Notebookcheck

Courte critique du PC portable de jeu HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070)

Géant silencieux. L’Omen 17t est un portable équilibré. Ses composants restent stables, son écran 144 Hz G-Sync est l’un des meilleurs du marché, et il gère efficacement la chauffe et le bruit. Avec son prix compétitif, le Omen 17t est l’un des meilleurs appareils du secteur du jeu portable.

HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 (Omen Gamme)
Carte graphique
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop) - 8192 Mo, Processeur: 1443 MHz, Mémoire: 2002 MHz, GDDR5 @ 2003,4 MHz (8013,6 effective), bus 256 bit, coeurs CUDA 2048, Nvidia GeForce Game Ready Driver 398.82
Mémoire
16384 Mo 
, 2x 8 Go DDR4-2666 SODIMM
Écran
17.3 pouces 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPP, AU Optronics AUO309D, IPS, 144 Hz, brillant: non
Carte mère
Intel HM370
Disque dur
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, 512 Go 
, SSD PCIe NVMe 512 Go + HDD 1 To 7200 tr/min HGST, 1406 Go libres
Carte son
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Connexions
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Encoche de Sécurité Kensington, Connectique audio: jacks écouteur et micro dédiées, Lecteur de cartes mémoires: SD / SDHC / SDXC plein format, Brightness Sensor
Réseau
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2
Taille
Hauteur x Largeur x Profondeur (en mm): 33 x 423 x 304
Batterie
86 Wh, 8 mAh Lithium-Ion
Système d'exploitation
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Appareil photo
Webcam: HD
Fonctionnalités additionnelles
Haut-parleurs: 2x 2 Watt, Bang & Olufsen avec HP Audio Boost, Clavier: chiclet, Rétroéclairage du clavier: oui, HP Audio, HP CoolSense, HP Omen Center, 12 Mois Garantie
Poids
3.654 kg, Alimentation: 727 g
Prix
1 750 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

428 mm 314 mm 58 mm 4.6 kg428 mm 334 mm 53 mm 4.5 kg423 mm 322 mm 40 mm 4.3 kg425 mm 327 mm 36.3 mm 4.9 kg428 mm 314 mm 30 mm 3.7 kg423 mm 304 mm 33 mm 3.7 kg424 mm 332 mm 29.9 mm 4.4 kg419 mm 287 mm 30 mm 2.9 kg418 mm 287 mm 24.9 mm 3 kg408 mm 295.5 mm 26.6 mm 4.1 kg
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X9 DT
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
202 MB/s ∼100% +148%
Eurocom Q8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
183 MB/s ∼91% +124%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.7 - 202, n=238)
92.7 MB/s ∼46% +14%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
81.59 MB/s ∼40%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
79 MB/s ∼39% -3%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78 MB/s ∼39% -4%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26 MB/s ∼13% -68%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Aorus X9 DT
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
241 MB/s ∼100% +181%
Eurocom Q8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
209 MB/s ∼87% +143%
Average of class Gaming
  (13.4 - 257, n=236)
111 MB/s ∼46% +29%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
89 MB/s ∼37% +4%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
88 MB/s ∼37% +3%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
85.84 MB/s ∼36%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
32 MB/s ∼13% -63%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
694 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
693 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
681 MBit/s ∼98% +6%
Eurocom Q8
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
648 MBit/s ∼93% +1%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
644 MBit/s ∼93%
Aorus X9 DT
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
639 MBit/s ∼92% -1%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
606 MBit/s ∼87% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=249)
605 MBit/s ∼87% -6%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Eurocom Q8
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
682 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
662 MBit/s ∼97% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
630 MBit/s ∼92%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
624 MBit/s ∼91% -1%
Aorus X9 DT
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
601 MBit/s ∼88% -5%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
589 MBit/s ∼86% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (144 - 730, n=249)
558 MBit/s ∼82% -11%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
512 MBit/s ∼75% -19%
304.4
cd/m²
342.3
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
319.3
cd/m²
343.6
cd/m²
322.6
cd/m²
298.7
cd/m²
317.8
cd/m²
308.4
cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité
AU Optronics AUO309D
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 343.6 cd/m² Moyenne: 319.7 cd/m² Minimum: 16.19 cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 87 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 343.6 cd/m²
Contraste: 1011:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.74 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6.1, calibrated: 3.49
ΔE Greyscale 3.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
90% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 58% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.36
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
AU Optronics AUO309D, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Alienware 17 R4
TN LED, 17.3, 2560x1440
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
AU Optronics B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B), IPS, 17.3, 3840x2160
Asus G752VS-BA338T
AU Optronics B173HAN01.1 (AUO119D), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Eurocom Q8
AU Optronics B173QTN01.0, Dell P/N WJGD4, TN LED, 17.3, 2560x1440
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
IPS, 17.3, 3840x2160
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Chi Mei N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN WLED, 17.3, 1920x1080
Aorus X9 DT
AUO B173HAN03.0 (AUO309D), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
CMN N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN, 17.3, 1920x1080
Response Times
-49%
-170%
-133%
-7%
-206%
-48%
-13%
50%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
17.6 (10, 7.6)
30 (18.8, 11.2)
-70%
50 (24.4, 25.6)
-184%
36 (18, 18)
-105%
21.6 (12.4, 9.2)
-23%
45.6 (22.8, 22.8)
-159%
28 (16.4, 11.6)
-59%
18.4 (9.2, 9.2)
-5%
8 (4.4, 3.6)
55%
Response Time Black / White *
10 (4.8, 5.2)
12.8 (10.8, 2)
-28%
25.6 (11.2, 14.4)
-156%
26 (14.4, 11.6)
-160%
9 (6.8, 2.2)
10%
35.2 (9.2, 26)
-252%
13.6 (11.8, 1.8)
-36%
12 (6.8, 5.2)
-20%
5.6 (3.8, 1.8)
44%
PWM Frequency
1042 (29)
25000 (14)
26000 (19)
Screen
-26%
5%
-27%
-69%
-1%
7%
19%
17%
Brightness middle
343.6
402.3
17%
343
0%
307
-11%
367.9
7%
399.1
16%
273
-21%
280
-19%
240
-30%
Brightness
320
372
16%
328
3%
300
-6%
346
8%
360
13%
273
-15%
262
-18%
248
-22%
Brightness Distribution
87
86
-1%
84
-3%
88
1%
84
-3%
81
-7%
90
3%
86
-1%
83
-5%
Black Level *
0.34
0.62
-82%
0.29
15%
0.32
6%
0.55
-62%
0.4
-18%
0.26
24%
0.22
35%
0.22
35%
Contrast
1011
649
-36%
1183
17%
959
-5%
669
-34%
998
-1%
1050
4%
1273
26%
1091
8%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.74
5.6
-50%
4.01
-7%
5.53
-48%
9.86
-164%
4.78
-28%
3.52
6%
1.78
52%
2.14
43%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
5.33
9.8
-84%
6.03
-13%
11.54
-117%
17.56
-229%
7.65
-44%
6.34
-19%
3.91
27%
5.04
5%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.49
4.43
-27%
2.09
40%
1.54
56%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.7
4.7
-27%
4.7
-27%
7
-89%
12.4
-235%
3.8
-3%
3.11
16%
0.74
80%
1.62
56%
Gamma
2.36 93%
2.14 103%
2.4 92%
2.48 89%
2.09 105%
2.03 108%
2.43 91%
2.43 91%
2.28 96%
CCT
6388 102%
7519 86%
6451 101%
8103 80%
11064 59%
7288 89%
6999 93%
6494 100%
6846 95%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58
53.7
-7%
88
52%
58
0%
52.5
-9%
86.9
50%
76
31%
60
3%
77
33%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
90
82.2
-9%
100
11%
90
0%
80.5
-11%
100
11%
100
11%
92
2%
100
11%
Moyenne finale (programmes/paramètres)
-38% / -30%
-83% / -24%
-80% / -45%
-38% / -59%
-104% / -35%
-21% / -1%
3% / 14%
34% / 22%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Temps de réponse de l'écran

Le temps de réponse d'un écran mesure la rapidité à laquelle l'écran est capable de changer une couleur pour une autre. Un temps de réponse élevé se traduit par une image floutée pour les objets en mouvement. Les joueurs bénéficieront de faibles latences d'affichage en jeu.
       Temps de réponse noir à blanc
10 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 4.8 ms hausse
↘ 5.2 ms chute
L'écran montre de bons temps de réponse, mais insuffisant pour du jeu compétitif.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 8 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (25.1 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
       Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80%
17.6 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 10 ms hausse
↘ 7.6 ms chute
L'écran montre de bons temps de réponse, mais insuffisant pour du jeu compétitif.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.9 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (40 ms) de tous les appareils testés.

Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion)

Afin d'abaisser la luminosité de l'écran, certains ordinateurs portables font varier très rapidement le rétroéclairage entre éteint et allumé. La fréquence à laquelle le rétroéclairage s'éteint et se rallume est normalement fixée à une valeur qui permet de rendre la variation indétectable à l'œil nu? Si la fréquence est trop basse, certaines personnes peuvent être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire, des maux de tête ou même percevoir les variations.
Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) non décelé

En comparaison, 51 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 9418 (minimum : 43 - maximum : 142900) Hz dans le cas où une MDI était active.

HP Omen 17t - CPU-Z : CPU.
CPU-Z : CPU.
HP Omen 17t - CPU-Z : Caches.
CPU-Z : Caches.
HP Omen 17t - CPU-Z : carte-mère.
CPU-Z : carte-mère.
HP Omen 17t - CPU-Z : mémoire vive.
CPU-Z : mémoire vive.
HP Omen 17t - CPU-Z : SPD.
CPU-Z : SPD.
HP Omen 17t - GPU-Z.
GPU-Z.
HP Omen 17t - HWiNFO64.
HWiNFO64.
 
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920930940950960970980990100010101020103010401050Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
205 Points ∼94% +24%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (163 - 177, n=85)
172 Points ∼79% +4%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
Intel Core i5-8300H
171 Points ∼78% +4%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
165 Points ∼76% 0%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
165 Points ∼76%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
162 Points ∼74% -2%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼74% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (77 - 212, n=496)
155 Points ∼71% -6%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
144 Points ∼66% -13%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
140 Points ∼64% -15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1408 Points ∼32% +31%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1378 Points ∼31% +28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1129 Points ∼26% +5%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (863 - 1251, n=92)
1109 Points ∼25% +3%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1074 Points ∼25%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
Intel Core i5-8300H
818 Points ∼19% -24%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 2022, n=499)
814 Points ∼19% -24%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
770 Points ∼18% -28%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼17% -31%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
707 Points ∼16% -34%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
2.33 Points ∼95% +17%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.99 Points ∼82%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1.89 - 2, n=40)
1.967 Points ∼81% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
1.89 Points ∼77% -5%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.84 Points ∼75% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼75% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.71 - 2.38, n=421)
1.69 Points ∼69% -15%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1.63 Points ∼67% -18%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1.55 Points ∼64% -22%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
15.76 Points ∼47% +22%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
15.05 Points ∼45% +17%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.88 Points ∼39%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
12.5 Points ∼37% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (9.54 - 13.5, n=41)
12.2 Points ∼36% -5%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
8.47 Points ∼25% -34%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.19 Points ∼24% -36%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
7.59 Points ∼23% -41%
Average of class Gaming
  (1.13 - 21.4, n=522)
7.42 Points ∼22% -42%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
6561 Points ∼61%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (6236 - 6645, n=25)
6479 Points ∼60% -1%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
6062 Points ∼56% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5923 Points ∼55% -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (8.85 - 8872, n=423)
4827 Points ∼45% -26%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
4330 Points ∼40% -34%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
4286 Points ∼40% -35%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
34184 Points ∼69%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (29664 - 35307, n=25)
33163 Points ∼67% -3%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
29330 Points ∼59% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
25561 Points ∼51% -25%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
23052 Points ∼46% -33%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22434 Points ∼45% -34%
Average of class Gaming
  (19.7 - 48808, n=423)
18221 Points ∼37% -47%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
353.153 s * ∼4% -136%
Average of class Gaming
  (117 - 2331, n=206)
324 s * ∼4% -116%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
215.4 s * ∼3% -44%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (125 - 181, n=6)
158 s * ∼2% -5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
149.85 s * ∼2%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (0.7 - 10832, n=56)
4055 Seconds * ∼18% -674%
Average of class Gaming
  (-1 - 207000, n=2924)
3196 Seconds * ∼14% -510%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
693.994 Seconds * ∼3% -32%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
677.2 Seconds * ∼3% -29%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
545.92 Seconds * ∼2% -4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
524 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
13126
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
34184
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6561
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
79.53 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
12.88 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.99 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
119.22 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1074 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
165 Points
Aide
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
6055 Points ∼93% +1%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5968 Points ∼92%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (5210 - 5968, n=6)
5621 Points ∼86% -6%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5410 Points ∼83% -9%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
5342 Points ∼82% -10%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
5088 Points ∼78% -15%
Average of class Gaming
  (2484 - 6515, n=376)
5023 Points ∼77% -16%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
4623 Points ∼71% -23%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4541 Points ∼70% -24%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
8378 Points ∼88%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
 
8378 Points ∼88% 0%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
8272 Points ∼87% -1%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
8191 Points ∼86% -2%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
7780 Points ∼82% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (2303 - 9529, n=247)
5467 Points ∼57% -35%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
5859 Points ∼96% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5557 Points ∼91%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5111 Points ∼84% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5103 Points ∼84% -8%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
5064 Points ∼83% -9%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (4271 - 5557, n=6)
4962 Points ∼81% -11%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
4498 Points ∼74% -19%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
4437 Points ∼73% -20%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4395 Points ∼72% -21%
Average of class Gaming
  (3638 - 6093, n=394)
4247 Points ∼70% -24%
PCMark 10 - Score
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
6387 Points ∼82% +8%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
6331 Points ∼82% +7%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5939 Points ∼76%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
5465 Points ∼70% -8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (4854 - 5939, n=6)
5414 Points ∼70% -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 7171, n=192)
5190 Points ∼67% -13%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5557 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
8378 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5968 points
Aide
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Alienware 17 R4
SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
Transcend TS1TMTE850
Average Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
 
AS SSD
-29%
-4%
-6%
17%
12%
-84%
-22%
3%
Copy Game MB/s
874.69
573.6
-34%
1033.53
18%
1216.97
39%
958.2
10%
295.55
-66%
969 (547 - 1554, n=32)
11%
Copy Program MB/s
481.13
446.13
-7%
469.95
-2%
445.13
-7%
406.67
-15%
192.94
-60%
420 (206 - 713, n=32)
-13%
Copy ISO MB/s
1080.01
1227.03
14%
1336.93
24%
2144.61
99%
1596.18
48%
412.55
-62%
1644 (917 - 3259, n=32)
52%
Score Total
4142
2072
-50%
2328
-44%
2547
-39%
3056
-26%
3840
-7%
881
-79%
2145
-48%
3963 (2348 - 5316, n=42)
-4%
Score Write
2147
858
-60%
487
-77%
890
-59%
1480
-31%
1579
-26%
254
-88%
916
-57%
1752 (147 - 2992, n=42)
-18%
Score Read
1304
831
-36%
1238
-5%
1112
-15%
1077
-17%
1515
16%
417
-68%
828
-37%
1469 (896 - 2125, n=42)
13%
Access Time Write *
0.047
0.123
-162%
0.033
30%
0.033
30%
0.027
43%
0.035
26%
0.097
-106%
0.038
19%
0.0998 (0.026 - 2.52, n=42)
-112%
Access Time Read *
0.071
0.042
41%
0.049
31%
0.052
27%
0.058
18%
0.043
39%
0.235
-231%
0.042
41%
0.0496 (0.029 - 0.073, n=42)
30%
4K-64 Write
1866.02
671.01
-64%
260.86
-86%
646.46
-65%
1185.29
-36%
1284.54
-31%
172.7
-91%
715.2
-62%
1487 (96.2 - 2716, n=42)
-20%
4K-64 Read
1124.72
620.48
-45%
998.94
-11%
851.25
-24%
744.47
-34%
1231.67
10%
351.41
-69%
654.45
-42%
1227 (664 - 1823, n=42)
9%
4K Write
84.44
113.36
34%
112.06
33%
120.78
43%
138.94
65%
107.92
28%
38.34
-55%
98.92
17%
107 (1.76 - 142, n=42)
27%
4K Read
31.66
35.61
12%
45.64
44%
37.51
18%
49.71
57%
35.57
12%
14.07
-56%
22.23
-30%
49.7 (31.7 - 61, n=42)
57%
Seq Write
1962.09
734.8
-63%
1144.4
-42%
1230.12
-37%
1553.97
-21%
1869.29
-5%
425.71
-78%
1018.64
-48%
1586 (487 - 1991, n=42)
-19%
Seq Read
1472.55
1752.03
19%
1933.89
31%
2236.52
52%
2824.25
92%
2480.96
68%
511.18
-65%
1517.93
3%
1919 (1049 - 2806, n=42)
30%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2367 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2038 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 407.5 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 340.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1284 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1665 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 35.49 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 110.7 MB/s
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
13993 Points ∼62% +18%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
11842 Points ∼52%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
11101 Points ∼49% -6%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
10838 Points ∼48% -8%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (7137 - 12565, n=58)
9708 Points ∼43% -18%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
8405 Points ∼37% -29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼35% -34%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H
7739 Points ∼34% -35%
Average of class Gaming
  (510 - 17501, n=598)
7445 Points ∼33% -37%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
27966 Points ∼55% +31%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (13760 - 25604, n=58)
22405 Points ∼44% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
21380 Points ∼42%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
18349 Points ∼36% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% -29%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
14367 Points ∼28% -33%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=597)
13158 Points ∼26% -38%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
9632 Points ∼19% -55%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H
9266 Points ∼18% -57%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
22240 Points ∼55% +38%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (15718 - 19059, n=56)
17228 Points ∼42% +7%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
16131 Points ∼40%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
14427 Points ∼36% -11%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
11558 Points ∼28% -28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% -29%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=522)
11187 Points ∼28% -31%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H
7576 Points ∼19% -53%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
7059 Points ∼17% -56%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
141451 Points ∼77% +26%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
112332 Points ∼61%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (64973 - 125922, n=51)
99208 Points ∼54% -12%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
95034 Points ∼51% -15%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
81178 Points ∼44% -28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
70020 Points ∼38% -38%
Average of class Gaming
  (5761 - 184578, n=504)
66465 Points ∼36% -41%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H
49254 Points ∼27% -56%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
37915 Points ∼21% -66%
3DMark 11 Performance
17921 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
37519 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
14335 points
Aide
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra
The Witcher 3
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
78.1 fps ∼61% +37%
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
77.4 fps ∼60% +36%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
65 fps ∼51% +14%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
62.9 fps ∼49% +10%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
59.6 fps ∼47% +5%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
59.4 fps ∼46% +4%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (48.2 - 68.4, n=41)
59.1 fps ∼46% +4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
57 fps ∼45%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=291)
49 fps ∼38% -14%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
48.2 fps ∼38% -15%
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
146 fps ∼68% +76%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
117 fps ∼54% +41%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
113.8 fps ∼53% +37%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (83 - 123, n=30)
105 fps ∼49% +27%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
104 fps ∼48% +25%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.1 - 194, n=247)
84.8 fps ∼39% +2%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
83 fps ∼39%
Rise of the Tomb Raider
1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
118.3 fps ∼63% +36%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
109 fps ∼58% +25%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
99 fps ∼53% +14%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
96.4 fps ∼51% +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (79.1 - 103, n=25)
92.3 fps ∼49% +6%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
87 fps ∼46%
Average of class Gaming
  (8.9 - 159, n=168)
68.5 fps ∼36% -21%
1920x1080 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
117.7 fps ∼62% +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (83.2 - 119, n=18)
107 fps ∼57% +4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
103 fps ∼54%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.6 - 189, n=132)
77.5 fps ∼41% -25%
Bas Moyen Élevé Ultra4K
The Witcher 3 (2015) 2681918357fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 25317410387fps
Rocket League (2017) 250250231173fps
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017) 1861279876fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 1408263fps

Degré de la nuisance sonore

Au repos
31.1 / 31.1 / 35 dB(A)
Fortement sollicité
42 / 46.5 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencieux
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
bruyant
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (à 15 cm de distance)   environment noise: 27.8 dB(A)
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
Noise
-10%
-7%
-6%
-2%
-3%
-6%
-21%
off / environment *
27.8
28.2
-1%
29.2
-5%
31
-12%
30
-8%
28
-1%
30
-8%
30
-8%
Idle Minimum *
31.1
35.6
-14%
33.9
-9%
32
-3%
30
4%
28.2
9%
32
-3%
36
-16%
Idle Average *
31.1
35.6
-14%
33.9
-9%
35
-13%
32
-3%
31.8
-2%
33
-6%
37
-19%
Idle Maximum *
35
35.7
-2%
33.9
3%
38
-9%
36
-3%
36.3
-4%
34
3%
43
-23%
Load Average *
42
50.2
-20%
43.8
-4%
42
-0%
43
-2%
46.7
-11%
41
2%
50
-19%
Witcher 3 ultra *
44.5
50.2
-13%
44
1%
43
3%
46.9
-5%
50
-12%
57
-28%
Load Maximum *
46.5
50.2
-8%
53.4
-15%
50
-8%
49
-5%
49.7
-7%
54
-16%
61
-31%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

 40.2 °C42.6 °C39.2 °C 
 33.6 °C44.2 °C34 °C 
 28 °C26.2 °C28.2 °C 
Maximum: 44.2 °C
Moyenne: 35.1 °C
55.8 °C45.8 °C52 °C
36 °C42.4 °C36.4 °C
25.8 °C27.4 °C27 °C
Maximum: 55.8 °C
Moyenne: 38.7 °C
Alimentation (valeur maximale)  57.6 °C | Température ambiante de la pièce 20.4 °C | Fluke 62 Mini
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.1 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.2 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 39.5 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 55.8 °C / 132 F, compared to the average of 42.1 °C / 108 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.5 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.9 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28.2 °C / 82.8 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (+0.6 °C / 1 F).
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
Heat
3%
7%
19%
17%
5%
2%
9%
Maximum Upper Side *
44.2
49.6
-12%
47.6
-8%
39.1
12%
41
7%
43.4
2%
47
-6%
43
3%
Maximum Bottom *
55.8
56
-0%
53.2
5%
42.1
25%
39.3
30%
44
21%
49
12%
55
1%
Idle Upper Side *
31.6
29.6
6%
28.2
11%
27.9
12%
28.8
9%
32.8
-4%
32
-1%
27
15%
Idle Bottom *
35
29.2
17%
28.6
18%
26.1
25%
27.3
22%
34.2
2%
34
3%
29
17%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.440.82534.337.93133.336.34031.933.55033.633.56330.733.38029.730.810029.130.112528.33316027.848.220026.958.125026.665.931526.565.440025.665.350024.964.663025.568.280025.865100024.867.7125024.369.3160024.866.2200024.563.5250023.968.3315023.668.4400023.472.8500023.168.2630023.271.6800023.170.3100002371.11250022.972.61600022.967.9SPL36.481.1N2.753.1median 24.8median 67.7Delta1.64.34542.741.441.632.237.839.245.230.540.629.343.930.154.928.461.426.457.72367.124.972.623.475.120.775.319.876.319.273.518.266.519.272.519.773.31973.917.383.617.18817.384.917.578.317.477.317.378.417.273.717.37317.271.81776.216.878.730.492.91.491.9median 18.2median 73.92.72.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.78 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 33% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 62% 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, 4% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (93 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consommation énergétique
Éteint/en veilledarklight 0.44 / 0.69 Watts
Au reposdarkmidlight 17.8 / 24.7 / 29.6 Watts
Fortement sollicité midlight 110 / 178.6 Watts
 color bar
Légende: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
6820HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.3
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.3
Asus G752VS-BA338T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Eurocom Q8
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, TN LED, 2560x1440, 17.3
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY, TN WLED, 1920x1080, 17.3
Alienware 17 R4
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB, TN LED, 2560x1440, 17.3
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Power Consumption
-37%
-19%
-4%
-10%
2%
-44%
-8%
Idle Minimum *
17.8
27.3
-53%
23
-29%
21
-18%
26.3
-48%
15
16%
37.5
-111%
21.6
-21%
Idle Average *
24.7
34.9
-41%
33
-34%
27
-9%
29
-17%
20
19%
37.6
-52%
26.4
-7%
Idle Maximum *
29.6
37.6
-27%
40
-35%
32
-8%
32.3
-9%
26
12%
37.6
-27%
26.6
10%
Load Average *
110
164.4
-49%
94
15%
86
22%
82.4
25%
97
12%
122.4
-11%
95.6
13%
Load Maximum *
178.6
202.5
-13%
228
-28%
206
-15%
170.2
5%
239
-34%
277.4
-55%
199.6
-12%
Witcher 3 ultra *
167.8
177
-5%
165
2%
192
-14%
186
-11%
180.3
-7%
221.7
-32%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Autonomie
Au repos (module WiFi éteint, luminosité au minimum)
4h 28min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 13min
Fortement sollicité (luminosité au maximum)
1h 37min
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 86 Wh
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
6820HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 74.48 Wh
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 88 Wh
Asus G752VS-BA338T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 90 Wh
Eurocom Q8
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 66 Wh
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 51 Wh
Alienware 17 R4
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 99 Wh
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 99 Wh
Aorus X9 DT
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 94.24 Wh
Autonomie de la batterie
-30%
0%
27%
-40%
-25%
-18%
28%
-17%
Reader / Idle
268
242
-10%
323
21%
445
66%
303
13%
276
3%
348
30%
252
-6%
WiFi v1.3
253
160
-37%
218
-14%
293
16%
153
-40%
186
-26%
181
-28%
333
32%
190
-25%
Load
97
55
-43%
91
-6%
96
-1%
38
-61%
69
-29%
117
21%
77
-21%

Points positifs

+ châssis rigide
+ périphériques d'entrée (clavier et boutons de souris dédiés)
+ macros clavier
+ composants équilibrés
+ performances stables
+ ventilateurs plutôt silencieux
+ chauffe bien gérée
+ écran 144 Hz très fluide
+ couleurs de l'écran fidèles et jolies
+ ports nombreux
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ maintenance aisée

Points négatifs

- clavier non RVB
- châssis lourd et encombrant
- moins performant que certaines machines équipées de façon similaire
- Optimus absent
- autonomie moyenne
- haut-parleurs faibles qui manquent de basses
En test : le HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070). Modèle de test aimablement fourni par CUKUSA.
En test : le HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070). Modèle de test aimablement fourni par CUKUSA.

L’Omen 17t est tout d’équilibre. Ses composants se complètent efficacement, permettant à l’ensemble d’être excellent, et de laisser peu de place à la critique. L’écran est lumineux, et ses couleurs fidèles. Le processeur et la carte graphique puissants sont bien adaptés au jeu en Full HD. Le clavier et la qualité de construction sont excellents, et les ports nombreux. Pour couronner le tout, la gestion de la chauffe et du bruit est supérieure à la moyenne dans cette catégorie.

La fonctionnalité-phare de l’appareil reste l’écran 144 Hz. Les écrans à taux de rafraîchissement élevé, par le passé réservés aux portables chers, arrivent peu à peu dans des portables moins chers, et l’Omen 17t illustre très bien la qualité qu’ils peuvent atteindre dans ce segment de prix : alors que le HP Omen 17t n’est pas un laptop à bas prix, il est placé de façon plus agressive que la plupart de ses concurrents, en particulier de ceux équipés d’un écran à taux de rafraîchissement élevé.

Mais l’Omen 17t possède des défauts. En particulier, son autonomie est mauvaise (absence d’Optimus), et les haut-parleurs horribles (à cause de la friture quand le volume est élevé). De plus, le Samsung PM981 principal se comporte bizarrement, mais cela peut être spécifique à notre modèle. HP aurait également dû utiliser la place disponible pour garder le disque optique. Mais tous ces défauts ne sont pas vraiment problématiques pour un portable de jeu.

Au final, le HP Omen 17t est un appareil équilibré qui paraît bien pensé. L’écran 144 Hz est appréciable à ce niveau de prix, et les composants sont généralement capables de profiter pleinement du taux de rafraîchissement élevé de l’écran et de la technologie G-Sync. Le Omen 17t est un bon exemple d’appareil de jeu équilibré, et son prix avantageux le rend intéressant.

L’intégralité de cette critique est disponible en anglais en suivant ce lien.

HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 - 08/21/2018 v6
Sam Medley

Châssis
83 / 98 → 85%
Clavier
88%
Dispositif de pointage
81%
Connectivité
64 / 81 → 79%
Poids
52 / 10-66 → 74%
Autonomie
Écran
90%
Performances en jeu
97%
Performances dans les applications
95%
Chauffe
86 / 95 → 90%
Nuisance sonore
79 / 90 → 88%
Audio
69%
Appareil photo
50 / 85 → 59%
Moyenne
78%
87%
Gaming - Moyenne compensée

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Revues et rapports de ordinateurs portatifs et smartphones, ordiphones > Critiques > Courte critique du PC portable de jeu HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070)
Sam Medley, 2018-08-28 (Update: 2018-08-28)