data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6b02e/6b02e8cfc357619688e1124bac29fec8e5052547" alt="Teaser"
惠普 EliteBook X G1a 14 AI 评测:配备 AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 的超强商务笔记本电脑
Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 首次亮相。
AMD Zen 5 CPU 使 EliteBook X G1a 14 AI 成为一款动力强劲的笔记本电脑,尤其是对于商务子笔记本电脑而言,无需牺牲电池续航时间或人体工学设计。不过,对于一台 14 英寸的机器来说,重量可能有点重,而显示屏选项仅限于 sRGB 和 60 Hz。Allen Ngo, 👁 Allen Ngo (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 🇺🇸 🇫🇷 ...
结论 - 性能优先于其他功能
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 CPU 使 EliteBook X G1a 14 AI 有别于其他 14 英寸商务笔记本电脑。对于那些希望获得比一般 U 系列子笔记本更强性能的用户或内容创作者来说,EliteBook X G1a 14 AI 的性能在同尺寸、同类别笔记本中非常出色,值得投资。舒适的按键和可观的电池续航时间使该系统比预期更适合旅行者使用,因为它配备了高速的 HX 系列处理器。
虽然该系统比看上去要快,但也比看上去要重一些。大多数 U 系列替代产品,如 联想 ThinkPad X1 Carbon 13 或华硕 ExpertBook P5相比,EliteBook X G1a 14 AI 明显更轻,显示屏选项也更多。缺乏广域网功能可能会让某些依赖该功能的用户望而却步,而内容创作者可能会考虑采用 OLED 面板,以获得 P3 色彩和更高的刷新率。此外,尽管 EliteBook X 的起售价超过 2000 美元,而且它是一款高端商务机,但其标准有限保修期仅为一年而非三年,这也令人感到遗憾。
Pros
Cons
价格和供应情况
惠普现已开始销售EliteBook X G1a 14,Ryzen AI 7 1200p IPS 配置的起价为 2100 美元,Ryzen AI 9 HX 1880p OLED 配置的起价为 2750 美元。另外,亚马逊(Amazon)的部分 SKU起价为 2100 美元。
可能的替代品比较
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Height | Display |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 ⎘ AMD Radeon 890M ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: $2,488.20 List Price: 2200 USD | 1.5 kg | 13.2 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI IPS | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA Intel Core i5-1335U ⎘ Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $829.99 HP EliteBook 840 G10 14" Not... 2. $749.99 HP EliteBook 640 G10 Busines... 3. $999.00 HP EliteBook 840 G10 14" Tou... List Price: 1669€ | 1.3 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI IPS | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE Intel Core Ultra 7 258V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 140V ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $1,399.00 Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Ge... 2. $1,729.00 Lenovo Gen 12 ThinkPad X1 Ca... 3. $1,479.99 Lenovo Gen 11 ThinkPad X1 Ca... List Price: 2700 Euro | 982 g | 16 mm | 14.00" 2880x1800 243 PPI OLED | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 Intel Core Ultra 7 165U ⎘ Intel Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: $1,669.18 List Price: 2279 USD | 1.5 kg | 17.1 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI IPS | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Intel Core Ultra 7 258V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 140V ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $1,099.00 EXCaliberPC [2024] ASUS Expe... 2. $1,249.99 ASUS ExpertBook P5 Copilot+ ... List Price: 1500€ | 1.3 kg | 16.5 mm | 14.00" 2560x1600 216 PPI IPS LED | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Intel Core Ultra 5 226V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 130V ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | List Price: 1200 EUR | 1.3 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" 2880x1800 243 PPI OLED |
高端 EliteBook X G1a 14 是EliteBook 1040 系列 的直接继承者,因为惠普正在改变命名规则,以方便用户理解。在这种情况下,"X "取代了 "1000","14 "取代了代表英寸的 "40","a "代表 AMD,而 "G1 "则代表采用新名称的第一代产品。
我们的测试机是中间配置,配备 Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375、32 GB LPDDR5x 内存和 1200p IPS 显示屏,售价约为 2200 美元。其他配置有配置较低的 Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 或价格更高的 1800p OLED 触摸屏。该机型是为数不多的配备 Zen 5 HX 系列 PRO 处理器的 14 英寸商务笔记本电脑之一。
该领域的替代产品包括其他高端 14 英寸办公笔记本电脑,如联想 ThinkPad X1 Carbon,戴尔Latitude 7450 2-in-1, 或华硕 ExpertBook P5 。
(2025 年 2 月 25 日更新:OLED 面板具有 120 Hz 和 P3 色彩,而 IPS 面板仅限于 60 Hz 和 sRGB)。
更多惠普评论:
» 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
规格
案例 - 一个熟悉的新名称
亮灰色的铝合金机身对于现有的 EliteBook 用户来说应该很容易辨认。即使是在显示屏周围,它也能防止扭曲和弯曲,给人留下深刻的第一印象,但按压外盖中心时仍会出现一些翘曲。
与即将上市的 EliteBook 1040 相比,它在外观上有几处不同,包括边缘和边角更锋利、更平整,底盖上的通风栅格更大,扬声器栅格经过重新设计,而且使用了更少的螺丝,使维修更加方便。这些微小的变化使机器变得更加时尚。
该机型比即将推出的 EliteBook 1040 G10 更小更重,手感更绵密。事实上,这是一款较重的 14 英寸蛤壳机,比竞争对手的 ThinkPad X1 Carbon 13 代.
连接性
与旧机型相比,该机型将 USB-A 端口换成了 USB-C 端口。这一改变允许在设备的任意一侧充电,而 EliteBook 1040 G10 只能沿左侧边缘充电。
需要注意的是,三个 USB-C 端口中只有两个支持 Thunderbolt 4 或 40 Gbps 的速度。
网络摄像头
500 万像素网络摄像头的分辨率低于 OmniBook Ultra 14 上的 900 万像素传感器。 OmniBook Ultra 14.但对于会议或视频流来说,图像质量还是令人满意的。红外和物理快门均为标配。
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/717f2/717f2857009cd4a0572c41f4f3c306ab0b526d68" alt="ColorChecker"
可持续性
惠普宣称外盖采用了 80% 的可回收铝材,键帽采用了 50% 的可回收塑料,扬声器采用了 30% 的可回收海洋塑料,塑料边框采用了 20% 的可回收食用油,散热解决方案采用了 50% 的可回收铜。包装也是纸和纸板,只有交流适配器周围有一点塑料。
配件和保修
零售包装盒中除了常规的文件和交流适配器外,没有其他任何额外物品。
遗憾的是,美国的标准保修期只有一年,而不是我们所期待的 Elite 系列旗舰机型的三年。
输入设备 - 最舒适的尺寸之一
键盘
键盘采用 GS Mark complaint 键盘设计,符合人体工程学原理,带来最佳的键入体验。键程相对较深,为 1.5 毫米,反馈均匀且比联想 IdeaPad 或戴尔 XPS.铿锵声一般,也不会过于高亢。
触摸板
与去年的设计相比,点击板稍宽(12.5 x 8 厘米对 12 x 8 厘米),尽管外形尺寸只有 14 英寸,但却给人一种宽敞的感觉。输入点击时的反馈清晰而安静,是笔记本电脑中点击体验较好的产品之一。不过,有些用户可能还是更喜欢老式的 TrackPoint 和专用鼠标键,如 ThinkPad T14s 第 6 代取而代之的是
显示屏 - 就价格而言可能更强
有以下两种显示选项:
- 1920 x 1200,哑光,IPS,400 nits,100% sRGB,60 Hz,非触摸屏
- 2880 x 1800,亮面,OLED,400 nits,100% P3,120 Hz,触摸屏
我们设备上的 1200p 面板属于中端产品,刷新率仅为 60 Hz,黑白和灰白响应时间较慢。因此,鬼影现象特别明显,体验不如ExpertBook P5 上的 144 Hz IPS 面板流畅。用户可能会考虑使用具有更广泛显示功能的 ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13。
对于满足 sRGB 色彩的室内用户来说,亮度和图像质量还算不错。买家不应期望该机型具有 HDR 兼容性或最佳的多媒体播放体验。
|
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 442.8 cd/m²
Contrast: 2013:1 (Black: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.92 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.89, calibrated: 1.31
ΔE Greyscale 7.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.1
64% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
93.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
62.6% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.22
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI LG Philips LGD07A1, IPS, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA CMN1435, IPS, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE ATNA40YK20-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 120 Hz | Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 BOE NV140WU, IPS, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X NE140QDM-NX4, IPS LED, 2560x1600, 14", 144 Hz | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Samsung ATNA40YK11-0 (SDC4181), OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 90 Hz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 4% | 39% | 16% | 10% | 40% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 62.6 | 67.7 8% | 99.5 59% | 76.5 22% | 70.8 13% | 99.9 60% |
sRGB Coverage | 93.2 | 88.1 -5% | 100 7% | 100 7% | 98 5% | 100 7% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 64 | 69.8 9% | 97.1 52% | 76 19% | 71.6 12% | 97.6 53% |
Response Times | 5% | 95% | 30% | 29% | 98% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 55.8 ? | 54.8 ? 2% | 2.4 ? 96% | 35.65 ? 36% | 36.3 ? 35% | 0.8 ? 99% |
Response Time Black / White * | 30.5 ? | 28.3 ? 7% | 1.9 ? 94% | 23.35 ? 23% | 23.4 ? 23% | 0.8 ? 97% |
PWM Frequency | 240 ? | 60 ? | ||||
Screen | 14% | -22% | 8% | 21% | 287% | |
Brightness middle | 442.8 | 343 -23% | 407 -8% | 333 -25% | 457 3% | 500 13% |
Brightness | 412 | 330 -20% | 410 0% | 326 -21% | 457 11% | 499 21% |
Brightness Distribution | 87 | 92 6% | 99 14% | 85 -2% | 95 9% | 97 11% |
Black Level * | 0.22 | 0.19 14% | 0.27 -23% | 0.12 45% | 0.01 95% | |
Contrast | 2013 | 1805 -10% | 1233 -39% | 3808 89% | 50000 2384% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.92 | 3 49% | 4.9 17% | 2.46 58% | 4.9 17% | 3.55 40% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.46 | 7 33% | 9.1 13% | 4.58 56% | 8.5 19% | 6.38 39% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.31 | 0.7 47% | 4.7 -259% | 1.31 -0% | 1.7 -30% | 2.55 -95% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.6 | 5.4 29% | 2.3 70% | 2.1 72% | 5.7 25% | 2.2 71% |
Gamma | 2.22 99% | 2.14 103% | 2.26 97% | 2.2 100% | 2.25 98% | 1.94 113% |
CCT | 6728 97% | 7079 92% | 6310 103% | 6578 99% | 7647 85% | 6405 101% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 8% /
10% | 37% /
13% | 18% /
13% | 20% /
20% | 142% /
207% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
30.5 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15.3 ms rise | |
↘ 15.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 82 % 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 | ||
55.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 25.3 ms rise | |
↘ 30.5 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. » 92 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.7 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 8600 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
性能 - 禅 5 主宰
测试条件
在运行以下基准测试之前,我们将 MyHP 设置为性能模式。MyHP 中的两个电源配置文件(Smart Sense 和 Performance)分别与 Windows 的平衡和性能配置文件相关联。与旧版本的 MyHP 不同,更改其中一个设置将自动更改另一个设置。
处理器
与英特尔选项更为常见的大多数其他 14 英寸商务笔记本电脑相比,Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 的 CPU 性能大幅提升了约 2 倍。与英特尔 Lunar Lake 或 Raptor Lake-U 相比,Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 运行在更高的功率包络线上,优势显而易见。
从 Ryzen AI 9 HX SKU 降级到 Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360选项,预计性能会受到多达 35% 的影响。 联想 ThinkPad T14s 6 代.两种处理器之间的性能差异相当大。
Cinebench R15 Multi Loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 6.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
CPU Performance Rating | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 -3! | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 -4! | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE -4! |
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE |
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE |
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 |
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 |
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 |
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen2-20TA000DGE | |
HP Dragonfly Pro 2023 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 Gen 6 21M3002KGE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 5 21MC003QGE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
Asus ZenBook Duo OLED UX8406CA | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9 |
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 6.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
Performance Rating | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU |
AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU |
AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
压力测试
在启动 Prime95 压力时,CPU 会提升至 3.6 GHz 和 65 W,几秒钟后由于热限制又降至 3.1 GHz 和 50 W。这一观察结果与下文功耗部分的结果一致。因此,CPU 的最大提升性能是不可持续的。
在性能模式下运行《赛博朋克 2077》时,核心温度稳定在 67 摄氏度,而在OmniBook Ultra14 上则为 84 摄氏度。 OmniBook Ultra 14 而使用类似 Zen 5 CPU 的 OmniBook Ultra 14 则为 84 C。
CPU 平均时钟 (GHz) | GPU 时钟 (MHz) | CPU 平均温度 (°C) | |
系统闲置 | -- | -- | 33 |
Prime95 压力 | 3.0 | -- | 76 |
Prime95 + FurMark Stress | 3.3 | 1483 | 76 |
赛博朋克 2077》压力(平衡配置文件) | 0.7 | 2418 | 60 |
赛博朋克 2077》压力(性能配置文件) | 0.9 | 2272 | 67 |
系统性能
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
WebXPRT 3: Overall
WebXPRT 4: Overall
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Total
PCMark 10 / Score | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU |
PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
CrossMark / Overall | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
CrossMark / Productivity | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
CrossMark / Creativity | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
WebXPRT 3 / Overall | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
WebXPRT 4 / Overall | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 / Total | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 |
* ... smaller is better
PCMark 10 Score | 7578 points | |
Help |
AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 |
AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 |
AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (n=1) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA |
* ... smaller is better
DPC 延迟
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA | |
Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE | |
Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI |
* ... smaller is better
存储设备
我们的设备配有 Kioxia XG8而不是去年 EliteBook 1040 G10 上的三星 MZ9L4512HBLU,传输速率明显更快。传输速率稳定在 6900 MB/s,而三星 MZ9L4512HBLU 的传输速率几乎只有它的一半。
* ... smaller is better
Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
图形处理器性能
Radeon 890M Radeon 890M 是目前笔记本电脑上速度最快的集成解决方案之一,与即将推出的 Radeon 780M或 680M分别提升了 15% 至 30%。它比去年的 Arc 8 以及最新的 弧 140V 系列更具竞争力。
降到 Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 配置,而不是我们的 Ryzen AI 9 选项,需要使用稍慢的 Radeon 880M.
在大多数设置为中低分辨率的情况下,现代游戏可在原生 1080p 分辨率下进行,但由于前面提到的黑白响应时间较慢,这款商务笔记本的游戏性能并不理想。
电源配置文件 | 图形分数 | 物理得分 | 综合得分 |
性能模式 | 9810 | 27793 | 3389 |
均衡模式 | 9411 (-4%) | 26051 (-6%) | 3208 (-5%) |
电池电量 | 8239 (-16%) | 24569 (-12%) | 3013 (-11%) |
降至平衡模式(又称智能感应模式)对性能的影响很小,如下表Fire Strike 所示。
3DMark 11 Performance | 15443 points | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 38099 points | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 8980 points | |
3DMark Time Spy Score | 3997 points | |
Help |
* ... smaller is better
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands | |
1280x720 Lowest Preset (DX12) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (139.5 - 172.1, n=5) | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
1920x1080 Low Preset (DX12) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (80 - 88.3, n=5) | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
1920x1080 Medium Preset (DX12) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (53.8 - 62.4, n=5) | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
1920x1080 High Preset (DX12) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (35.9 - 41.8, n=5) | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 | |
1920x1080 Badass Preset (DX12) | |
HP OmniBook Ultra 14 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (28.1 - 34.1, n=5) | |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI | |
Lenovo ThinkPad E14 G6 | |
Dell Latitude 9440 2-in-1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra FPS Chart
low | med. | high | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
GTA V (2015) | 164.5 | 154.1 | 79.5 | 33.3 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 153.6 | 127.7 | 46.6 | 44.8 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 85.5 | 45.2 | 32.9 | |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 65.1 | 54.9 | 42.2 | |
Far Cry 5 (2018) | 98 | 59 | 54 | 52 |
Strange Brigade (2018) | 195.7 | 79.5 | 67.8 | 56.5 |
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands (2022) | 80 | 53.8 | 35.9 | 28.1 |
F1 22 (2022) | 101.6 | 94.5 | 71.6 | 19 |
Baldur's Gate 3 (2023) | 41.1 | 33.6 | 28.5 | 27.9 |
Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty (2023) | 50.5 | 39.6 | 30.9 | 26.8 |
排放量
系统噪音
Noise Level
Idle |
| 24.4 / 24.4 / 24.5 dB(A) |
Load |
| 25.4 / 43.1 dB(A) |
![]() | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI Radeon 890M, Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, Kioxia XG8 KXG80ZNV1T02 | HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA Iris Xe G7 80EUs, i5-1335U, Samsung MZ9L4512HBLU-00BMV | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE Arc 140V, Core Ultra 7 258V, SK hynix PCB01 HFS001TFM9X179N GL | Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 Graphics 4-Core, Ultra 7 165U, Micron 2550 512GB | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Arc 140V, Core Ultra 7 258V, Western Digital PC SN5000S SDEQNSJ-1T00 | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Arc 130V, Core Ultra 5 226V, Micron 2550 512GB | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | -2% | -1% | -3% | 4% | -12% | |
off / environment * | 24 | 23.1 4% | 23.2 3% | 23.03 4% | 24.1 -0% | 25 -4% |
Idle Minimum * | 24.4 | 23.1 5% | 23.2 5% | 23.53 4% | 24.1 1% | 25 -2% |
Idle Average * | 24.4 | 23.1 5% | 23.2 5% | 23.53 4% | 24.1 1% | 26 -7% |
Idle Maximum * | 24.5 | 23.1 6% | 23.2 5% | 23.53 4% | 24.1 2% | 29 -18% |
Load Average * | 25.4 | 35.3 -39% | 29.9 -18% | 38.54 -52% | 31.2 -23% | 40 -57% |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 39.3 | 43.3 -10% | 38.2 3% | 31.7 19% | 40 -2% | |
Load Maximum * | 43.1 | 41.1 5% | 40.5 6% | 38.21 11% | 31.2 28% | 41 5% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 37.3 |
* ... smaller is better
温度
在运行高负荷时,表面温度在中心温度最高,热点可达 36 摄氏度。这比即将上市的 EliteBook 1040 G10的温度低了近 10 摄氏度,尽管它们的性能差异很大。
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36 °C / 97 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 34.2 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.3 °C / 76 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) 3: The average temperature for the upper side is 30.9 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 29.5 °C / 85 F for the class Office.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 27.6 °C / 81.7 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 °C / 0 F).
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Radeon 890M | HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA Intel Core i5-1335U, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, Intel Arc Graphics 140V | Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 Intel Core Ultra 7 165U, Intel Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, Intel Arc Graphics 140V | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, Intel Arc Graphics 130V | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | -13% | -14% | -14% | -11% | -15% | |
Maximum Upper Side * | 36 | 40.5 -13% | 42.3 -18% | 41.2 -14% | 41.6 -16% | 41 -14% |
Maximum Bottom * | 34.2 | 45.8 -34% | 40.1 -17% | 45 -32% | 43.2 -26% | 45 -32% |
Idle Upper Side * | 25 | 25.5 -2% | 27.3 -9% | 27.2 -9% | 25.7 -3% | 26 -4% |
Idle Bottom * | 25.6 | 26.1 -2% | 28.3 -11% | 26.2 -2% | 25.3 1% | 28 -9% |
* ... smaller is better
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 6% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2021 M1 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (4.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
能源管理
耗电量
由于采用了要求更高的处理器,因此功耗普遍高于大多数其他 14 英寸商务笔记本电脑。 ThinkPad X1 Carbon 13 代.当运行游戏等高负荷负载时,功耗会高达 76 W,而上述联想 X1 Carbon 13 的功耗仅为 35 W。
Off / Standby | ![]() ![]() |
Idle | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Load |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Key:
min: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, Radeon 890M, Kioxia XG8 KXG80ZNV1T02, IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA i5-1335U, Iris Xe G7 80EUs, Samsung MZ9L4512HBLU-00BMV, IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, SK hynix PCB01 HFS001TFM9X179N GL, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 Ultra 7 165U, Graphics 4-Core, Micron 2550 512GB, IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, Western Digital PC SN5000S SDEQNSJ-1T00, IPS LED, 2560x1600, 14" | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Core Ultra 5 226V, Arc 130V, Micron 2550 512GB, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 39% | 44% | 45% | 30% | 35% | |
Idle Minimum * | 6.5 | 2.8 57% | 4.7 28% | 2.23 66% | 3.9 40% | 5 23% |
Idle Average * | 8.7 | 6.1 30% | 5.7 34% | 5.36 38% | 8.9 -2% | 6 31% |
Idle Maximum * | 10.3 | 6.3 39% | 6.1 41% | 6.8 34% | 9.6 7% | 10 3% |
Load Average * | 75.7 | 48.9 35% | 29.8 61% | 51.2 32% | 43.4 43% | 36 52% |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra external monitor * | 73.1 | 34.1 53% | 34.6 53% | 41.8 43% | 38.2 48% | |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 76.2 | 35.3 54% | 29.5 61% | 42.8 44% | 41.6 45% | |
Load Maximum * | 100.7 | 65.9 35% | 60.1 40% | 69.9 31% | 64.1 36% | 60 40% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 38.2 |
* ... smaller is better
Power Consumption Cyberpunk / Stress Test
Power Consumption external Monitor
电池寿命
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, Radeon 890M, 74.5 Wh | HP EliteBook 1040 G10 818N7EA i5-1335U, Iris Xe G7 80EUs, 51 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 13 21NS0010GE Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, 57 Wh | Dell Latitude 7450 2-in-1 Ultra 7 165U, Graphics 4-Core, 57 Wh | Asus ExpertBook P5 P5405-NZ0102X Core Ultra 7 258V, Arc 140V, 63 Wh | Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU Core Ultra 5 226V, Arc 130V, 65 Wh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -31% | -23% | -23% | 14% | -12% | |
Reader / Idle | 1272 | |||||
WiFi v1.3 | 852 | 587 -31% | 658 -23% | 660 -23% | 973 14% | 753 -12% |
H.264 | 764 | 741 | ||||
Load | 130 | 86 | 173 | |||
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra 150cd | 94 |
笔记本检查评级
HP EliteBook X G1a 14 AI
- 02/25/2025 v8
Allen Ngo
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.