 3

HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15
HP Omen 15

Size comparison

363.1 mm 259.6 mm 26.1 mm 2.5 kg361 mm 258 mm 28 mm 2.1 kg359 mm 256 mm 24.9 mm 2.2 kg363 mm 254 mm 19.9 mm 2.1 kg358 mm 240 mm 23 mm 2.2 kg359.8 mm 245.8 mm 19.9 mm 2 kg

SDCardreader

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Average of class Gaming
  (18 - 222, n=93, last 2 years)
113 MB/s ∼100% +59%
Aorus 5 KB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
76 MB/s ∼67% +7%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
71 MB/s ∼63%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36 MB/s ∼32% -49%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Average of class Gaming
  (20.5 - 257, n=93, last 2 years)
127 MB/s ∼100% +44%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
88 MB/s ∼69%
Aorus 5 KB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
86 MB/s ∼68% -2%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
37 MB/s ∼29% -58%

Comunicação

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1380 MBit/s ∼100% +115%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1230 MBit/s ∼89% +92%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650i 160MHz Wireless Network Adapter (201NGW)
1220 MBit/s ∼88% +90%
Average of class Gaming
  (301 - 1645, n=157, last 2 years)
1118 MBit/s ∼81% +74%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
Realtek 8822CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
662 (553min - 769max) MBit/s ∼48% +3%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
Realtek 8822CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
642 MBit/s ∼47%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
566 (37min - 647max) MBit/s ∼41% -12%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1640 MBit/s ∼100% +203%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1380 MBit/s ∼84% +155%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650i 160MHz Wireless Network Adapter (201NGW)
1380 MBit/s ∼84% +155%
Average of class Gaming
  (90 - 1743, n=157, last 2 years)
1184 MBit/s ∼72% +118%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
880 (772min - 916max) MBit/s ∼54% +62%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
Realtek 8822CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
630 (571min - 641max) MBit/s ∼38% +16%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
Realtek 8822CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
542 MBit/s ∼33%

Webcam

ColorChecker
11.3 ∆E
15.8 ∆E
21.6 ∆E
22 ∆E
24 ∆E
20.5 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
25.1 ∆E
17 ∆E
17.6 ∆E
18.6 ∆E
24.7 ∆E
15 ∆E
18.7 ∆E
20.3 ∆E
14.7 ∆E
21.3 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
1.8 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
20.5 ∆E
19.6 ∆E
19.9 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
ColorChecker HP Omen 15-en0375ng: 17.92 ∆E min: 1.76 - max: 27.71 ∆E

Mostrar

Vamos direto a uma das maiores decepções: a exposição. Enquanto a variante Intel poderia se exibir com um bom painel de 144 Hz no teste, a edição AMD tem apenas um painel medíocre de 60 Hz a bordo

279
cd/m²
269
cd/m²
268
cd/m²
274
cd/m²
297
cd/m²
268
cd/m²
260
cd/m²
286
cd/m²
271
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
BOE0852
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 297 cd/m² Médio: 274.7 cd/m² Minimum: 17 cd/m²
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 297 cd/m²
Contraste: 900:1 (Preto: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.54 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.5, calibrated: 4.66
ΔE Greyscale 2.1 | 0.64-98 Ø5.7
58% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
40% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
40.42% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
57.62% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
39.12% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.066
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
BOE0852, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
LM156LF-1F02, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
LM156LF-2F01, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
BOE08FB, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Aorus 5 KB
LG Philips LP156WFG-SPB2 (LGD05E8), IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
BOE CQ NV156FHM-NX1, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.60
Display
69%
0%
1%
61%
-1%
Display P3 Coverage
39.12
67.22
72%
38.92
-1%
39.51
1%
63.4
62%
38.8
-1%
sRGB Coverage
57.62
95.91
66%
58.47
1%
58.09
1%
92.85
61%
57.76
0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
40.42
68.53
70%
40.22
0%
40.81
1%
64.77
60%
40.09
-1%
Response Times
61%
-14%
4%
50%
16%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
30.4 (16.4, 14)
9.6 (5.2, 4.4)
68%
34 (16, 18)
-12%
29.2 (14.4, 14.8)
4%
14.4 (7.6, 6.8)
53%
26 (12, 14)
14%
Response Time Black / White *
20.8 (11.6, 9.2)
9.6 (4.4, 5.2)
54%
24 (13, 11)
-15%
20 (9.6, 10.4)
4%
11.2 (6.8, 4.4)
46%
17 (8, 9)
18%
PWM Frequency
200 (99)
Screen
0%
1%
-8%
33%
0%
Brightness middle
297
312
5%
280
-6%
279
-6%
318
7%
301
1%
Brightness
275
290
5%
254
-8%
257
-7%
298
8%
277
1%
Brightness Distribution
88
87
-1%
88
0%
89
1%
87
-1%
77
-12%
Black Level *
0.33
0.2
39%
0.15
55%
0.31
6%
0.3
9%
0.26
21%
Contrast
900
1560
73%
1867
107%
900
0%
1060
18%
1158
29%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.54
4.84
-7%
5.89
-30%
5.84
-29%
2.49
45%
5.12
-13%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
18.92
13.85
27%
19
-0%
21.8
-15%
5.06
73%
8.86
53%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.66
1.77
62%
4.79
-3%
4.54
3%
1.53
67%
4.88
-5%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.1
9
-329%
4.08
-94%
3.1
-48%
1.6
24%
3.47
-65%
Gamma
2.066 106%
2.105 105%
2.33 94%
2.116 104%
2.211 100%
2.37 93%
CCT
6291 103%
8099 80%
7303 89%
6577 99%
6714 97%
7062 92%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
40
68
70%
37
-7%
41
3%
65
63%
37
-7%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
58
92
59%
58
0%
59
2%
89
53%
57
-2%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
43% / 21%
-4% / -1%
-1% / -5%
48% / 41%
5% / 2%

* ... smaller is better

Além do tempo de resposta, o contraste também é muito pior. Em vez de mais de 1400:1, o modelo AMD tem apenas uma proporção de 900:1. O modelo Intel também está normalmente à frente nas outras disciplinas - seja a precisão da cor, o valor do preto ou o brilho. O Omen 15-en0375ng dificilmente é adequado para uso externo devido a seu brilho escasso (aprox. 275 cd/m²)

CalMAN: Escala de cinza
CalMAN: Escala de cinza
CalMAN: saturação de cores
CalMAN: saturação de cores
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: Escala de cinza (calibrada)
CalMAN: Escala de cinza (calibrada)
CalMAN: saturação de cor (calibrada)
CalMAN: saturação de cor (calibrada)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrado)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrado)

Entretanto, o pequeno espaço de cores é o maior inconveniente aos nossos olhos: 58% sRGB e 40% AdobeRGB resultam em imagens bastante pálidas e indiferenciadas. A boa estabilidade do ângulo de visão só pode compensar esta deficiência até certo ponto. Em resumo, a qualidade da imagem não faz justiça ao preço do notebook. Independentemente de ser um produto econômico ou uma máquina de luxo: Esperamos um painel de alta qualidade com pelo menos 300 cd/m² de brilho, pelo menos 1000:1 de contraste e pelo menos 80% de cobertura sRGB para laptops de jogos - e 120 Hz para cima por 1.000 Euros (~$1214)

HP Omen 15 vs sRGB (58%)
HP Omen 15 vs sRGB (58%)
HP Omen 15 vs AdobeRGB (40%)
HP Omen 15 vs AdobeRGB (40%)

No entanto, a HP não está sozinha em seu mau desempenho. Com exceção do Schenker Core 15 e Aorus 5 KB, as exibições da concorrência também deixam muito a desejar. Atenção: Abaixo de um brilho de 100%, a tela cintila com 200 Hz, o que pode causar problemas para pessoas sensíveis

Retroiluminação
Retroiluminação
Subpixel
Subpixel
Ponto de vista
Ponto de vista

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
20.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.6 ms rise
↘ 9.2 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. » 29 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
30.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16.4 ms rise
↘ 14 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 636 (maximum) ms. » 24 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (37.8 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 detected 200 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 200 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 200 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 15345 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Condições de teste

Os ventiladores de afinação podem desabafar no Centro de Comando pré-instalado. Além do monitoramento do sistema, a ferramenta também oferece um booster de rede e controle de desempenho. Este último inclui três perfis que afetam o desempenho e as temperaturas ou volume. Nossos testes sempre foram realizados com o modo padrão, que é suposto ser adequado para todos os tipos de tarefas e está ativo fora da caixa. Os ventiladores sempre funcionavam em modo automático (ver captura de tela nº 3)

Centro de Comando
Centro de Comando
Centro de Comando

Energia

Embora seja um dispositivo de orçamento em termos de preço, o Omen 15-en0375ng definitivamente pertence ao segmento high-end. Isto se deve principalmente ao forte processador de oito núcleos, que raramente tem vantagens sobre um rápido quatro ou seis núcleos em jogos até agora, mas mostra seus músculos em aplicações especializadas e geralmente tem mais futuro garantido

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
HWiNFO
Benchmark AS SSD
CrystalDiskMark

Processador

Os benchmarks provam de forma impressionante que a AMD está atualmente dando o tom no setor de CPU e ultrapassou a Intel. Graças a seus muitos núcleos, o Ryzen 7 4800H, que pode processar até 16 roscas simultaneamente via SMT, passa cerca de 50% do Core i7-10750H, que é muito popular entre os laptops de jogos, em aplicações multi-core como o Cinebench R15. A vantagem sobre o Core i5-10300H, por exemplo, no Legion 5 15IMH05H, é mesmo em torno de 100%

010020030040050060070080090010001100120013001400150016001700180019001909.311895.471897.351902.141898.431897.81899.251887.861892.951893.671905.671891.071882.81889.471905.221885.811895.731896.361893.581887.861873.011812.991856.321852.711852.021926.131889.21876.71879.521880.851840.261845.611848.261873.981875.291867.061872.571873.981864.371864.451864.451864.451855.121860.031857.611864.371867.151861.681848.771849.631869.861868.551868.461868.461868.551867.151856.321860.291869.861863.061863.061856.321863.061864.451871.261868.551868.461854.941867.151868.461861.681868.551861.681865.761860.291850.141781.741806.361796.31781.821827.071834.531711.161750.391651.731763.671840.861643.861743.071660.031842.211727.261601.61844.251739.361836.971715.341647.991741.481723.11725.41833.011714.091840.61714.91715.781827.41718.291825.231834.271707.291815.291816.041724.361626.081723.991663.761680.461837.481729.581728.911650.511838.4918391805.051665.631739.361676.311840.941722.361317.181253.371232.8212401233.431222.271220.521202.721208.971207.261202.181195.991207.261194.321180.531194.321190.971192.641198.211193.181192.641189.311187.081186.941180.531193.851164.351045.481061.911045.121144.891151.311156.671151.971160.81158.081149.951158.781157.911158.411154.771164.111157.911161.11151.941156.441156.641152.871155.71160.13Tooltip
HP Omen 15-en0375ng AMD Ryzen 7 4800H, AMD Ryzen 7 4800H: Ø1886 (1812.99-1909.31)
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O AMD Ryzen 7 4800H, AMD Ryzen 7 4800H: Ø1866 (1840.26-1926.13)
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 AMD Ryzen 7 4800H, AMD Ryzen 7 4800H: Ø1753 (1601.6-1850.14)
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP Intel Core i7-10750H, Intel Core i7-10750H: Ø1209 (1180.53-1317.18)
Aorus 5 KB Intel Core i7-10750H, Intel Core i7-10750H: Ø1145 (1045.12-1193.85)

Embora o desempenho caia em alguns por cento sob carga prolongada, o Omen 15-en0375ng também corta um bom número no loop Cinebench. O relógio está aproximadamente no mesmo nível do concorrente Schenker Core 15 de 4800H, enquanto o Asus TUF A15 tem que lidar com um Turbo fortemente flutuante

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
203 Points ∼100% +8%
Average of class Gaming
  (108 - 254, n=196, last 2 years)
200 Points ∼99% +6%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
199 Points ∼98% +6%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
188 Points ∼93%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
187 Points ∼92% -1%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
187 Points ∼92% -1%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
186 Points ∼92% -1%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1926 Points ∼100% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1909 (1812.99min - 1909.31max) Points ∼99%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1850 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Gaming
  (536 - 2804, n=208, last 2 years)
1559 Points ∼81% -18%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
1317 (1180.53min - 1317.18max) Points ∼68% -31%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
1194 (1045.12min - 1193.85max) Points ∼62% -37%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
898 Points ∼47% -53%
Blender 2.79 - BMW27 CPU
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
485.9 Seconds * ∼100% -88%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
388 Seconds * ∼80% -50%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
372 Seconds * ∼77% -44%
Average of class Gaming
  (179 - 633, n=164, last 2 years)
320 Seconds * ∼66% -24%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
262.5 Seconds * ∼54% -1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
259 Seconds * ∼53%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
255 Seconds * ∼52% +2%
7-Zip 18.03
7z b 4 -mmt1
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
5253 MIPS ∼100% +13%
Average of class Gaming
  (2945 - 6174, n=165, last 2 years)
5213 MIPS ∼99% +12%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
5052 MIPS ∼96% +9%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
4903 MIPS ∼93% +6%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4666 MIPS ∼89% +1%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4664 MIPS ∼89% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4638 MIPS ∼88%
7z b 4
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
50075 MIPS ∼100%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
48326 MIPS ∼97% -3%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
45679 MIPS ∼91% -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (15146 - 75612, n=165, last 2 years)
44187 MIPS ∼88% -12%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
35797 MIPS ∼71% -29%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
34772 MIPS ∼69% -31%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
24635 MIPS ∼49% -51%
Cinebench R20
CPU (Single Core)
Average of class Gaming
  (312 - 634, n=186, last 2 years)
494 Points ∼100% +2%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
486 Points ∼98%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
485 Points ∼98% 0%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
476 Points ∼96% -2%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
475 Points ∼96% -2%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
473 Points ∼96% -3%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
459 Points ∼93% -6%
CPU (Multi Core)
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4435 Points ∼100% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4380 Points ∼99%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4257 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Gaming
  (1397 - 6321, n=187, last 2 years)
3667 Points ∼83% -16%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
3075 Points ∼69% -30%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
2991 Points ∼67% -32%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
2217 Points ∼50% -49%
Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
1316 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Gaming
  (703 - 1777, n=164, last 2 years)
1303 Points ∼99% +8%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
1286 Points ∼98% +7%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
1220 Points ∼93% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1203 Points ∼91%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1188 Points ∼90% -1%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1166 Points ∼89% -3%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
8073 Points ∼100%
Average of class Gaming
  (2783 - 11393, n=164, last 2 years)
7166 Points ∼89% -11%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
6906 Points ∼86% -14%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
6397 Points ∼79% -21%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
6365 Points ∼79% -21%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
5920 Points ∼73% -27%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
4640 Points ∼57% -43%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 - 4k Preset
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
12.9 fps ∼100%
Average of class Gaming
  (4.4 - 19.8, n=164, last 2 years)
12.2 fps ∼95% -5%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
12.1 fps ∼94% -6%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
10.8 fps ∼84% -16%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
9.61 fps ∼74% -26%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
9.5 fps ∼74% -26%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
7.69 fps ∼60% -40%
LibreOffice - 20 Documents To PDF
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
69.2 s * ∼100%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
60.16 s * ∼87% +13%
Average of class Gaming
  (23.9 - 113, n=156, last 2 years)
54.4 s * ∼79% +21%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
52.6 s * ∼76% +24%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
49 s * ∼71% +29%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
47.2 s * ∼68% +32%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
28.6 s * ∼41% +59%
R Benchmark 2.5 - Overall mean
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Intel Core i5-10300H
0.634 sec * ∼100% -10%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
Intel Core i7-10750H
0.607 sec * ∼96% -6%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
0.603 sec * ∼95% -5%
Aorus 5 KB
Intel Core i7-10750H
0.602 sec * ∼95% -5%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.4907 - 1.088, n=159, last 2 years)
0.585 sec * ∼92% -2%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
0.583 sec * ∼92% -1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
0.575 sec * ∼91%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1909 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
102 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
188 Points
Ajuda

Desempenho do sistema

O Omen 15 também é um dos pioneiros quando se trata de desempenho do sistema. 5.766 pontos no PCMark 10 catapultam o equipamento de 15 polegadas para a posição superior

PCMark 10 - Score
Average of class Gaming
  (3952 - 7884, n=176, last 2 years)
6041 Points ∼100% +5%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
5766 Points ∼95%
Aorus 5 KB
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H, ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro (ASX8200PNP-512GT)
5452 Points ∼90% -5%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
5427 Points ∼90% -6%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H, WDC PC SN730 SDBQNTY-1T00
5193 Points ∼86% -10%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB
5095 Points ∼84% -12%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i5-10300H, Samsung PM991 MZALQ512HALU
4887 Points ∼81% -15%

Latências DPC

Em termos de latências, o caderno também não tem que ouvir nenhuma crítica. De acordo com a ferramenta LatencyMon, o sistema é bem adequado para conteúdo e aplicações em tempo real

Latências
Latências
Latências
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
1781 μs * ∼100% -130%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H, WDC PC SN730 SDBQNTY-1T00
1767.3 μs * ∼99% -128%
Aorus 5 KB
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H, ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro (ASX8200PNP-512GT)
1218.2 μs * ∼68% -57%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB
797.4 μs * ∼45% -3%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
775.7 μs * ∼44%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i5-10300H, Samsung PM991 MZALQ512HALU
723.4 μs * ∼41% +7%

* ... smaller is better

Armazenamento em massa

Os compradores também podem esperar por um dispositivo rápido de armazenamento em massa. O modelo 512 GB WDC PC SN730 instalado na amostra de revisão atinge mais de 2000 MB/s em leitura e escrita seqüencial, o que é um resultado muito bom. Não é de se admirar, já que se trata de uma unidade PCIe/NVMe moderna

HP Omen 15-en0375ng
WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
WDC PC SN730 SDBQNTY-1T00
Aorus 5 KB
ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro (ASX8200PNP-512GT)
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
Samsung PM991 MZALQ512HALU
Average WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
28%
-13%
-0%
10%
-18%
-0%
Write 4K
119.6
233
95%
219.8
84%
117.5
-2%
162.1
36%
145.4
22%
156 (107 - 224, n=15)
30%
Read 4K
47.4
54.5
15%
50.16
6%
47.36
0%
60.66
28%
51.6
9%
47.2 (36.8 - 53.7, n=15)
0%
Write Seq
2677
3050
14%
978.7
-63%
2748
3%
2366
-12%
1007
-62%
2056 (1025 - 2707, n=15)
-23%
Read Seq
2220
3042
37%
1990
-10%
2084
-6%
2633
19%
1145
-48%
2086 (1356 - 2553, n=15)
-6%
Write 4K Q32T1
427.4
519.5
22%
515.8
21%
407.3
-5%
428.2
0%
468.4
10%
433 (237 - 671, n=15)
1%
Read 4K Q32T1
549.2
546.1
-1%
298.3
-46%
474.6
-14%
582.2
6%
528.1
-4%
484 (333 - 761, n=15)
-12%
Write Seq Q32T1
2706
3241
20%
981.7
-64%
3069
13%
2480
-8%
1381
-49%
2490 (1087 - 2721, n=15)
-8%
Read Seq Q32T1
2869
3538
23%
1907.2
-34%
3154
10%
3121
9%
2291
-20%
3306 (2869 - 3426, n=15)
15%
AS SSD
15%
-29%
-3%
-17%
-36%
-16%
Seq Read
2255.25
2836
26%
1682
-25%
2368.75
5%
2794.95
24%
2011.91
-11%
2497 (1786 - 3021, n=15)
11%
Seq Write
2129.44
2452
15%
904
-58%
2446.49
15%
2171.68
2%
1261.05
-41%
1939 (993 - 2479, n=15)
-9%
4K Read
49.5
60.37
22%
60.21
22%
40.61
-18%
53.33
8%
43.66
-12%
45 (34.7 - 49.5, n=15)
-9%
4K Write
175.13
190.52
9%
164.78
-6%
103.18
-41%
121.32
-31%
109.31
-38%
148 (96.9 - 212, n=15)
-15%
4K-64 Read
1463.06
1282.5
-12%
472.49
-68%
1637.26
12%
713.6
-51%
850.81
-42%
1184 (615 - 1472, n=15)
-19%
4K-64 Write
2060.9
2297.92
12%
845.47
-59%
1960.96
-5%
1375.73
-33%
780.22
-62%
1404 (938 - 2346, n=15)
-32%
Access Time Read *
0.138
0.034
75%
0.087
37%
0.06
57%
0.049
64%
0.117
15%
0.0777 (0.05 - 0.138, n=15)
44%
Access Time Write *
0.022
0.02
9%
0.02
9%
0.036
-64%
0.036
-64%
0.036
-64%
0.0401 (0.021 - 0.076, n=15)
-82%
Score Read
1738
1627
-6%
701
-60%
1915
10%
1046
-40%
1096
-37%
1478 (895 - 1822, n=15)
-15%
Score Write
2449
2734
12%
1101
-55%
2309
-6%
1714
-30%
1016
-59%
1746 (1173 - 2721, n=15)
-29%
Score Total
5075
5184
2%
2143
-58%
5205
3%
3279
-35%
2643
-48%
3958 (2834 - 5376, n=15)
-22%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
22% / 20%
-21% / -22%
-2% / -2%
-4% / -6%
-27% / -28%
-8% / -9%

* ... smaller is better

WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2869 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2706 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 549.2 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 427.4 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 2220 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2677 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 47.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 119.6 MB/s

Continuous reading: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8

014529043558072587010151160130514501595174018852030217523202465261027552626.472871.212871.582872.552873.642874.782874.782874.782874.862875.412875.412875.612876.032876.962877.082877.172877.292877.52877.922877.922878.132878.342878.342878.552878.972879.182879.392879.392879.392879.812879.812880.022880.232880.332880.442880.652880.862880.862880.862880.862881.072881.072881.072881.072881.172881.282882.122882.542882.752883.9Tooltip
: Ø2873 (2626.47-2883.9)

Placa gráfica

O GeForce RTX 2060 é o companheiro perfeito para os jogadores que desejam investir no máximo 1.500 Euros (~$1820) em um notebook. O modelo DirectX 12 está localizado entre a gama média e superior em termos de desempenho e, ao contrário de seus irmãos mais baratos, pode ostentar capacidades "reais" de traçado de raio

3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (1360 - 34993, n=195, last 2 years)
19869 Points ∼100% +28%
Aorus 5 KB
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
16362 Points ∼82% +6%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
16355 Points ∼82% +6%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
15967 Points ∼80% +3%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
15746 Points ∼79% +2%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
15609 Points ∼79% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
15499 Points ∼78%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (429 - 13210, n=198, last 2 years)
7594 Points ∼100% +31%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
6164 Points ∼81% +6%
Aorus 5 KB
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
6123 Points ∼81% +5%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
6043 Points ∼80% +4%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
6012 Points ∼79% +3%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
5848 Points ∼77% 0%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
5819 Points ∼77%
2560x1440 Port Royal Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (425 - 8032, n=114, last 2 years)
4844 Points ∼100% +47%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
3531 Points ∼73% +7%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
3445 Points ∼71% +5%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
3286 Points ∼68%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Average of class Gaming
  (1925 - 43077, n=187, last 2 years)
26330 Points ∼100% +28%
Aorus 5 KB
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
22138 Points ∼84% +8%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
21748 Points ∼83% +6%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
21542 Points ∼82% +5%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
21480 Points ∼82% +5%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
21338 Points ∼81% +4%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
20535 Points ∼78%

Enquanto a potência da CPU está - como já explicado - acima da média, a velocidade da GPU fica um pouco atrás da concorrência. O Omen 15-en0375ng traz a traseira nos testes do 3DMark, mas a diferença é muitas vezes marginal e subjetivamente quase imperceptível. O mesmo se aplica à queda sutil da taxa de quadros no testeWitcher 3 (cerca de 1 hora @FHD/Ultra), que simula uma carga 3D mais longa

05101520253035404550556062606160616061606160616061606061606060606060596059605960605959596058595958585759595859595859595960595960595960596059606060605960606060605960606061606060605959596060606059606059606060606059606060606059606060606060606060605960606060606159596060615961606060606060605959596060606060606059606060596060605960606060606060606060616060606060606060596061606060606060596060606059606060606060596060606060606059606059606060596060606060596060596059605960605960596059606059606059605960595958595960596059596059605960595959605960596059605959605960596059605960596060596059606059596059605960596059605960605959605960596059596059595859605960586060605959605959595960596059596059586059586059596059605959605960595960596059596059596059595959605959595960595959596059595959595959595959595959595859595958595959595959595959595959595958605859595958595958585859585959585959585959585959585959585958595859585958595859585959585859585958585958595858585958585858585757565958585857585857585858575858585858585858585858575858595858585957595857585858575858575657585858575857585758575858585758585758585758575858585758585756585857585757575857585758575857585758575857575757585757585758575857575857585758575657575758575757585757575757575857575757575757575757575857575757585757575757585758575757575758585758575857585857585758585758585857585857575757595758585857585858585857585858585758585858585858585858585858585858585858585857585958585858585858585758585858585858585858595858585859585858585858585958585858585858585758585859585858595858595859585859585858585958585958585958595859585858585958595858585858595859585958595858595859585958585958585958595858595958585958595858595859595858595958595858585858595859585958595859585957585758575758575858575857585858585758575958595858585958595858595858585959585859585958585859585959585958595859595959585958595958595859585958595857575957585958585858595859585958585858595858585859585958595859595859595858585858595858585858585857595858595858585759585858585858595759585858585858585858585758595859585959585958595859585957585958585858585958585959585959595859595958595958585958595859595958595757595859585958585958595959595859595958595959595958595859585958585959595859595859595858595958585859595959595959595959595959595959595959595958595958585959596059605959595959595959595859595958595959595859585959595959595859595960595858595758585958585958595959595958585959585858575859585959585959595860595959585958595958595959585959585959585958585959595859595858595958585858595859585858585858585758595857595858585858595859585859585959585958595958595859595958595859585859585957595858595858595858585859585859585859585958595859585858595859585858595859585859585858585858585958595859585958585859585858595959585958595959585959585959595959595960586059595959595959595959595959585959586059595958596059595958595959585958595859595959595959585959595959595959605959595959595958595959585959595859595959595959595958595959595959595959595959595959595960595859595959595959595959595959595958585959585959595859595859595959585959595959585960595959595960595960595959605859585959605959595959585959595959595959595959595959595959595959595959595960586059595959605960595960595960595959605959595959595959595959595859585958585859585858585958595859595958585958595958595859585859585959595858585958595859585859585958595859585858585758575858585858585858595858585858585859585859585959585958595858595959595958605859585959585958595958585858595958596059595859595859595958595958595958595858585959585858595859575858595859595860595959595959585959595959595959595959585959595858585958585859575858595859585958585959595959596059595959595959595959535856565657565656565656565656565556565656565656575656565657565656565656565655555756575656565657565656565656565656565556565554555554545555545555555455545455545555545554555554555554555455555455555354555455555555545455545555555455555455555455555655555457555655555655565555565555565555565555555655555655555655555554555655555555555655565556565556555656555655565556555656555656565655565656565656555656565656565656565656555656555656565556565656565656555656565655565656555656555655565656555656555656555755565655555655565656565556565555555756565655565756565656565656565656565656565656565656565656565556555756565657565657565657565656565656575657565756575756575657565757565756575657565757565756575756575657575657565757565757565757565757565756575756575756565757575657565757565756575756575657575657565757565756575756575657565756575657565756575657565756565756555656565756565657565657565656565656565756565756565656575656575656575656565656565756575656565756565756565657565657565657565556565656565556565655565656555655555656555556565655555656565655555655555555555455555454555454545656565655565656555656565655555655555555565555565555555555565555555555565555565556565556555556555657575656575757575657575756575756565657575657575756575657575657575656575657565756575656575756575657565756565657565657565756575557575756575656555655575756555757565656575756565756565756575655565656575657565656575556565656565656555555575556565656565655565655565556555555565556555655555556565655555656555556555655565655565656565556565656565657565756565656565657565656575657565655565656565756565657565656565656575557565656565756565656565656565657565656565756565656565656565656555656555656565656575656565657565657565657565656565656565656565655555655565556555656565656565657565656575657575657565756565756575657565757575756575757575756575757565757565757575657565757565757565757565757575657575656575657565757565757575757575656575757575757575757575757575757575756575757575757575757575757575757575757575757575757575757575757575857575756575758565757575756575756585757575756575757575758575758575757585757585757585757585757585756565757565758575757575757575856585757575657575756585757575757575757575758575857575758585757575857575758575758575758565856575757575958585858585858585858585857585858585858595858585858585858585858585858585858585858585857575857585858575757575757565757575757575758575757575657585757575657575758575757575757575757585758575857585757585758575756575757575857585758575758575858575758575858585757585757575758575757575658565758575757575758575757575757565757575857585757585758575857575857585758575758575758575857585757585758575758575757575758575757575757575757565756575656555757565656565758575657575657575756575657575757575757585755575657565657575657565756585657575857585857585758575858585758585858575958575858585857595858585758575757575857575858585858575858585758585858575858575657575858585958585859585858585958585857575758585758565859585959595859595859585958585958595958595859585958595859595859585958595858595859585858585958585958585858585858595859585958585958595859595859585858595859585958595859585958595858595858585958585859585858585958585857585757575858575858575758575857585857585757575758575757575757575656575756575756575756575757575757575757585757575758575757575758575757575757585757575857575758575757585758575757575856575757575757575758575756575757565756565657565656565556565555555555555555555555545555555555555455555555555554555554555455545554555455545554555554545554555455545455545554545554545453535452535354525452535253545353535353535353545353535353535353525453535353535452535354535352535353535353515353525354535353545353535354535453535453535453535354535353535353545353535352545353545354535354535453525353545353545353545353545354535354535453535354535454535453545354545354545354545354545353545353545354535453545352545453535453Tooltip
HP Omen 15-en0375ng GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G: Ø57.4 (51-62)
3DMark 11 Performance
18798 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
38655 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
14526 pontos
3DMark Time Spy Score
6161 pontos
Ajuda

Desempenho do jogo

A combinação de Ryzen 7 4800H e GeForce RTX 2060 é rápida o suficiente para jogar a maioria dos jogos atuais suavemente com 1.920 x 1.080 pixels e detalhes máximos. Somente jogos muito exigentes e/ou pouco otimizados, tais como Watch Dogs Legion, Dirt 5 e Cyberpunk 2077, solte o FPS Avg abaixo da marca de 40

The Witcher 3
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
Average of class Gaming
  (42.1 - 242, n=154, last 2 years)
136 fps ∼100% +27%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i5-10300H
124.8 fps ∼92% +17%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
107 fps ∼79%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
105 (90min - 115max) fps ∼77% -2%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
105 fps ∼77% -2%
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Average of class Gaming
  (24.3 - 123, n=194, last 2 years)
76.7 fps ∼100% +36%
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i5-10300H
68.3 fps ∼89% +21%
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
60.5 (51min - 68max) fps ∼79% +7%
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H
59.1 (49min) fps ∼77% +5%
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
58.8 (48min) fps ∼77% +4%
Aorus 5 KB
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-10750H
57 (47min) fps ∼74% +1%
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, R7 4800H
56.4 fps ∼74%
baixo média alto ultra
GTA V (2015) 165 159 127 70.8 fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 107 56.4 fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 123 115 109 104 fps
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 91.5 81.9 68.8 fps
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) 83 73 fps
Battlefield V (2018) 102 93.1 fps
Borderlands 3 (2019) 61.9 48.1 fps
Valorant (2020) 177 fps
Crysis Remastered (2020) 52.9 40 fps
FIFA 21 (2020) 163 161 fps
Watch Dogs Legion (2020) 66 36 fps
Dirt 5 (2020) 59.2 38.7 fps
Assassin´s Creed Valhalla (2020) 53 46 fps
Call of Duty Black Ops Cold War (2020) 62.2 57.1 fps
Yakuza Like a Dragon (2020) 71.8 64.1 fps
Immortals Fenyx Rising (2020) 54 51 fps
Cyberpunk 2077 (2020) 45.3 38.8 fps

Emissões

Emissões sonoras

O controle do ventilador deixa uma impressão decente quando ocioso e durante atividades simples (escritório, web, etc.). Embora possa haver pequenos surtos de vez em quando, os ventiladores geralmente ficam parados, o que leva a uma operação silenciosa. Sob carga, porém, o ventilador de 15 polegadas atrai claramente a atenção. 48 dB(A) no teste Witcher 3 é semelhante ao nível de ruído da competição, que atinge 47 a 51 dB(A)

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.341.235.93839.52534.836.933.335.9383146.244.143.143.245.64030.832.527.628.630.65034.743.623.624.8386332.336.131.925.438.68030.83728.219.436.310026.530.420.218.330.412530.129.918.817.936.316030.827.417.917.634.62003125.421.522.13125031.526.317.417.435.331531.227.21313.934.940030.623.811.111.333.750031.624.410.510.535.463034.325.510.51038.480033.225.210.310.139.6100033.62610.310.439.6125034.926.710.710.640.6160034.927.511.110.940.920003530.611.211.240.4250039.124.711.611.841.5315031.519.812.312.340.9400027.817.412.612.336500023.814.612.712.632.5630021.11412.712.629.9800018.713.112.912.726.61000017.212.812.812.822.31250016.112.512.512.418.61600015.911.711.711.714.7SPL45.336.924.424.250.6N4.62.40.60.67.2median 31median 25.2median 12.5median 12.3median 35.3Delta4.65.21.91.84.4hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseHP Omen 15-en0375ng

Barulho

Ocioso
24 / 25 / 37 dB
Carga
45 / 51 dB
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 24 dB(A)
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Aorus 5 KB
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
i5-10300H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
-2%
-6%
-2%
-8%
-6%
-8%
off / environment *
24
25
-4%
30.2
-26%
25
-4%
25
-4%
30.7
-28%
26.6 (23 - 31, n=164, last 2 years)
-11%
Idle Minimum *
24
26
-8%
30.2
-26%
25
-4%
26
-8%
30.7
-28%
28.6 (23 - 42, n=164, last 2 years)
-19%
Idle Average *
25
30
-20%
30.2
-21%
29
-16%
30
-20%
30.7
-23%
30.3 (23 - 44, n=164, last 2 years)
-21%
Idle Maximum *
37
32
14%
30.2
18%
34
8%
34
8%
30.7
17%
34.1 (23 - 57, n=163, last 2 years)
8%
Load Average *
45
46
-2%
40
11%
44
2%
53
-18%
36.6
19%
45.2 (27.1 - 63, n=164, last 2 years)
-0%
Witcher 3 ultra *
48
48
-0%
49
-2%
49
-2%
51
-6%
47
2%
Load Maximum *
51
48
6%
49
4%
49
4%
56
-10%
50.9
-0%
53 (40.8 - 66.6, n=164, last 2 years)
-4%

* ... smaller is better

Temperatura

O desenvolvimento da temperatura do chassi varia muito. Enquanto a parte inferior da caixa aquece até mais de 50 °C (122 °F)em alguns lugares sob carga máxima, a parte superior só atinge um máximo de 42 °C (107,6 °F) - umataxamoderada. Debaixo do capô, o processador em particular aquece. Após 60 minutos de testes de estresse com as ferramentas Furmark e Prime95, o Ryzen 7 4800H ficou confortável a cerca de 86 °C (186,8 °F). O GeForce RTX 2060 permaneceu visivelmente mais frio com pouco menos de 70 °C (158 °F). Os valores no teste Witcher 3 podem ser vistos na primeira captura de tela

O Witcher 3
O Witcher 3
Teste de estresse
Teste de estresse
Topo de carga completa
Topo de carga completa
Carga completa abaixo
Carga completa abaixo
 39 °C41 °C42 °C 
 38 °C42 °C39 °C 
 30 °C32 °C33 °C 
Máximo: 42 °C
Médio: 37.3 °C
53 °C54 °C50 °C
48 °C48 °C33 °C
32 °C29 °C28 °C
Máximo: 54 °C
Médio: 41.7 °C
alimentação elétrica  55 °C | Temperatura do quarto 20 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-900
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.3 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 33.6 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 40.1 °C / 104 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 54 °C / 129 F, compared to the average of 42.9 °C / 109 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.6 °C / 92 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 38.7 °C / 102 F, compared to the device average of 33.6 °C / 92 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (35 °C / 95 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 29 °C / 84.2 F (-6 °C / -10.8 F).
HP Omen 15-en0375ng
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Acer Predator Triton 300 PT315-52-79LP
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Aorus 5 KB
i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Lenovo Legion 5 15IMH05H
i5-10300H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
-14%
4%
-21%
-11%
2%
-8%
Maximum Upper Side *
42
51
-21%
42.9
-2%
55
-31%
50
-19%
46.3
-10%
47.6 (33.4 - 62, n=167, last 2 years)
-13%
Maximum Bottom *
54
64
-19%
49.9
8%
65
-20%
49
9%
44.4
18%
52.1 (32.5 - 66, n=167, last 2 years)
4%
Idle Upper Side *
28
29
-4%
27.8
1%
32
-14%
35
-25%
28.1
-0%
31.1 (23 - 46, n=167, last 2 years)
-11%
Idle Bottom *
29
32
-10%
27
7%
34
-17%
31
-7%
29.4
-1%
32.8 (24 - 46, n=167, last 2 years)
-13%

* ... smaller is better

Alto-falante

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs203840.12535.938.53143.243.24028.629.85024.826.66325.428.38019.425.410018.320.612517.931.916017.643.820022.15225017.462.531513.965.240011.366.850010.570.16301069.280010.166.1100010.469.9125010.670.8160010.968.4200011.265.6250011.867.2315012.370.2400012.372.1500012.672.6630012.670.9800012.760.81000012.867.41250012.470.51600011.773.2SPL24.281.6N0.654.5median 12.3median 67.4Delta1.87.138.43935.536.644.347.829.934.241.839.126.830.32426.316.61915.928.721.141.618.949.715.756.813.959.41262.511.566.211.270.811.270.51168.711.166.711.466.811.467.711.568.712.969.313.164.414.360.814.475.413.582.212.879.712.379.511.863.72585.50.658.4median 12.8median 66.71.56.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Omen 15-en0375ngSchenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP Omen 15-en0375ng audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 28% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 13% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Schenker XMG Core 15 GK5NR0O audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 62% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Gerenciamento de energia

Absorção de energia

Para um caderno de jogos, o consumo de energia está dentro dos limites. O Omen 15-en0375ng é relativamente frugal com 4 a 22 watts em modo ocioso, o que promete bons tempos de funcionamento da bateria. Mesmo sob carga, as taxas de consumo são geralmente melhores do que as da concorrência. Há muitas indicações de que o Ryzen 7 4800H é mais eficiente em termos energéticos do que seus equivalentes da Intel - graças ao moderno processo de fabricação (7 vs 14 nm)

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.1 / 0.1 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 4 / 9 / 22 Watt
Carga midlight 102 / 182 Watt