Breve análisis del portátil MSI CX62 7QL
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| MSI GT73VR 6RF | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| MSI GT73VR 6RF | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminación: 85 %
Brillo con batería: 196.1 cd/m²
Contraste: 261:1 (Negro: 0.75 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 10.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 12.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
60.6% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
38.4% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
41.56% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
60.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
40.22% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.18
| MSI CX62 7QL TN LED, 15.6", 1366x768 | HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) BOE0693, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE BOE HF NV156FHM-N42, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T LG Philips LP156WF6-SPB6, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 CMN N156HGE-EAL (CMN15D2), TN LED, 15.6", 1920x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 8% | 4% | 42% | 93% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 40.22 | 43.27 8% | 41.92 4% | 61.5 53% | 85.8 113% |
| sRGB Coverage | 60.5 | 64.9 7% | 62.9 4% | 80.4 33% | 99.8 65% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 41.56 | 44.71 8% | 43.32 4% | 58.8 41% | 84.1 102% |
| Response Times | -2% | 1% | 14% | 17% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 50.4 ? | 42 ? 17% | 53 ? -5% | 40 ? 21% | 43 ? 15% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 28 ? | 33.6 ? -20% | 26 ? 7% | 26 ? 7% | 23 ? 18% |
| PWM Frequency | 198.4 | 50 ? | 1000 ? | ||
| Screen | 46% | 70% | 65% | 31% | |
| Brightness middle | 196.1 | 186.5 -5% | 236 20% | 326 66% | 216 10% |
| Brightness | 196 | 174 -11% | 212 8% | 316 61% | 202 3% |
| Brightness Distribution | 85 | 69 -19% | 78 -8% | 80 -6% | 83 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.75 | 0.18 76% | 0.18 76% | 0.35 53% | 0.48 36% |
| Contrast | 261 | 1036 297% | 1311 402% | 931 257% | 450 72% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 10.9 | 5.7 48% | 3.92 64% | 5.49 50% | 9.98 8% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 19 | 22.5 -18% | 9.2 52% | 11.36 40% | 17.12 10% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 12.6 | 4.4 65% | 2.35 81% | 4.84 62% | 10.91 13% |
| Gamma | 2.18 101% | 2.35 94% | 2.34 94% | 2.23 99% | 2.31 95% |
| CCT | 14195 46% | 6963 93% | 6161 106% | 5971 109% | 13185 49% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 38.4 | 44.71 16% | 40 4% | 53 38% | 75 95% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 60.6 | 64.95 7% | 63 4% | 80 32% | 100 65% |
| Media total (Programa/Opciones) | 17% /
32% | 25% /
48% | 40% /
54% | 47% /
42% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
Tiempos de respuesta del display
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 10 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 18 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. » 68 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (20.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
| ↔ Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris | ||
| 50.4 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada | ↗ 24 ms subida |  |
| ↘ 26.4 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. » 85 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores. Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (32.8 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados. | ||
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 8706 (mínimo: 5 - máxmo: 343500) Hz. | |||
| Cinebench R10 | |
| Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit | |
| Asus GL702VM-GC102D | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET | |
| HP 250 G4 T6P08ES | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614 | |
| Rendering Single 32Bit | |
| Asus GL702VM-GC102D | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| HP ProBook 640 G2-T9X60ET | |
| HP 250 G4 T6P08ES | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614 | |
| wPrime 2.10 - 1024m | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614 | |
| HP Envy x360 15t-w200 | |
| Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - 32M | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad Z40-59422614 | |
| HP Envy x360 15t-w200 | |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| PCMark 8 | |
| Home Score Accelerated v2 | |
| Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE | |
| MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Work Score Accelerated v2 | |
| MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| Creative Score Accelerated v2 | |
| MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3594 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4035 puntos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4364 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| MSI CX62 7QL WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0 | HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) Toshiba MQ01ABD100 | Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002 | MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ128G8NY | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -18% | 8589% | 5301% | 6073% | |
| Read Seq | 113.7 | 109.5 -4% | 529 365% | 459.3 304% | 530 366% |
| Write Seq | 113.3 | 105.2 -7% | 508 348% | 325.5 187% | 442.7 291% |
| Read 512 | 38.42 | 34.08 -11% | 409.8 967% | 279.2 627% | 409.1 965% |
| Write 512 | 55.8 | 40.02 -28% | 316.5 467% | 280.1 402% | 417.3 648% |
| Read 4k | 0.48 | 0.429 -11% | 36.01 7402% | 22.43 4573% | 21.81 4444% |
| Write 4k | 1.282 | 1.008 -21% | 106.7 8223% | 74.9 5742% | 93 7154% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 1.172 | 0.81 -31% | 384.8 32733% | 149 12613% | 257 21828% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 1.296 | 0.893 -31% | 237.3 18210% | 234 17956% | 168.3 12886% |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Intel Skull Canyon NUC6i7KYK | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell Latitude 15 3550-0123 | |
| HP Pavilion x360 13t-u100 | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Intel Skull Canyon NUC6i7KYK | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell Latitude 15 3550-0123 | |
| HP Pavilion x360 13t-u100 | |
| 3DMark 11 | |
| 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Intel Skull Canyon NUC6i7KYK | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell Latitude 15 3550-0123 | |
| HP Pavilion x360 13t-u100 | |
| 1280x720 Performance Combined | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D | |
| Intel Skull Canyon NUC6i7KYK | |
| MSI CX62 7QL | |
| HP ProBook 440 G4-Y8B51EA | |
| Dell Latitude 15 3550-0123 | |
| HP Pavilion x360 13t-u100 | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 2529 puntos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 65002 puntos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 6847 puntos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 1473 puntos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 753 puntos | |
ayuda | ||
| bajo | medio | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 97.2 | 54.3 | 44 | |
| Metro: Last Light (2013) | 51.3 | 39.5 | 28.5 | |
| Thief (2014) | 50.7 | 29.3 | ||
| Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) | 28 | |||
| Metal Gear Solid V (2015) | 60 | 58 | ||
| Fallout 4 (2015) | 34.6 | |||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 40.1 | 23.2 | ||
| Ashes of the Singularity (2016) | 19.4 | |||
| Overwatch (2016) | 73.5 | 51.4 |
Ruido
| Ocioso |
| 32.1 / 32.2 / 32.2 dB(A) |
| Carga |
| 37.4 / 51.4 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distancia) environment noise: 29 dB(A) | ||
| MSI CX62 7QL GeForce 940MX, i5-7200U, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0 | HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) GeForce 940MX, i7-7500U, Toshiba MQ01ABD100 | Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE Radeon R7 M460, i5-7200U, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U, SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002 | MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ128G8NY | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 2% | 6% | -1% | -6% | |
| off / environment * | 29 | 30.15 -4% | 31.6 -9% | 30 -3% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 32.1 | 32.2 -0% | 30.2 6% | 31.6 2% | 35 -9% |
| Idle Average * | 32.2 | 32.2 -0% | 30.2 6% | 31.6 2% | 36 -12% |
| Idle Maximum * | 32.2 | 33.7 -5% | 31 4% | 33.4 -4% | 37 -15% |
| Load Average * | 37.4 | 39.4 -5% | 38 -2% | 41.7 -11% | 41 -10% |
| Load Maximum * | 51.4 | 42.2 18% | 38.6 25% | 44.8 13% | 46 11% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.4 °C / 101 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 35.8 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (32.2 °C / 90 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-3.4 °C / -6.2 F).
MSI CX62 7QL audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 9.5% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (15.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (38.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 99% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 94% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby | 0.32 / 0.5 Watt |
| Ocioso | 6.3 / 7 / 7.2 Watt |
| Carga |
35.1 / 61.2 Watt |
   
| |
Clave:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| MSI CX62 7QL i5-7200U, GeForce 940MX, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-22JC3T0, TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6" | HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) i7-7500U, GeForce 940MX, Toshiba MQ01ABD100, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE i5-7200U, Radeon R7 M460, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T 6500U, GeForce GTX 960M, SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 6700HQ, GeForce GTX 960M, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ128G8NY, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -15% | 6% | -36% | -110% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 6.3 | 6.16 2% | 3.9 38% | 5 21% | 10 -59% |
| Idle Average * | 7 | 8.48 -21% | 7.8 -11% | 8.9 -27% | 14 -100% |
| Idle Maximum * | 7.2 | 9.62 -34% | 8.4 -17% | 11.8 -64% | 19 -164% |
| Load Average * | 35.1 | 41.63 -19% | 37 -5% | 55 -57% | 82 -134% |
| Load Maximum * | 61.2 | 63.22 -3% | 46 25% | 93 -52% | 118 -93% |
* ... más pequeño es mejor
| MSI CX62 7QL i5-7200U, GeForce 940MX, 41 Wh | HP Pavilion 15t-au100 CTO (W0P31AV) i7-7500U, GeForce 940MX, 41 Wh | Lenovo Yoga 510-15IKB 80VC000XGE i5-7200U, Radeon R7 M460, 35 Wh | Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T 6500U, GeForce GTX 960M, 48 Wh | MSI GL62-6QFi781H11 6700HQ, GeForce GTX 960M, 41.4 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duración de Batería | -22% | 13% | 20% | -44% | |
| Reader / Idle | 613 | 438 -29% | 816 33% | 339 -45% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 283 | 220 -22% | 320 13% | 430 52% | 158 -44% |
| Load | 125 | 106 -15% | 95 -24% | 71 -43% |
Pro
Contra
El rendimiento del CX62 está por debajo del nivel que se podría esperar de su tamaño y su peso. La CPU ULV Kaby Lake y la GeForce 940MX de gama baja son una mala elección para cargas de trabajo exigentes más allá de las múltiples ventanas del navegador o reproducción de contenido multimedia. La posibilidad de jugar está limitada a ajustes bajos y a 768p, especialmente en los títulos 3D más modernos y el ventilador se hace muy presente especialmente bajo carga de trabajo. El chasis, a pesar de visualmente idéntico al del GE62, es más flexible y se siente más barato al tacto. Además la pantalla TN está mal calibrada de origen con poco nivel de contraste y poca retroiluminación.
Las pocas cualidades que podrían redimir al portátil son la ranura M.2 y las bajas temperaturas de funcionamiento. Lo primero debería mejorar muchísimo el rendimiento, a pesar de que invalidaría la garantía. Las bajas temperaturas generadas no deberían sorprendernos ya que la carcasa deriva de la gama de G de portátiles para juegos, donde son comunes mayores temperaturas y consumos. Esto permite al CX62 mantener el Turbo Boost activo y funcionar a temperaturas más bajas que la mayoría de sistemas con procesadores ULV similares.
El CX62 es esencialmente un portátil para juegos poco potente equipado con hardware más adecuado para un portátil multimedia. Hay demasiados aspectos que mejorar y un potencial comprador haría mejor en gastar cien o doscientos euros extras en un Ultrabook equipado con una CPU igual o superior y mejores opciones de visualización.
Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.
MSI CX62 7QL
- 01/16/2017 v6 (old)
Allen Ngo
Price comparison
