HP Spectre x360 14 review - High-end convertible now with a larger 120-Hz OLED

[Redaktion]

HP updates its Spectre x360 high-end convertible, now using a larger 14-inch OLED panel with 120 Hz in combination with a current Meteor Lake processor from Intel. In addition, the case was redesigned and Wi-Fi 7 is also available.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-Spectre-x360-14-review-High-end-convertible-now-with-a-larger-120-Hz-OLED.804502.0.html

[Apatel]

Your reviews are nice and detailed but the more I see your meteor lake CPU reviews vs other reviewers, the more it seems like you have really become an AMD fanboy. Your CPU results just don't match other reviewers. For example:

1. pcworld hp-spectre-x360-14 review
The cinebench R23 score is higher and battery life is better vs 7840U than your results. Other Youtube reviewers arrive at similar conclusion.

2. tomshardware lenovo-ideapad-pro-5i-review for meteor-lake 125H
pretty good perf and good battery life vs 7840U

3. Your own MSI prestige 16 155H review showed great perf and battery life (almost MB2 pro level). It showed better perf and battery life (even after accouting for its larger battery size) than most 7840U/7840HS.

4. Dave2D, HW canucks and others on youtube find very competitive perf and battery life vs 7840U
and many others

So I don't understand why you are so off. Either you don't know how to use meteor lake or you have become an AMD super fanboy. I really like your website and I hope you become an impartial review site again. Cause this type of blatant partiality is not good for you in the long run.

[Hotz]

Your reviews are nice and detailed but the more I see your meteor lake CPU reviews vs other reviewers, the more it seems like you have really become an AMD fanboy.

LOL. It wasn't long ago when I've read the exact opposite thing from other people: that Notebookcheck are Intel fanboys, because they ignored some noteworthy AMD news (especially in regards to their Phoenix iGPU). I don't think they are fanboys from either one.

[f x86]

Your own MSI prestige 16 155H review showed great perf and battery life (almost MB2 pro level). It showed better perf and battery life (even after accouting for its larger battery size) than most 7840U/7840HS.

x86 laptop battery life mostly depends on how much a specific manufacturer and/or reviewer cuts laptop performance on battery, not real consumption.
Also reviewers can blatantly cheat, e.g. by making screen 20% dimmer you can get up to x1.5 battery life.

[DontFearTheFuture]

So I don't understand why you are so off. Either you don't know how to use meteor lake or you have become an AMD super fanboy. I really like your website and I hope you become an impartial review site again. Cause this type of blatant partiality is not good for you in the long run.

I find it curious too.  The only thing I can think of is that they are borrowing these machines, and since they are not their machines, they are not installing available Bios and Driver updates that would increase performance and such.  But if that was the case, I'd think they would disclose that.

So weird, nearly every review outside of this one shows much better performance this review. And like you said, it's not just with this computer, it's with nearly all Meteor Lake laptops so far

[lmao]

lmao intel marketers are strong over their core ultra fiasco
"look at our paid reviews wth are you doing here"

[indy]

Interesting how people jump to biased conclusions about test results, without looking at differences in testing methodologies.

[Ayohw]

No mention of the obvious graininess visible on the OLED screen. HP continues to use a cheap touch layer overlay deisgn for their OLED screens which leaves a visible wire mesh that makes the screen look low resolution with light colours such as a white background. It is very obvious and I do not know why reviews always not mention this. I have looked at this laptop in person and the OLED screen looks crap!

[Jas]

No mention of the obvious graininess visible on the OLED screen. HP continues to use a cheap touch layer overlay deisgn for their OLED screens which leaves a visible wire mesh that makes the screen look low resolution with light colours such as a white background. It is very obvious and I do not know why reviews always not mention this. I have looked at this laptop in person and the OLED screen looks crap!

Anyone know about laptops with touchscreen OLEDs that do not have a grainy digitizer? I wouldn't know where to even sear for something like that.

[Ayohw]

No mention of the obvious graininess visible on the OLED screen. HP continues to use a cheap touch layer overlay deisgn for their OLED screens which leaves a visible wire mesh that makes the screen look low resolution with light colours such as a white background. It is very obvious and I do not know why reviews always not mention this. I have looked at this laptop in person and the OLED screen looks crap!

Anyone know about laptops with touchscreen OLEDs that do not have a grainy digitizer? I wouldn't know where to even sear for something like that.

Maybe the Samsung laptops from this year. Their tab S8/s9 ultra has a high quality OLED panel without the cheap crap overlay mesh. Hopefully they have used the same high end panels in their laptops. It really annoys me how almost no reviewers mention this obvious problem with almost every touch screen OLED laptop. All the screen look obviously grainy!

[Abc]

Your own MSI prestige 16 155H review showed great perf and battery life (almost MB2 pro level). It showed better perf and battery life (even after accouting for its larger battery size) than most 7840U/7840HS.

x86 laptop battery life mostly depends on how much a specific manufacturer and/or reviewer cuts laptop performance on battery, not real consumption.
Also reviewers can blatantly cheat, e.g. by making screen 20% dimmer you can get up to x1.5 battery life.

Yes. There are a lot of variation between manufacturers for the non-core consumption. For example, you can optimize your board design to put RAM next to the CPU, or you can route it around the board to a separate area. Everything is 0.1W, 0.2W difference but it can add up. Some SSDs can consume 2x the power at peak gen4 performance than others. Also things like turning off unused PCIe lanes. Etc etc. Some manufacturers work harder than others. Also depends on the product segment. A $1500 product does not receive the same treatment as the $150 product. Some lower price products are ODM manufactured with a logo sticker. Etc etc.

Also interesting you mentioned screen brightness. Notebook Check is the only reviewer who said they test at 150 nit brightness. I think it was either Toms or PC mag who test at 50% brightness. Obviously not every laptop has the same 50% brightness, but also even two laptops with 300 nit screens can have different brightness curves that 50% isn't 150 nit.

So yes these other reviewers are really not being objective enough.

[Don't Fear the Future]

Interesting how people jump to biased conclusions about test results, without looking at differences in testing methodologies.

I agree.  People will jump to conclusions, as they may not know all the ways a device can be tested or such.

However, there is very consistent data around the web showing that an Intel 155H running at its base TDP of 28 Watts generally gets a score of 13,000 on the last run of a Stress Test of Cinebench R23; not a 1 run Best Score.  Therefore, a sustained score of 13,000; a 1 run test will obviously be higher than this.

The HP Spectre in this review at 24 watts (instead of 28 watts) is somehow only getting a score of 10,333 in Cinebench R23.  It just doesn't add up.  This has happened to other reviews too regarding these new Intel 155H chips in a variety of laptops; however, reviewer have stated that after Bios or Driver updates the performance of these devices had improved to more predictable / expected levels.

To be clear, I'm not blaming NotebookCheck for their Testing methods. I just strongly feel that something has to be off with the Bios or such that's affecting the score, which has plagued other reviewers too.  It just seems to have happened more here at Notebookcheck as of late.

Personally, Notebookcheck is my go-to place for laptops reviews and tests.  For me, they are the best.  However, I also watch other reviews on YouTube of the same products, as I feel as a consumer it is best to get your information from more than just one source.  For me, this is how you truly learn the ins and outs of something.

[Jas]

 Anyone know about laptops with touchscreen OLEDs that do not have a grainy digitizer? I wouldn't know where to even search for something like that.

[/quote]
Maybe the Samsung laptops from this year. Their tab S8/s9 ultra has a high quality OLED panel without the cheap crap overlay mesh. Hopefully they have used the same high end panels in their laptops. It really annoys me how almost no reviewers mention this obvious problem with almost every touch screen OLED laptop. All the screen look obviously grainy!
[/quote]

I've always liked Samsung displays but they don't have a good reputation when it comes to their laptop reliability mainly because of their design flaws.

Can anyone validate if this new HP flagship has a hazy screen or not because of it's digitizer?

[HW]

HP does offer its own power settings in fact.
Launch pre-install App , MyHP\Device\System control...It supports Performance, Balance, Quiet....Modes

Search Youtube "2024 HP Spectre x360 14: 30-Days Later" by Andrew Marc David
Launching  System Control  at 43m:00s.

Enjoy!

[DontFearTheFuture]

HP does offer its own power settings in fact.
Launch pre-install App , MyHP\Device\System control...It supports Performance, Balance, Quiet....Modes

Search Youtube "2024 HP Spectre x360 14: 30-Days Later" by Andrew Marc David
Launching  System Control  at 43m:00s.

Enjoy!

Maybe this needs to be installed to get the full performance out of this machine. Because something seems off based on the fact this machine only gets a Cinebench Multicore of 10,333 @ 24 watts when all others seem to get a score of 13,000 @ 28 watts.