Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Magyar惠普 EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 笔记本电脑简短评测
HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 (EliteBook Folio 1040 Series)
Processor
Intel Core i5-6300U 2 x 2.4 - 3 GHz, Skylake
Graphics adapter
Intel HD Graphics 520, Core: 300 MHz, 20.19.15.4331 WQHL
Memory
16 GB
, DDR4-2133, 双通道, 板载, 无空余内存槽
Display
14.00 inch 16:9, 2560 x 1440 pixel 210 PPI, AUO1136, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Skylake-U Premium PCH
Storage
Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e, 256 GB
Weight
1.445 kg, Power Supply: 309 g
Price
2600 Euro
Links
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
AUO1136 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 335 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 316.3 cd/m² Minimum: 26 cd/m²Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 324 cd/m²
Contrast: 934:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.39 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 4.69 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96.71% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
62.52% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
70% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.9% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.15
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 2560x1440, IPS | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 2560x1440, IPS | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE 2560x1440, IPS-Panel | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 2560x1440, IPS | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X23ET 2560x1440, | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 1920x1080, IPS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -2% | 1% | -1% | 1% | -2% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 67.9 | 66.7 -2% | 68.7 1% | 67.2 -1% | 68.2 0% | 66.1 -3% |
| sRGB Coverage | 96.8 | 94.7 -2% | 98.1 1% | 95.9 -1% | 98.3 2% | 94.8 -2% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 70 | 68.4 -2% | 70.4 1% | 69.3 -1% | 70.3 0% | 68.3 -2% |
| Response Times | 7% | 6% | -3% | -7% | ||
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 46.4 ? | 44 ? 5% | 35.6 ? 23% | 48 ? -3% | 45 ? 3% | |
| Response Time Black / White * | 26.4 ? | 24 ? 9% | 29.2 ? -11% | 27 ? -2% | 31 ? -17% | |
| PWM Frequency | 220 ? | 220 ? | ||||
| Screen | 6% | -7% | 15% | 6% | 5% | |
| Brightness middle | 327 | 272 -17% | 257 -21% | 380 16% | 355 9% | 274 -16% |
| Brightness | 316 | 268 -15% | 248 -22% | 354 12% | 335 6% | 263 -17% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 95 9% | 94 8% | 81 -7% | 82 -6% | 85 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.35 | 0.32 9% | 0.26 26% | 0.26 26% | 0.28 20% | 0.21 40% |
| Contrast | 934 | 850 -9% | 988 6% | 1462 57% | 1268 36% | 1305 40% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.39 | 2.61 41% | 4.59 -5% | 3.11 29% | 3.75 15% | 3.93 10% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.27 | 6.43 12% | 9.72 -34% | 6.73 7% | 8.58 -18% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.69 | 3.31 29% | 6.38 -36% | 4.35 7% | 4.84 -3% | 5.28 -13% |
| Gamma | 2.15 102% | 2.35 94% | 2.51 88% | 2.37 93% | 2.33 94% | 2.49 88% |
| CCT | 7101 92% | 6360 102% | 6238 104% | 6771 96% | 7536 86% | 7108 91% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 62.52 | 63 1% | 65 4% | 62 -1% | 63 1% | 61 -2% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 96.71 | 95 -2% | 98 1% | 96 -1% | 98 1% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 4% /
4% | 0% /
-4% | 4% /
9% | 0% /
3% | 2% /
3% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
ℹ
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 26.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 6.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 62 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 46.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 30 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. » 78 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
ℹ
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 not detected | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | ||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3305 points | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4058 points | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4241 points | |
Help | ||
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE Samsung SSD SM951a 512GB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVKV512) | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 Samsung SSD PM851 M.2 2280 256GB | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD Samsung SSD PM851 256 GB MZNTE256HMHP | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 Samsung SSD PM851 256 GB MZNTE256HMHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -56% | 2% | -54% | -58% | -55% | |
| Write 4k QD32 | 376.7 | 279.2 -26% | 277 -26% | 191.7 -49% | 242.8 -36% | 265.3 -30% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 559 | 339.6 -39% | 561 0% | 400.9 -28% | 388.5 -31% | 393.3 -30% |
| Write 4k | 159.9 | 86.5 -46% | 139.3 -13% | 110.9 -31% | 82.6 -48% | 101.2 -37% |
| Read 4k | 53.3 | 34.05 -36% | 51.3 -4% | 36.32 -32% | 27.02 -49% | 28.4 -47% |
| Write 512 | 1244 | 304.2 -76% | 1506 21% | 214 -83% | 241.8 -81% | 264.6 -79% |
| Read 512 | 1252 | 299.5 -76% | 1339 7% | 470.8 -62% | 396 -68% | 418.9 -67% |
| Write Seq | 1265 | 308.1 -76% | 1530 21% | 300.7 -76% | 241.4 -81% | 264.3 -79% |
| Read Seq | 1649 | 439.3 -73% | 1778 8% | 518 -69% | 497.8 -70% | 499.9 -70% |
Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e
Sequential Read:
1649 MB/s
Sequential Write:
1265 MB/s
512K Read:
1252 MB/s
512K Write:
1244 MB/s
4K Read:
53.3 MB/s
4K Write:
159.9 MB/s
4K QD32 Read:
559 MB/s
4K QD32 Write:
376.7 MB/s
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1539 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5471 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 842 points | |
Help | ||
| low | med. | high | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 68 | 34.9 | 23.9 | 11.1 |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 47.6 | 27.6 | 22.5 | 6.9 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 9.7 |
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 29.1 / 29.1 / 29.1 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 32.6 / 37.8 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  ECM8000 + Voltcraft SL-451 (15 cm distance) environment noise: 29.1 dB(A) | ||
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 5600U, HD Graphics 5500 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -2% | -1% | -2% | -8% | -5% | |
| off / environment * | 29.1 | 29.1 -0% | 29.2 -0% | 31.2 -7% | 31.2 -7% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 29.1 | 29.1 -0% | 29.2 -0% | 31.2 -7% | 31.2 -7% | 29.6 -2% |
| Idle Average * | 29.1 | 29.1 -0% | 29.2 -0% | 31.2 -7% | 32.1 -10% | 29.6 -2% |
| Idle Maximum * | 29.1 | 29.1 -0% | 29.2 -0% | 31.2 -7% | 33.1 -14% | 32.2 -11% |
| Load Average * | 32.6 | 35.6 -9% | 33.7 -3% | 31.9 2% | 36.2 -11% | 36.4 -12% |
| Load Maximum * | 37.8 | 38.1 -1% | 38.5 -2% | 31.9 16% | 37.8 -0% | 36.4 4% |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 29.5 °C / 85 F for the devices in the class Office.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.2 °C / 110 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 47.1 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.4 °C / 93.9 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-6.7 °C / -12 F).
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.2 °C / 110 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 47.1 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.4 °C / 93.9 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-6.7 °C / -12 F).
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 5600U, HD Graphics 5500 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 2% | 10% | 18% | 17% | 11% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 43.2 | 43.2 -0% | 40.8 6% | 38.2 12% | 37 14% | 35.9 17% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 47.1 | 45 4% | 40.3 14% | 36.5 23% | 37.1 21% | 42.4 10% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 30.5 | 30.2 1% | 27.6 10% | 25.1 18% | 25.3 17% | 28.5 7% |
| Idle Bottom * | 31.5 | 30.6 3% | 28.7 9% | 25.8 18% | 26.6 16% | 29 8% |
* ... smaller is better
Power Consumption
| Off / Standby | 0.22 / 0.6 Watt |
| Idle | 6.3 / 9.4 / 10.1 Watt |
| Load |
33.3 / 49.5 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 6600U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 5600U, HD Graphics 5500 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 21% | 17% | 12% | 29% | 35% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 6.3 | 3.8 40% | 3.8 40% | 5.1 19% | 3.8 40% | 3.2 49% |
| Idle Average * | 9.4 | 7.1 24% | 7.1 24% | 8.5 10% | 6.3 33% | 6.5 31% |
| Idle Maximum * | 10.1 | 7.7 24% | 7.8 23% | 10.1 -0% | 6.8 33% | 7.4 27% |
| Load Average * | 33.3 | 30.2 9% | 36.3 -9% | 35.2 -6% | 34.4 -3% | 25.6 23% |
| Load Maximum * | 49.5 | 44.7 10% | 46 7% | 31 37% | 28.3 43% | 26.1 47% |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 45.6 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 52 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T460s-20FA003GGE 49 Wh | Dell Latitude 14 7000 Series E7470 55 Wh | HP EliteBook 840 G3 T9X59ET#ABD 46 Wh | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G2 42 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 39% | 8% | -2% | 50% | 34% | |
| Reader / Idle | 530 | 942 78% | 833 57% | 1020 92% | 901 70% | |
| H.264 | 339 | 510 50% | 397 17% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 309 | 429 39% | 340 10% | 346 12% | 453 47% | 452 46% |
| Load | 131 | 115 -12% | 62 -53% | 112 -15% | 146 11% | 112 -15% |
Pros
+ 出色的WQHD屏幕，无闪烁
+ 非常优秀的机身品质
+ 轻盈纤薄
+ 非常优秀的键盘
+ 集成LTE模组和免费移动流量
+ 附赠VGA和以太网转接器
+ 非常优秀的性能
Cons
- 一般的电池续航
- 无SD读卡器
- 不支持Thunderbolt 3
- 售价高昂
惠普EliteBook Folio 1040 G3不是一个革新，但考虑到已经十分优秀的前作的话它并没有大幅改变的必要。我们十分喜欢它的机身，但键盘右侧表面的坚固度还需要改进。它的接口得到了更新，不过惠普没能完全发挥USB-C接口的潜能（不支持Thunderbolt 3）。它的另外一个改进的更长键程的键盘，这应该对办公用户帮助较大。我们也很喜欢它明亮的磨砂WQHD屏幕，它没有采用闪烁亮度控制，同时它的SIM卡附带免费的流量。
惠普EliteBook Folio 1040 G3毫无疑问是一台出色的笔记本电脑，不过相比竞争对手它高昂的价格有些让人难以接受。
它较高的功耗影响了电池续航时间。在我们的实际使用无线上网测试中它相比前代产品短了两个半小时。我们并不推荐全高清屏幕机型，因为它采用的是TN屏幕面板。同时它还有一些如电流声，缺少SD读卡器等小问题。它的质保期只有一年，你需要多付140欧元才可以得到常见的三年质保。
这就是它最大的弊端：售价。约2600欧元（约19268人民币）的价位，Folio 1040 G3远超其他同类产品，而它们并不差。如果预算不是问题的话，Folio时分值得考虑，但不得不承认一些竞争对手提供了更高的性价比。
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 Folio 1040 G3
-
04/21/2016 v5.1 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
Office - Weighted Average
Price comparison
