Breve análisis del HP ProBook 430 G4 (Core i7, Full HD)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 | |
| Networking | |
| iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m | |
| HP ProBook 450 G4 Y8B60EA | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ | |
| iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m | |
| HP ProBook 450 G4 Y8B60EA | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ | |
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM no detectado | ||
Comparación: 53 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 8743 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. | ||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 92 %
Brillo con batería: 252 cd/m²
Contraste: 791:1 (Negro: 0.32 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.28 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 3.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
57.6% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
36.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39.85% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
57.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
38.55% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.3
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA LGD052D, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ AUO B133HAN04.1, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 Sharp SHP1449 LQ133M1, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK Sharp SHP 1447 / LQ133M1JW15, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 LP133WF2-SPL1, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | HP ProBook 430 G3 P5T00ES Samsung, , 1366x768, 13.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 27% | 71% | -1% | -7% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage | 38.55 | 48.94 27% | 66.4 72% | 38.35 -1% | 35.87 -7% | |
| sRGB Coverage | 57.8 | 73.3 27% | 97.5 69% | 57.4 -1% | 54 -7% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 39.85 | 50.5 27% | 68.4 72% | 39.66 0% | 37.06 -7% | |
| Response Times | -15% | -2% | -7% | -2% | -26% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 42.4 ? | 50 ? -18% | 32.8 ? 23% | 52.4 ? -24% | 43.2 ? -2% | 54.4 ? -28% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 26.4 ? | 29.6 ? -12% | 33.2 ? -26% | 23.6 ? 11% | 26.8 ? -2% | 32.8 ? -24% |
| PWM Frequency | 220 ? | 192 ? | ||||
| Screen | 24% | 22% | 18% | 3% | -68% | |
| Brightness middle | 253 | 375 48% | 351.2 39% | 344 36% | 233 -8% | 212 -16% |
| Brightness | 249 | 358 44% | 325 31% | 326 31% | 227 -9% | 205 -18% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 87 -5% | 89 -3% | 87 -5% | 86 -7% | 90 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.32 | 0.39 -22% | 0.195 39% | 0.36 -13% | 0.22 31% | 0.71 -122% |
| Contrast | 791 | 962 22% | 1801 128% | 956 21% | 1059 34% | 299 -62% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.28 | 4.6 13% | 7.4 -40% | 6.09 -15% | 5.41 -2% | 12.06 -128% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 13.66 | 8.8 36% | 9.08 34% | 10 27% | 13.61 -0% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.8 | 4 -5% | 6.71 -77% | 5.36 -41% | 4.15 -9% | 13.41 -253% |
| Gamma | 2.3 96% | 2.34 94% | 2.74 80% | 2.01 109% | 2.45 90% | 2.41 91% |
| CCT | 6646 98% | 7304 89% | 7222 90% | 7230 90% | 6773 96% | 15382 42% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 36.7 | 57.9 58% | 50.48 38% | 62.25 70% | 36.52 0% | 34.3 -7% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 57.6 | 88.7 54% | 73.31 27% | 97.54 69% | 57.16 -1% | 54.2 -6% |
| Media total (Programa/Opciones) | 5% /
18% | 16% /
20% | 27% /
25% | 0% /
2% | -34% /
-49% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 26.4 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 6.4 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 20 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta relativamente lentos en nuestros tests pero podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 240 (máximo) ms. » 62 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (21 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 42.4 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 15.6 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 26.8 ms bajada | ||
| La pantalla mostró tiempos de respuesta lentos en nuestros tests y podría ser demasiado lenta para los jugones. En comparación, todos los dispositivos de prueba van de ##min### (mínimo) a 636 (máximo) ms. » 67 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002 | Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ LiteOn CV1-8B512 | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK Samsung PM951 NVMe MZVLV256 | Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | 27% | 109% | 92% | 26% | |
| Read Seq | 505 | 502 -1% | 1233 144% | 1193 136% | 461.7 -9% |
| Write Seq | 328.9 | 418.9 27% | 733 123% | 309.6 -6% | 297.8 -9% |
| Read 512 | 313.6 | 341.3 9% | 1036 230% | 613 95% | 351.6 12% |
| Write 512 | 301 | 389.7 29% | 439.9 46% | 311 3% | 298.4 -1% |
| Read 4k | 21.69 | 29.69 37% | 29.31 35% | 42.43 96% | 31.85 47% |
| Write 4k | 80.4 | 86.8 8% | 116.9 45% | 144.9 80% | 68.5 -15% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 132.2 | 301.3 128% | 479.2 262% | 549 315% | 360.9 173% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 258.8 | 211.2 -18% | 218.3 -16% | 311.3 20% | 276.2 7% |
| PCMark 7 Score | 5333 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3554 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4588 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4717 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 | |
| Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1569 puntos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5520 puntos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 719 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| bajo | medio | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 67.6 | 34.3 | 20 | 9.8 |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 42.6 | 25.1 | 20.3 | 6.5 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 13.3 |
Ruido
| Ocioso |
| 29.1 / 29.1 / 29.1 dB(A) |
| HDD |
| 29.8 dB(A) |
| Carga |
| 33.4 / 36 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  ECM8000 + Voltcraft SL-451 (15 cm de distancia) environment noise: 29.1 dB(A) | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.7 °C / 102 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 39.4 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.2 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26.8 °C / 80.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (+0.9 °C / 1.7 F).
HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby | 0.23 / 0.4 Watt |
| Ocioso | 4.2 / 6.5 / 7.2 Watt |
| Carga |
28.7 / 43.5 Watt |
   
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620 | Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ 6500U, HD Graphics 520 | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK 6560U, Iris Graphics 540 | Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 6200U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 2% | 24% | -7% | 18% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 4.2 | 4.1 2% | 4.1 2% | 3.3 21% | 3.1 26% |
| Idle Average * | 6.5 | 6.7 -3% | 4.2 35% | 7.4 -14% | 5.5 15% |
| Idle Maximum * | 7.2 | 7.4 -3% | 5.1 29% | 8.2 -14% | 6 17% |
| Load Average * | 28.7 | 32.4 -13% | 22.1 23% | 36.5 -27% | 25.8 10% |
| Load Maximum * | 43.5 | 32.4 26% | 29.4 32% | 43.7 -0% | 33.6 23% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh | Acer Aspire S 13 S5-371-71QZ 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 45 Wh | Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | Lenovo IdeaPad 710S-13ISK 6560U, Iris Graphics 540, 46 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad 13-20GKS01100 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 42 Wh | HP ProBook 430 G3 P5T00ES 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 44 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -8% | 29% | -18% | -12% | -33% | |
| Reader / Idle | 953 | 1028 8% | 1295 36% | 810 -15% | 944 -1% | 449 -53% |
| H.264 | 520 | 486 -7% | 469 -10% | 337 -35% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 430 | 472 10% | 677 57% | 418 -3% | 372 -13% | 377 -12% |
| Load | 168 | 99 -41% | 157 -7% | 89 -47% | 129 -23% | 118 -30% |
Pro
Contra
La cuarta generación del ProBook 430 es una actualización sólida y conservadora del portátil business de 13.3" de HP. El fabricante no sacrifica nada en chasis, rendimiento, aguante de batería, ni el (opcional) display IPS.
Un vistazo en la selección de puertos y características de seguridad, empero, muestra rápidamente que es una máquina business básica. HP implementa un puerto USB-C, pero sólo es 3.0. Tampoco hay puerto de anclaje, lo que complicará la integración con tu ambiente de trabajo. También falta un lector de SmartCard.
Kaby Lake, buen display, y teclado cómodo – el HP ProBook 430 G4 es una actualización exitosa del subportátil de 13.3". Hay algunos sacrificios, y nuestro modelo de pruebas tampoco es una ganga.
La competencia aún tiene que lanzar sus actualizaciones a Kaby Lake, por lo que esperaremos un poco a las comparaciones. Nuestro modelo de pruebas está en la parte alta de la línea ProBook en términos de precio, por lo que le costará competir con sistemas domésticos. Por más de 1,000 Euros, te llevas Ultrabooks más delgados con puertos modernos y a menudo mejores displays, pero a cambio tendrás que pasar sin las características de seguridad y a menudo el cómodo teclado.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
HP ProBook 430 G4-Y8B47EA
- 12/26/2016 v6 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
Price comparison
