惠普 Elite x3 平板手机 (包含 Lap Dock) 简短评测
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 268 cd/m²
Contrast: 1072:1 (Black: 0.25 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.12
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 333 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.12
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 357.1 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 357.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 357.1 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 15 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 15 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
| HP Elite x3 | |
| Huawei Mate 9 | |
| Microsoft Lumia 950 XL | |
| Lenovo Moto Z | |
| LG G6 | |
| Apple iPhone 7 Plus | |
| Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus | |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.3 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.1 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
HP Elite x3 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 9.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 58% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 74% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Mate 9 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 58% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 75% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.06 / 0.27 Watt |
| Idle |  0.86 / 1.46 / 1.59 Watt |
| Load |
8.1 / 9.35 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP Elite x3 4150 mAh | Microsoft Lumia 950 XL 3340 mAh | Huawei Mate 9 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 Plus 2915 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z 2600 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -90% | -4% | 31% | 11% | -4% | 29% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.86 | 2.85 -231% | 0.78 9% | 0.68 21% | 0.62 28% | 0.77 10% | 0.66 23% |
| Idle Average * | 1.46 | 2.95 -102% | 2.13 -46% | 1.13 23% | 1.43 2% | 2.04 -40% | 1.01 31% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.59 | 3.26 -105% | 2.17 -36% | 1.16 27% | 1.48 7% | 2.24 -41% | 1.09 31% |
| Load Average * | 8.1 | 8.92 -10% | 6.32 22% | 4.69 42% | 5.52 32% | 4.69 42% | 3.97 51% |
| Load Maximum * | 9.35 | 9.39 -0% | 6.49 31% | 5.24 44% | 10.47 -12% | 8.66 7% | 8.34 11% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP Elite x3 4150 mAh | Microsoft Lumia 950 XL 3340 mAh | Huawei Mate 9 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus 3500 mAh | Apple iPhone 7 Plus 2915 mAh | LG G6 3300 mAh | Lenovo Moto Z 2600 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -22% | 23% | 23% | 13% | 21% | 7% | |
| Reader / Idle | 2205 | 1078 -51% | 1538 -30% | 1565 -29% | 1835 -17% | 1789 -19% | 1371 -38% |
| H.264 | 760 | 611 -20% | 947 25% | 742 -2% | 813 7% | 779 3% | 724 -5% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 422 | 369 -13% | 758 80% | 736 74% | 587 39% | 692 64% | 407 -4% |
| Load | 185 | 179 -3% | 219 18% | 275 49% | 225 22% | 252 36% | 320 73% |
Pros
Cons
惠普Elite x3是一款大屏平板手机，惠普将其宣传为平板电脑不是没有理由。作为成功的商务工具，它结合了功能强大的设计和功能。它针对卫生部门，物流业，POS业，工业而设计，为那些主要需要轻松访问其数据，并希望尽可能使用少的移动设备的工作人员而制造。
对于后者，惠普Elite x3做得非常好，因为它不仅可以用作智能手机，而且还可以作为一个功能有限的笔记本。在测试过程中，将其用作笔记本电脑的想法并不完全令人信服。显示屏幕相当暗，色彩再现可以更好。但是，我们喜欢将Elite x3变成多功能演示工具的附加端口。Lap Dock中的大容量电池也是一个加分项。
惠普Elite x3是一个以强大的硬件为基础的平板手机，代表了许多企业领域的、成功业务解决方案。
惠普Elite x3没有任何真正的缺点，因为它将全面的安全功能与相对安全的移动平台——Windows 10 Mobile相结合。对于大众消费领域，该操作系统不是很实用，而中型企业和大型企业很容易将设备集成到现有的IT基础设施中进行管理。此外，它还经常提供安全更新。但即使对于小企业和个体经营者来说，惠普也可以通过Workspace为云计算而作为一个比较实惠的入门，这样就不需要购买和维护更多的硬件。这是由各种服务和保修产品折中选择。起步价大约是 790 英镑。
然而，作为一个大众消费产品，我们只能为核心Windows粉丝们，推荐这款机器。
HP Elite x3
- 06/02/2017 v6 (old)
Daniel Schmidt
Price comparison
