惠普 EliteBook 840 G4 (7200U, 全高清) 笔记本电脑简短评测
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
Size Comparison
SD Card Reader | |
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD | |
Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD | |
HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD | |
Fujitsu LifeBook U747 |
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD (jseb) | |
Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 | |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD (jseb) |
|
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 346 cd/m²
Contrast: 402:1 (Black: 0.86 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.64 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 11.24 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
80% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
52% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
57.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
80.7% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
55.8% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.62
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD AUO123D, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE N140HCA-EAB, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 B140QAN01.5, , 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 LG LP140WF3, , 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 AUO1136, , 2560x1440, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD Chi Mei CMN14C0, , 1920x1080, 14" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | -24% | 21% | 10% | 21% | -11% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 55.8 | 41.6 -25% | 69 24% | 66.1 18% | 67.9 22% | 48.93 -12% |
sRGB Coverage | 80.7 | 61.9 -23% | 95.1 18% | 84.8 5% | 96.8 20% | 73.7 -9% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 57.7 | 43.06 -25% | 69.6 21% | 62 7% | 70 21% | 50.5 -12% |
Response Times | -28% | -22% | 4% | -17% | -10% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 39 ? | 41.6 ? -7% | 46.4 ? -19% | 36 ? 8% | 46.4 ? -19% | 43 ? -10% |
Response Time Black / White * | 23 ? | 34 ? -48% | 28.8 ? -25% | 23.2 ? -1% | 26.4 ? -15% | 25 ? -9% |
PWM Frequency | 204 ? | |||||
Screen | 23% | 39% | 33% | 38% | 4% | |
Brightness middle | 346 | 306 -12% | 327 -5% | 291 -16% | 327 -5% | 366 6% |
Brightness | 317 | 287 -9% | 311 -2% | 296 -7% | 316 0% | 336 6% |
Brightness Distribution | 86 | 88 2% | 88 2% | 84 -2% | 87 1% | 87 1% |
Black Level * | 0.86 | 0.3 65% | 0.25 71% | 0.32 63% | 0.35 59% | 0.65 24% |
Contrast | 402 | 1020 154% | 1308 225% | 909 126% | 934 132% | 563 40% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 8.64 | 6.2 28% | 6.1 29% | 4.3 50% | 4.39 49% | 10.26 -19% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 13.58 | 13.6 -0% | 12.2 10% | 7.5 45% | 7.27 46% | |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 11.24 | 5.8 48% | 8.8 22% | 4.3 62% | 4.69 58% | 11.51 -2% |
Gamma | 2.62 84% | 2.04 108% | 2.18 101% | 2.31 95% | 2.15 102% | 2.4 92% |
CCT | 12530 52% | 6277 104% | 6172 105% | 6529 100% | 7101 92% | 12725 51% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 52 | 39.62 -24% | 61.56 18% | 55.46 7% | 62.52 20% | 47 -10% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 80 | 61.44 -23% | 94.88 19% | 84.77 6% | 96.71 21% | 74 -7% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -10% /
7% | 13% /
27% | 16% /
25% | 14% /
27% | -6% /
-1% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
23 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 6 ms rise | |
↘ 17 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 48 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20 ms rise | |
↘ 19 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 55 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM not detected | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3486 points | |
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4352 points | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4572 points | |
Help |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD Samsung SSD PM851 256 GB MZNTE256HMHP | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -10% | 12% | -50% | 9% | -56% | |
Read Seq | 1819 | 1155 -37% | 1760 -3% | 504 -72% | 1649 -9% | 497.8 -73% |
Write Seq | 1263 | 1076 -15% | 1666 32% | 497.8 -61% | 1265 0% | 241.4 -81% |
Read 512 | 922 | 811 -12% | 832 -10% | 396.7 -57% | 1252 36% | 396 -57% |
Write 512 | 804 | 862 7% | 1064 32% | 283.4 -65% | 1244 55% | 241.8 -70% |
Read 4k | 61.4 | 55.5 -10% | 53.2 -13% | 35.73 -42% | 53.3 -13% | 27.02 -56% |
Write 4k | 157.1 | 134.6 -14% | 167.4 7% | 87.8 -44% | 159.9 2% | 82.6 -47% |
Read 4k QD32 | 513 | 496.2 -3% | 630 23% | 399.1 -22% | 559 9% | 388.5 -24% |
Write 4k QD32 | 410.2 | 425.4 4% | 533 30% | 249.7 -39% | 376.7 -8% | 242.8 -41% |
3DMark 11 Performance | 1525 points | |
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 50497 points | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5621 points | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 697 points | |
Help |
low | med. | high | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 40.5 | 24.3 | 19.8 | 6.4 |
Battlefield 4 (2013) | 30.7 | 24.5 | 15.7 | |
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 12.9 |
Noise Level
Idle |
| 31 / 31 / 31 dB(A) |
Load |
| 33.5 / 33.7 dB(A) |
| ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min: , med: , max: Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 31 dB(A) |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620 | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | 6% | -2% | 8% | 3% | -6% | |
off / environment * | 31 | 28 10% | 28.9 7% | 28.2 9% | 29.1 6% | 31.2 -1% |
Idle Minimum * | 31 | 28 10% | 28.9 7% | 28.2 9% | 29.1 6% | 31.2 -1% |
Idle Average * | 31 | 28 10% | 28.9 7% | 28.2 9% | 29.1 6% | 32.1 -4% |
Idle Maximum * | 31 | 29.4 5% | 30.1 3% | 28.2 9% | 29.1 6% | 33.1 -7% |
Load Average * | 33.5 | 31.4 6% | 39.2 -17% | 31.2 7% | 32.6 3% | 36.2 -8% |
Load Maximum * | 33.7 | 34.6 -3% | 39.2 -16% | 33 2% | 37.8 -12% | 37.8 -12% |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.4 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 27.4 °C / 81.3 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.6 °C / 81.7 F (+0.2 °C / 0.4 F).
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (66 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 0.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 23% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (13.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 30% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.52 / 0.72 Watt |
Idle | 2.9 / 5.6 / 8.15 Watt |
Load |
30.6 / 31 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 2560x1440, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 1920x1080, 14" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -2% | -44% | -19% | -56% | -6% | |
Idle Minimum * | 2.9 | 3.21 -11% | 4.64 -60% | 4.11 -42% | 6.3 -117% | 3.8 -31% |
Idle Average * | 5.6 | 6.15 -10% | 8.93 -59% | 7.87 -41% | 9.4 -68% | 6.3 -13% |
Idle Maximum * | 8.15 | 6.82 16% | 9.12 -12% | 8.74 -7% | 10.1 -24% | 6.8 17% |
Load Average * | 30.6 | 28.5 7% | 42.2 -38% | 30.2 1% | 33.3 -9% | 34.4 -12% |
Load Maximum * | 31 | 34.5 -11% | 47.3 -53% | 32.4 -5% | 49.5 -60% | 28.3 9% |
* ... smaller is better
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 51 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, 51 Wh | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 45.6 Wh | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 46 Wh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -19% | -33% | -28% | -43% | -18% | |
Reader / Idle | 1155 | 787 -32% | 782 -32% | 530 -54% | 1020 -12% | |
H.264 | 591 | 623 5% | 454 -23% | 490 -17% | 339 -43% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 571 | 438 -23% | 417 -27% | 430 -25% | 309 -46% | 453 -21% |
Load | 184 | 110 -40% | 93 -49% | 117 -36% | 131 -29% | 146 -21% |
Pros
Cons
全新的惠普EliteBook 840 G4基本上只是前代机型G3的Kaby Lake处理器更新。机身的尺寸和品质在竞争中都不落下风,只有屏幕转轴发出的碎裂似的怪声和触控版按键的噪音有些影响它的整体印象。内部组件的易于维护是它的另一个优势,例如升级内存只需要很简单的操作。我们依然很喜欢它的输入设备,特别是键盘。
这台14寸商务笔记本电脑在性能或者散热噪音控制方面都没有让我们失望。这台设备十分安静,也不会变得太热,同时英特尔酷睿 i5-7200U可以完全发挥性能潜力。惠普也提高了它的电池容量,带来了接近10小时的续航时间。
优秀的机身,充沛的性能,低发热噪音——第四代的惠普EliteBook 840本可以是一台十分优秀的商务笔记本电脑。但这受到了较差的TN屏幕带来的负面影响,这样的屏幕对于一台售价1500欧元(约11015人民币)的设备让人难以理解。
惠普对EliteBook的改动很小从接口就可以看出来。你可以得到办公所需的所有重要接口,不过它没有搭配未来将更重要的Thunderbolt 3接口。
它的最大问题还是在于全高清TN屏幕。尽管亮度和分辨率都说得过去,但这块面板在其他的方面都很难让人满意。有限的可视角度范围在实际使用中会造成很大不便。这样一块屏幕不应该出现在一台售价1500欧元(约11015人民币)的商务设备中。如果你对EliteBook 840感兴趣的话,则需要选择搭配IPS屏幕的机型。我们不推荐这台搭配TN屏幕的测试机型。
注:本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本,阅读完整的英文评测,请点击这里。
HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD
- 05/26/2017 v6 (old)
Andreas Osthoff