Test: HP EliteBook 1050 G1 (i7-8750H, 4K, GTX 1050 Max-Q) Laptop (Sammanfattning)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (18.4 - 201, n=60, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (25.8 - 266, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 83 %
Mitt på batteriet: 440 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1294:1 (Svärta: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.04 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 2.04
ΔE Greyscale 4.98 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
94% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
61% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
67.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
94.1% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.8% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.48
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA AUO30EB, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD LQ156D1, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) APPA040, , 2880x1800, 15.4" | Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 NV156QUM-N44, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA SHP1445, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | HP EliteBook 850 G5 3JX58EA AUO24ED, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad P51 20HH0016GE LEN40BD, B156ZAN02.1, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 13% | 27% | -1% | 24% | -6% | 26% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 67.8 | 79.1 17% | 98.7 46% | 69.2 2% | 82.6 22% | 63.4 -6% | 86.3 27% |
| sRGB Coverage | 94.1 | 98.8 5% | 99.9 6% | 90.7 -4% | 98.9 5% | 88.8 -6% | 99.5 6% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 67.9 | 79.2 17% | 86.6 28% | 66.3 -2% | 98 44% | 64.4 -5% | 99.3 46% |
| Response Times | 4% | 8% | 4% | 9% | 20% | 20% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 56 ? | 46.4 ? 17% | 43.2 ? 23% | 51.2 ? 9% | 44.8 ? 20% | 42 ? 25% | 40.8 ? 27% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 29 ? | 32 ? -10% | 31.2 ? -8% | 29.6 ? -2% | 30 ? -3% | 25 ? 14% | 25.2 ? 13% |
| PWM Frequency | 980 ? | 117000 ? | 952 ? | 1497 ? | |||
| Screen | -4% | 32% | 4% | 15% | -20% | 10% | |
| Brightness middle | 440 | 494 12% | 520 18% | 310 -30% | 324 -26% | 402 -9% | 317 -28% |
| Brightness | 389 | 457 17% | 492 26% | 283 -27% | 338 -13% | 383 -2% | 309 -21% |
| Brightness Distribution | 83 | 88 6% | 88 6% | 87 5% | 78 -6% | 88 6% | 89 7% |
| Black Level * | 0.34 | 0.34 -0% | 0.39 -15% | 0.24 29% | 0.3 12% | 0.41 -21% | 0.36 -6% |
| Contrast | 1294 | 1453 12% | 1333 3% | 1292 0% | 1080 -17% | 980 -24% | 881 -32% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.04 | 5.2 -3% | 1.2 76% | 3.1 38% | 1.6 68% | 5.25 -4% | 2.7 46% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.99 | 17.5 -150% | 2.3 67% | 7.6 -9% | 4.6 34% | 8.65 -24% | 4.1 41% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.04 | 2.2 -8% | 5.19 -154% | ||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.98 | 2.7 46% | 1.3 74% | 2.3 54% | 2.5 50% | 4 20% | 3 40% |
| Gamma | 2.48 89% | 2.1 105% | 2.18 101% | 2.21 100% | 2.21 100% | 2.68 82% | 2.27 97% |
| CCT | 7777 84% | 7038 92% | 6738 96% | 6876 95% | 6273 104% | 6756 96% | 6077 107% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 61 | 71.2 17% | 59.1 -3% | 85.7 40% | 58 -5% | 87.6 44% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 94 | 98.8 5% | 90.1 -4% | 98.9 5% | 89 -5% | 99.5 6% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 4% /
1% | 22% /
27% | 2% /
3% | 16% /
16% | -2% /
-13% | 19% /
14% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 29 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 15 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. » 75 % 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 | ||
| 56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 26 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. » 92 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3433 poäng | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4643 poäng | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4666 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) Apple SSD AP0512 | Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e | HP EliteBook 850 G5 3JX58EA Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Average Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -11% | 1% | 3% | 51% | -9% | 4% | |
| Read Seq | 1733 | 1805 4% 1805 4% | 1511 -13% | 944 -46% | 2229 29% | 2069 19% | 1714 ? -1% |
| Write Seq | 1030 | 523 -49% 523 -49% | 1466 42% | 924 -10% | 1562 52% | 393.4 -62% | 1039 ? 1% |
| Read 512 | 547 | 807 48% 807 48% | 1015 86% | 555 1% | 391.4 -28% | 914 67% | 600 ? 10% |
| Write 512 | 802 | 499.7 -38% 499.7 -38% | 1166 45% | 565 -30% | 1279 59% | 284.9 -64% | 922 ? 15% |
| Read 4k | 27.81 | 29.02 4% 29.02 4% | 10.97 -61% | 63.9 130% | 56.5 103% | 31.76 14% | 27.2 ? -2% |
| Write 4k | 112.4 | 79.4 -29% 79.4 -29% | 19.53 -83% | 135.3 20% | 182 62% | 99.2 -12% | 108.2 ? -4% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 415.8 | 279 -33% 279 -33% | 525 26% | 336.2 -19% | 645 55% | 282 -32% | 437 ? 5% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 345.2 | 351.9 2% 351.9 2% | 212.4 -38% | 264.9 -23% | 595 72% | 338.5 -2% | 372 ? 8% |
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 29687 poäng | |
| 3DMark Vantage P Result | 26117 poäng | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 7396 poäng | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 51461 poäng | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 14739 poäng | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 5114 poäng | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 1709 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q (59 - 62.1, n=4) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P52 20MAS03N00 | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) | |
| The Witcher 3 | |
| 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (11.2 - 290, n=73, last 2 years) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q (34 - 41, n=3) | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P52 20MAS03N00 | |
| 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (8 - 143.2, n=80, last 2 years) | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q (18.5 - 30, n=3) | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P52 20MAS03N00 | |
| Battlefield 1 - 1920x1080 High Preset AA:T | |
| Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q () | |
| Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) | |
| låg | med. | hög | ultra | 4K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 285.1 | 172.6 | 150.4 | 62.1 | |
| Company of Heroes 2 (2013) | 79.7 | 71.8 | 48.7 | 21.87 | |
| GTA V (2015) | 118.7 | 112.9 | 62.1 | 27 | 26.1 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 103.2 | 59.3 | 34 | 18.5 | 12 |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 149.5 | 134.1 | 115.5 | 104.1 | 37.1 |
| Rainbow Six Siege (2015) | 108 | 93.5 | 67.5 | 62.8 | 22.1 |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 105.5 | 56 | 33.9 | 30.3 | 12.9 |
| The Division (2016) | 109.9 | 69.8 | 32.3 | 24.8 | 10.9 |
| Overwatch (2016) | 256.9 | 160 | 80.5 | 48.9 | 26 |
| Deus Ex Mankind Divided (2016) | 71.5 | 52.6 | 28.3 | 20.3 | 9 |
| Battlefield 1 (2016) | 144.7 | 89.2 | 45 | 41.3 | 15.9 |
| Civilization VI (2016) | 141 | 82.7 | 35 | 28.6 | 23 |
| For Honor (2017) | 140.5 | 53.5 | 49.8 | 38.1 | 14.7 |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 80.6 | 35.7 | 32.5 | 17.1 | 10.5 |
| Rocket League (2017) | 240.3 | 155.4 | 98.8 | 36.7 | |
| Dirt 4 (2017) | 191.1 | 88 | 47.1 | 26.2 | 15.4 |
| Team Fortress 2 (2017) | 136 | 128 | 120 | 118 | 55 |
| Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017) | 51.4 | 33.6 | 11.3 | ||
| FIFA 18 (2017) | 254.7 | 153.2 | 127.5 | 127 | 55.5 |
| Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017) | 97 | 44 | 31 | 24 | 10 |
| Destiny 2 (2017) | 82.2 | 57.4 | 51.6 | 38.1 | 13.5 |
| Assassin´s Creed Origins (2017) | 59 | 40 | 35 | 28 | 11 |
| Call of Duty WWII (2017) | 144.8 | 99.6 | 46.7 | 36.7 | 16.1 |
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 82.5 | 56.5 | 48.8 | 32.7 | 7.4 |
| Fortnite (2018) | 142.8 | 111.8 | 49.4 | 36.5 | 9.3 |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 56.9 | 29.3 | 20.6 | 7.9 | |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 82.1 | 36.8 | 29.5 | 21.5 | 6 |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 88.8 | 80.9 | 65.1 | 30.3 | |
| Far Cry 5 (2018) | 66 | 35 | 33 | 30 | 10 |
| The Crew 2 (2018) | 42 | 37 | 33.4 | 10.4 | |
| Monster Hunter World (2018) | 73.7 | 32 | 24 | 20 | 5.8 |
| F1 2018 (2018) | 104 | 63 | 47 | 29 | 13 |
Ljudnivå
| Låg belastning |
| 30.25 / 30.25 / 31.8 dB(A) |
| Hög belastning |
| 44.7 / 42 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB tyst 40 dB(A) hörbar 50 dB(A) högt ljud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm avstånd) environment noise: 30.25 dB(A) | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.4 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 46.4 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.5 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29.3 °C / 84.7 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-0.5 °C / -0.9 F).
HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 17% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (6.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 96% 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, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.9% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 26% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby | 0.3 / 1.4 Watt |
| Låg belastning | 6.1 / 10.2 / 13.4 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
82 / 122 Watt |
   
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, Apple SSD AP0512, IPS, 2880x1800, 15.4" | HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA E3-1505M v6, Quadro M1200, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad P52 20MAS03N00 i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | HP EliteBook 850 G5 3JX58EA i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q | Average of class Multimedia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -32% | 11% | -50% | 12% | 17% | 45% | 13% | 0% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 6.1 | 9.48 -55% | 3.4 44% | 12.6 -107% | 4.02 34% | 5.3 13% | 2.7 56% | 4.48 ? 27% | 6.54 ? -7% |
| Idle Average * | 10.2 | 16.1 -58% | 11 -8% | 17.1 -68% | 7.2 29% | 10.2 -0% | 8.1 21% | 9.58 ? 6% | 11.3 ? -11% |
| Idle Maximum * | 13.4 | 16.9 -26% | 14.9 -11% | 19.3 -44% | 11.46 14% | 13.6 -1% | 10.1 25% | 11.6 ? 13% | 13.3 ? 1% |
| Load Average * | 82 | 90.8 -11% | 78.9 4% | 88.3 -8% | 76.3 7% | 58.3 29% | 39 52% | 77.3 ? 6% | 70.7 ? 14% |
| Load Maximum * | 122 | 134.4 -10% | 91.2 25% | 147.3 -21% | 154 -26% | 65.3 46% | 37.2 70% | 105.5 ? 14% | 116.1 ? 5% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 74.8 | 74 | 47.8 |
* ... smaller is better
| HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 96 Wh | Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 97 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) i7-8850H, Radeon Pro 560X, 83 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, 105 Wh | HP ZBook Studio G4-Y6K17EA E3-1505M v6, Quadro M1200, 64 Wh | HP EliteBook 850 G5 3JX58EA i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad P52 20MAS03N00 i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, 96 Wh | Average of class Multimedia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -1% | 19% | 9% | -61% | 20% | 15% | 15% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1027 | 1181 15% | 410 -60% | 1066 4% | 1519 48% | 1168 ? 14% | ||
| H.264 | 581 | 738 27% | 701 21% | 565 -3% | 627 8% | 733 26% | 847 ? 46% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 523 | 576 10% | 614 17% | 522 0% | 201 -62% | 556 6% | 637 22% | 640 ? 22% |
| Load | 128 | 76 -41% | 158 23% | 50 -61% | 207 62% | 79 -38% | 97.1 ? -24% | |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 62 | 88 | 76.3 ? |
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Helt nya laptop-modeller utan föregångare, likt HP EliteBook 1050 G1, är alltid intressanta. Har HP lyckats med sin första riktiga multimedia-modell från EliteBook-serien, och är den en värdig utmanare till Dell XPS 15?
HP har definitivt lyckats med EliteBook 1050:s hölje och design: extremt hög kvalitet, riktigt robust och visuellt attraktiv – lämplig för sitt prisskikt. Det finns heller inget att klaga på när det kommer till inmatningsenheterna. HP använder en bekväm styrplatta i glas och ett bra tangentbord (även om det inte är perfekt). Vad det gäller skärmen erbjuder HP en matt 4K UHD LCD-skärm, vilket är ett alternativ som ingen av konkurrenterna har. Den har dessutom bra ljusstyrkevärden på nästan 400 cd/m². Anslutningsutrustningen är gedigen och betydligt mer omfattande än på exempelvis Apple MacBook Pro 15. Även om webbkameran inte är bättre än den på Dell XPS 15 så är den åtminstone placerad korrekt ovanför skärmen. Den har dessutom lite fler funktioner med sin integritetsbländare och infraröda sensorer. Tack vare en andra M.2 2280-plats så har EliteBook 1050 G1 mer expansionsmöjligheter än Dell XPS 15. Dessutom håller sig EliteBook betydligt svalare i jämförelse och den har bra högtalare (för en laptop).
Men är detta tillräckligt för att stå upp mot konkurrenterna? Troligen inte, då EliteBook 1050 G1 inte bara är betydligt dyrare utan även har en del svagheter. Dessa inkluderar exempelvis faktum att även om höljet är robust så är det också relativt tungt och det är stor infattning ovanför och under skärmen. EliteBook 1050 G1 är inte bara den tyngsta modellen i sin klass, den är dessutom inte i närheten så kompakt som Dell XPS 15. Vidare har den sämre prestanda än konkurrenten från Dell: Även om ett Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q i kombination med Intels sexkärniga processor i princip gör den lämplig för spel så är det Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q som sitter i Dell XPS 15 märkbart snabbare. Vidare så stryptes EliteBook betydligt i stresstestet – nackdelen med de låga temperaturerna. Vi gillade heller inte EliteBooks ljudnivå. Fläkten är igång alldeles för ofta och med en frekvens som är alldeles för hög. Den är relativt högljudd, det finns dessutom en del spoltjut på det och fläktarna blåser varm luft direkt i handen på musanvändare på grund av ventilernas suboptimala placering.
Vi har också en del klagomål som rör skärmen, som att ljusfördelningen är ganska ojämn. Men mer allvarligt är att HP håller tillbaka den betydligt mer ljusstarka och levande DreamColor 4K UHD-skärmen från EliteBook 1050 G1, trots att den finns tillgänglig i den identiskt utrustade HP ZBook Studio G5. Det är ett obegripligt beslut för en såpass dyr laptop. Generellt hade vi önskat fler företagsfunktioner såsom PointStick, en SmartCard-läsare eller Ethernet. HP missar chansen att göra EliteBook 1050 G1 till en riktigt företags-allt-i-allo.
Ibland är riktigt bra inte tillräckligt: HP EliteBook 1050 G1 är en företags- och multimedialaptop av hög kvalitet som tyvärr totalt sett är underlägsen Dell XPS 15.
I slutändan får HP EliteBook 1050 G1 ett riktigt bra resultat på 89% i vår utvärdering. Även om detta vid en första anblick kan verka överraskande med tanke på våra klagomål så ligger vår kritik ändå på en hög nivå. Priset är trots allt motsvarande högt och konkurrenterna är väldigt starka. Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 får ett resultat på 90% och Dell XPS 15 9570 når till och med 92% – och den är ett billigare alternativ. Även om HP EliteBook 1050 G1 får vår rekommendation så finns det inga uppenbara anledningar att föredra den framför konkurrenterna. I synnerhet Dell XPS 15 har ett bättre förhållande mellan pris och prestanda. Så även om Dell inte behöver oroa sig för EliteBook så kan det ändå bli intressant i den här kategorin, då Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme snart når marknaden. Huruvida den kan utgöra en fara för XPS 15 får vår kommande recension att visa.
HP EliteBook 1050 G1-4QY20EA
- 10/25/2019 v7 (old)
Benjamin Herzig
Price comparison
