HP EliteBook x360 1040 G7 Review: A Spectre For Professionals

[Redaktion]

Like the HP Dragonfly or Spectre series, the EliteBook x360 1040 G7 is one of the sleekest laptops for its size and category. Internally, however, the old Intel 10th gen Comet Lake-U processor is holding back the system from performing as well as most of the latest Ultrabooks in the market.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-EliteBook-x360-1040-G7-Review-A-Spectre-For-Professionals.526816.0.html

[xpclient]

So HP has dumped the Pointing stick and buttons on the EliteBook too? I am staying away from this crap and going ThinkPad exclusively.

[Bobby]

So HP has dumped the Pointing stick and buttons on the EliteBook too? I am staying away from this crap and going ThinkPad exclusively.

I'm waiting for Lenovo to dump the annoying trackpoint and extra buttons before I ever get a ThinkPad. I want a large trackpad and don't want an annoying nub getting in the way when I type.

[GeneraISoybeans]

So HP has dumped the Pointing stick and buttons on the EliteBook too? I am staying away from this crap and going ThinkPad exclusively.

I'm waiting for Lenovo to dump the annoying trackpoint and extra buttons before I ever get a ThinkPad. I want a large trackpad and don't want an annoying nub getting in the way when I type.

Yeah, I can't agree more. Idk why people still want laptops that have nubs or touchpad buttons. They use up so much space, and since I am a thumb tracker when my fingers are on the keyboard, it's almost impossible to use the touchpad because the damn buttons use up so much space. I bought a Thinkpad a while back because I heard that the keyboards are amazing, and I can agree with that, but I hated the trackpad buttons so much that I ended up returning it. I've been using a MacBook since then, and hey, the keyboard isn't the same as the ThinkPad's, but the trackpad is absolutely amazing.

[thevisi0nary]

Your overall "review score" is not making sense lately.  How the hell is this getting a 91% with a super low watt and very outperformed cpu, no dedicated gpu and horrible igpu, bad DPC latency,  at nearly $2000?? Is all it takes for a high score a display with decent contrast and good speakers?

The 2021 G15 absolutely annihilates this laptop based on your own review, and is several hundred dollars cheaper. Justify this.

[Dorby]

Your overall "review score" is not making sense lately.  How the hell is this getting a 91% with a super low watt and very outperformed cpu, no dedicated gpu and horrible igpu, bad DPC latency,  at nearly $2000?? Is all it takes for a high score a display with decent contrast and good speakers?

The 2021 G15 absolutely annihilates this laptop based on your own review, and is several hundred dollars cheaper. Justify this.

First, the scores don't factor in the devices' prices.

Two, take it with a grain of salt, the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the quality or price/performance ratio of the device. They never have, because it's difficult to quantify and compare different hardware qualities.

Three, Asus Zephyrus may be one the best in its own category, but you can't really objectively compare the two. This particular laptop has been one of the best in its category for a long time. Today there are 2-in-1 laptops that are overall better package, but the EliteBook 14 is still one of the top 5.

If you disagree with this review, go ahead and find another 2-in-1 convertible that weighs 1.35kg, has a 78Wh battery, and a 4K 600nit IPS display option.

[123]

"Spectre for professionals"? Professional laptop with 16:9 screen? Seriously?

[GeneraISoybeans]

"Spectre for professionals"? Professional laptop with 16:9 screen? Seriously?

The entire reason I ditched HP is because they are so stubborn about keeping 16:9. 16:10 is so much better, and it truly does make a humongous difference. I hope that they finally use their sales with their spectre x360 14 and make a 16:10 or even better, a 3:2 business notebook.

[thevisi0nary]

First, the scores don't factor in the devices' prices.

Two, take it with a grain of salt, the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the quality or price/performance ratio of the device. They never have, because it's difficult to quantify and compare different hardware qualities.

Three, Asus Zephyrus may be one the best in its own category, but you can't really objectively compare the two. This particular laptop has been one of the best in its category for a long time. Today there are 2-in-1 laptops that are overall better package, but the EliteBook 14 is still one of the top 5.

If you disagree with this review, go ahead and find another 2-in-1 convertible that weighs 1.35kg, has a 78Wh battery, and a 4K 600nit IPS display option.

So, as long as you have a bright screen and it's light and has good battery life, it doesn't matter that the internals are a pile of s***?
I get that it's hard to compare two different types of devices, the point was that by their own standards there is an inconsistency with rating.

They didn't review the 600 nit option, their unit was sub 400 nits.

The only thing this Elitebook ranks as doing better is contrast ratio, better battery life, and 1lbs lighter. That's despite having a far, FAR worse cpu, ABYSMAL and nearly useless igpu, completely soldered ram, bad dpc latency, a screen that is not even 100% srgb.

And it's more expensive, which is mind boggling. I know, not factored into the review. But it can't help but be said.

If the overall score is going to be arbitrary the way it is here then it shouldn't be used at all. If it's simply too hard to compare slightly different devices (which I agree with) then the score is useless in that sense too, and people should just read the review instead of being potentially misled by scores like this.

[GeneraISoybeans]

First, the scores don't factor in the devices' prices.

Two, take it with a grain of salt, the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the quality or price/performance ratio of the device. They never have, because it's difficult to quantify and compare different hardware qualities.

Three, Asus Zephyrus may be one the best in its own category, but you can't really objectively compare the two. This particular laptop has been one of the best in its category for a long time. Today there are 2-in-1 laptops that are overall better package, but the EliteBook 14 is still one of the top 5.

If you disagree with this review, go ahead and find another 2-in-1 convertible that weighs 1.35kg, has a 78Wh battery, and a 4K 600nit IPS display option.

So, as long as you have a bright screen and it's light and has good battery life, it doesn't matter that the internals are a pile of s***?
I get that it's hard to compare two different types of devices, the point was that by their own standards there is an inconsistency with rating.

They didn't review the 600 nit option, their unit was sub 400 nits.

The only thing this Elitebook ranks as doing better is contrast ratio, better battery life, and 1lbs lighter. That's despite having a far, FAR worse cpu, ABYSMAL and nearly useless igpu, completely soldered ram, bad dpc latency, a screen that is not even 100% srgb.

Wtf are you talking about??? Are going to be playing AAA games on a god damn business thin and light? Who cares about the damn GPU? If you want to play games, then this laptop isn't for you, and you should get or build a proper desktop or get a chungus gaming laptop if you want to game.
As a consumer, I couldn't care less if I even had a 8 year old CPU, if it runs what I need to run, then good. About the soldered ram, yeah, I agree, but who cares if the screen isn't 100%? If I gave you 2 screens, one of them was 100% sRGB and the other was 95%, you wouldn't be able to distinguish jackshit.

[thevisi0nary]

First, the scores don't factor in the devices' prices.

Two, take it with a grain of salt, the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the quality or price/performance ratio of the device. They never have, because it's difficult to quantify and compare different hardware qualities.

Three, Asus Zephyrus may be one the best in its own category, but you can't really objectively compare the two. This particular laptop has been one of the best in its category for a long time. Today there are 2-in-1 laptops that are overall better package, but the EliteBook 14 is still one of the top 5.

If you disagree with this review, go ahead and find another 2-in-1 convertible that weighs 1.35kg, has a 78Wh battery, and a 4K 600nit IPS display option.

So, as long as you have a bright screen and it's light and has good battery life, it doesn't matter that the internals are a pile of s***?
I get that it's hard to compare two different types of devices, the point was that by their own standards there is an inconsistency with rating.

They didn't review the 600 nit option, their unit was sub 400 nits.

The only thing this Elitebook ranks as doing better is contrast ratio, better battery life, and 1lbs lighter. That's despite having a far, FAR worse cpu, ABYSMAL and nearly useless igpu, completely soldered ram, bad dpc latency, a screen that is not even 100% srgb.

Wtf are you talking about??? Are going to be playing AAA games on a god damn business thin and light? Who cares about the damn GPU? If you want to play games, then this laptop isn't for you, and you should get or build a proper desktop or get a chungus gaming laptop if you want to game.
As a consumer, I couldn't care less if I even had a 8 year old CPU, if it runs what I need to run, then good. About the soldered ram, yeah, I agree, but who cares if the screen isn't 100%? If I gave you 2 screens, one of them was 100% sRGB and the other was 95%, you wouldn't be able to distinguish jackshit.

You have trouble reading. I didn't say the scoring is bad because you can't game on this business laptop, the scoring is bad because it's arbitrary and not based on anything consistent. It scores higher for having a higher contrast screen and being lighter with more battery life, while being not just worse but substantially worse in every other category.

This is a criticism of the reviewing not the laptops. Ibrought up the screen not being 100% srgb because they knock harder on that in some reviews and less so in others, hence the inconsistency.

[Dorby]

First, the scores don't factor in the devices' prices.

Two, take it with a grain of salt, the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the quality or price/performance ratio of the device. They never have, because it's difficult to quantify and compare different hardware qualities.

Three, Asus Zephyrus may be one the best in its own category, but you can't really objectively compare the two. This particular laptop has been one of the best in its category for a long time. Today there are 2-in-1 laptops that are overall better package, but the EliteBook 14 is still one of the top 5.

If you disagree with this review, go ahead and find another 2-in-1 convertible that weighs 1.35kg, has a 78Wh battery, and a 4K 600nit IPS display option.

So, as long as you have a bright screen and it's light and has good battery life, it doesn't matter that the internals are a pile of s***?
I get that it's hard to compare two different types of devices, the point was that by their own standards there is an inconsistency with rating.

They didn't review the 600 nit option, their unit was sub 400 nits.

The only thing this Elitebook ranks as doing better is contrast ratio, better battery life, and 1lbs lighter. That's despite having a far, FAR worse cpu, ABYSMAL and nearly useless igpu, completely soldered ram, bad dpc latency, a screen that is not even 100% srgb.

And it's more expensive, which is mind boggling. I know, not factored into the review. But it can't help but be said.

If the overall score is going to be arbitrary the way it is here then it shouldn't be used at all. If it's simply too hard to compare slightly different devices (which I agree with) then the score is useless in that sense too, and people should just read the review instead of being potentially misled by scores like this.

"So, as long as you have a bright screen and it's light and has good battery life"

1. We can agree that these are objectively better. Everyone would prefer a better screen and portability, given equal performance. Thus they are good standards for comparison, whether easily quantifiable or not.

"That's despite having a far, FAR worse cpu, ABYSMAL and nearly useless igpu"

2. A15W U-CPU and a 45W H-CPU are priced similarly, that means they are targeted for different usage. Just like a one person who doesn't need a touchscreen or stylus shouldn't buy a 2-in-1, another person who doesn't need a H-CPU shouldn't buy a gaming laptop.

Unlike the above factors, one processor is not always objectively better than the other, hence they are assorted by classification so that consumers can select them first before choosing a laptop. Therefore they are not standards of comparison in quality

"it doesn't matter that the internals are a pile of s***?"

By this logic, why should anyone buy a laptop when you can build a more powerful desktop for the same cost? Compared to a desktop, gaming laptop internals are an overheating, underperforming, soldered down, expensive pile of s***.

"They didn't review the 600 nit option, their unit was sub 400 nits."

3. Minus the refresh or response time because one is not a gaming laptop,
Comparing FHD, Zephyrus is 300 nit, 30% ARGB, and EliteBook is 400 nit, 60% ARGB and 1000 nit.
Comparing High-Res, Zephyrus is QHD 300 nit, 85% ARGB, and EliteBook is UHD 600 nit, 100% ARGB.

The 144Hz FHD that Asus ROG uses this year is virtually unusable due to its poor specs. So the only viable option other than 300Hz FHD that the Zephyrus G15 doesn't have, is the 165Hz QHD, which is why I mentioned the high-end panel on the EliteBook being much better by comparison.

"If the overall score is going to be arbitrary the way it is here then it shouldn't be used at all."

4. I wholeheartedly agree. Part of the issue is that in a given time period, the entire staff cannot all gather around and examine a review unit until they reach a perfect score than considers all comparable devices, due to a lot of reasons like logistics, schedule and effort. Also there is the issue of accurate retention of comparable information of all devices.

Hence some reviewers end up being far less thorough and more biased than others, which creates a visible problems in non-quantified assessments, final conclusion, and overall scoring.

Another issue I've noticed is the categorization of laptops they use, which is not exactly the ideal standard. For instance, a HP ZBook workstation should be in the same category under "Performance Clamshell" with Asus Zephyrus G15, but it isn't because NBC classifies "Business Laptop" as being a whole other thing.
They both share the same consumers who are looking for H class CPU, dGPU and Clamshell form factor, yet fall under different categories following the same poor marketing / intentional product diversification used by OEMs.

Primarily, laptops should be categorized by the permutation of Processors and Form Factor (detachable, convertible, clamshell), which creates 6 major laptop categories overall + few others including Foldables, 10W Y/M-CPU, etc. Secondary Categories should be Screen Size and Price Class, which should be directly mentioned in each individual review as well.

e.g. EliteBook x360 14: Convertible UltraBook (14", Flagship)
       Zephyrus G15: Clamshell Performance (15", High-End)

As for comparing these two? That's not possible, because consumers can't substitute one for the other.

[Ahmad Jamil]

Hi have good day I want to buy 100 unit please contact me

[xpclient]

I'm waiting for Lenovo to dump the annoying trackpoint and extra buttons before I ever get a ThinkPad. I want a large trackpad and don't want an annoying nub getting in the way when I type.

Then you're in for a perpetual wait because Lenovo already tried removing the trackpoint buttons and the community was very vocal about it and wanted them back so they put it back and promised to never remove them again. Realizing how they are the defining and unique feature of ThinkPads, Lenovo stated how the trackpoint and the buttons will always be associated with ThinkPads.

You have the choice of a ThinkBook instead or any of the dozens of other laptops Lenovo makes (Yoga, IdeaPad etc) or any of the dozens of other models from Dell, HP, Acer, ASUS. And yet you want the one line that has them to get ruined further and fail to see the unique benefits of the Trackpoint and its buttons - wanting a useful feature for others removed 🤦🏻‍♂️😆 when you can just ignore it even if it's present. Trackpad size has got nothing to do with the presence of buttons.

The keyboard+trackpad area can always be tweaked to keep the buttons and yet have a large trackpad. But too large makes it interfere with your hands if you rest them while typing on the laptop to the left and right of the touchpad - palm rejection efficiency is reduced the bigger it becomes so there has to be balance between size of trackpad and area to place palms when typing.

Google for:
"Macbook" "palm rejection" "too large" "trackpad" OR "touchpad"
and enjoy the rants of dozens of posts of people having palm rejection issues with the MacBook. Or the butterfly keyboard fiasco that they took ages to address. Or Apple's shitty one button mouse. Apple just can't make good input devices and that shows in the tiny Macbook share vs Windows PCs.

[Benjamin Herzig]

Another issue I've noticed is the categorization of laptops they use, which is not exactly the ideal standard. For instance, a HP ZBook workstation should be in the same category under "Performance Clamshell" with Asus Zephyrus G15, but it isn't because NBC classifies "Business Laptop" as being a whole other thing.
They both share the same consumers who are looking for H class CPU, dGPU and Clamshell form factor, yet fall under different categories following the same poor marketing / intentional product diversification used by OEMs.

Here is the problem with your point of view: OEMs have the different categories for a reason. Workstations and business laptops are not marketed towards consumers, and generally, consumers don't buy them - they are much more expensive typically, lack consumer features and don't deliver the same performance for the same price.

If I would have to guess a rough estimate, probably 90 % of business laptops are sold to large businesses for use in their laptop fleets for their employees.

It doesn't make sense to just mix every laptop category together, because doing so, you lose the ability to take category specific features into account. For example: ECC RAM is generally not needed in a gaming laptop, same goes for ISV certified graphics. But both are needed in workstations. The same thing is true for security features and business laptops - consumers won't care if the laptop has a smartcard slot or not.

Your idea of categorization would be overly simplified and ignorant of the fact that large organizations like schools, governments and businesses do play a very important role in the laptop market.