News:

Willkommen im Notebookcheck.com Forum! Hier können sie über alle unsere Artikel und allgemein über Notebook relevante Dinge disuktieren. Viel Spass!

Main Menu

Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by NikoB
 - February 29, 2024, 13:44:49
Testers earn their daily bread. There is no truth here, just like in the courts...
Posted by Gastredner
 - February 29, 2024, 09:12:54
Quote from: RobertJasiek on February 19, 2024, 07:51:32Die Kühlung des HP Omen 16 ist deshalb und wegen des Lärms völlig unzureichend.

Sascha Mölcks Fazit "Stimmiger Gaming-Bolide [...] Klassenüblich hohe Emissionen könnten auf ein moderates Maß gestutzt werden"

ist also falsch, auch weil - wie ich ständig betonen muss - es nicht klassenüblich ist, laut zu sein, sondern verschiedene Notebooks unter Last laut sind oder in manchen Modi ein mittleres Lärmniveau haben.


Ich muss Robert Jasiek Recht geben. Ich habe mir mehrere HP Tests in letzter Zeit durchgelesen und immer schneidet die Kühlung unterdurchschnittlich ab. Und selbst der Durchschnitt bei Gamingnotebooks ist ziemlich mies mit meist über 50db Lautstärke.

Liebe Tester, bitte seid doch kritischer, was das anbelangt. Wenn ich mir Tests von vor über 10 Jahren durchlese, wurden bereits 45db als grenzwertig kritisiert (richtig so!). 10 Jahre sind Lichtjahre in der Entwicklung von Hardware, aber nicht im Hörempfinden! 45db sind heute genauso laut wie vor 10 Jahren. Wenn 45db bei voller Leistung damals als noch akzeptabel bewertet wurden, verstehe ich nicht, warum heute Notebooks mit schlechten Kühlungen und bis zu mehr als doppelt so lauten 58db als "klassenüblich" durchgewunken werden. Eure Tests werden damit überflüssig, wenn sowieso jedes Gerät eine gute bis sehr gute Wertung bekommt, egal wie sehr es den Nutzer anfaucht, wenn man die volle, vollmundig beworbene und sehr teuer bezahlte Leistung abruft.

Im Balanced Mode ist die Lautstärke zwar "nur" 47db, aber die 4080 verbraucht statt 150-175W nur 90W!! Der Gesamtverbrauch des kompletten Computers liegt bei nur 150W! Das ist doch ein Witz? Wozu denn? Warum macht man das Notebooks so dünn und leicht, wenn es offensichtlich völlig überfordert ist, die teuer bezahlte Hardware ausreichend zu kühlen? Was müssen Hersteller eigentlich für einen Mist bieten, damit sie endlich mal durchfallen?
Posted by NikoB
 - February 22, 2024, 13:17:51
Let's begin.

Screen - mediocre contrast and brightness. Mediocre color rendering, but without problems with poisonous oversaturated colors in software that expects sRGB space as input, and this is 99% of software.
Fake 240Hz. The panel is not capable of rendering a picture even at 100Hz, if we average the response time results for B2W and G2G. And of course the idiotic 2.5k resolution is not compatible at the pixel level with 4k and fhd. Which leads to cloudy movies and TV shows on it in fhd resolution. As well as games without DLSS support, which itself is a crutch and still cannot 100% eliminate hardware incompatibility with fhd mode.

CPU. Here again is the old friend 14900HX, as in the just published review of the Razer Blade 16 (2024):
www.notebookcheck.net/Razer-Blade-16-2024-laptop-review-Now-with-super-fast-Samsung-OLED.804677.0.html

Note again the complete discrepancy between the results. And their complete absurdity given the almost identical weight of both models!

HP, supposedly with a constant PL1 equal to a monstrous 130W for laptops, has a shameful drop in the result in Cinebench R15 after several passes to a ridiculous 2750-2800 points. At the same time, the Razer Blade 16 supposedly with PL1=60 (which of course is also a lie by the author) with exactly the same 126-135W produces stable results in the same CBR15 test around 4300 points. Can you believe this with a weight difference of only 100g and almost the same real PL1?

Apparently in one of these two reviews the CPU test results are completely fake. Decide for yourself where...

Please note that the much cheaper HP has 2 TB4 ports out, while the greedy manufacturer Razer only has one port out.

The location of the ports here is much more convenient, although the usb-a 3.2 gen2 port is clearly missing on the left. And of course HP covers itself with shame for an antique 20th century port in 1Gbps RJ45, instead of at least 5Gbps.

The keyboard, like the Razer one, is completely inadequate. Although it is many times more suitable for gaming than the completely disgraceful keyboard in the Razer 16 2024. But both keyboards are completely unsuitable for professional work and therefore both models cannot be recommended as universal models, for this reason alone.

The memory in this model, as in Razer, is quite well tuned in terms of efficiency in comparison with the maximum theoretical for DDR5 5600. What is even more surprising if we return to the monstrous difference in performance of the same 14900HX in both models, on approximately the same the same PL1 levels around real 130W.

From the point of view of games, as I have written more than once, we see that the 4080 is no longer capable of delivering the minimum required 60fps+ in the native screen resolution. Razer's 4090 is still capable of this with new game releases in 2024, but this won't last long either, because... it itself loses to the desktop version (like the 4080) by 1.5 times. It's cheaper to buy a desktop with 4080, which is obviously faster than the mobile 4090.

Despite much lower performance (at the same PL1 level, which is amazing, I emphasize again!) this model has even more noise. I would never believe that a 100g difference in weight could lead to such disastrous results.

Again, I will emphasize the critically dangerous temperatures of the keyboard surface in games on an external monitor, with the screen cover closed - there is a high probability of damage to the electronics of the screen panel, because its critical operating temperature is only 50C. It is better not to close the screen cover in such cases, on all modern "gaming" laptops.

In general, the target audience of such models is unclear.
A model for "poor" gamers who don't have enough for 4090? But those who are able to pay a monstrous $3200 to see less than 60fps in the current 2024 game releases at the native screen resolution? And why do you need this? It's better to buy a desktop with 4080. It will be a much more profitable investment. Although if there is too much easy money in your pocket, then why not?
Posted by RobertJasiek
 - February 19, 2024, 07:51:32
Die 4080 des MSI Vector 16 HX A14V ist in Time Spy Graphics 47% schneller! Die Kühlung des HP Omen 16 ist deshalb und wegen des Lärms völlig unzureichend. Der Preis ist daher auch angesichts der schlechten Verarbeitungsqualität €1300 zu hoch.

Sascha Mölcks Fazit "Stimmiger Gaming-Bolide [...] Klassenüblich hohe Emissionen könnten auf ein moderates Maß gestutzt werden"

ist also falsch, auch weil - wie ich ständig betonen muss - es nicht klassenüblich ist, laut zu sein, sondern verschiedene Notebooks unter Last laut sind oder in manchen Modi ein mittleres Lärmniveau haben.
Posted by Pyo
 - February 19, 2024, 07:09:18
Quadchannel nicht Dualchannel...
Posted by Redaktion
 - February 18, 2024, 23:56:50
HPs Gaming-Laptop wartet mit einem stimmigen Ausstattungsniveau auf: Core i9, RTX 4080, PCIe-4-SSD (1 TB), 32 GB RAM, 2x Thunderbolt 4, QHD-Bildschirm (G-Sync, 240 Hz). Trotz leistungsstarker Komponenten bietet der Rechner - bei den passenden Einstellungen - ein moderates Lärmniveau.

https://www.notebookcheck.com/HP-Omen-16-2024-im-Test-QHD-Gaming-Notebook-mit-Core-i9-und-RTX-4080-fuer-3-200-Euro.802245.0.html