Notebookcheck

Recensione breve del Portatile Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)

Allen Ngo (traduzione a cura di G. De Luca), 04/27/2017

Nessuna impresa epica. Il Samsung Odyssey avrebbe potuto essere un successo. Invece si tratta di un mediocre sistema entry-level senza features in grado di distinguerlo dalla massa, fatta eccezione per la ventola orribilmente rumorosa.

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Processore
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
Scheda grafica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 2048 MB, Core: 1354 MHz, Memoria: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 375.63, Optimus
Memoria
16384 MB 
, PC4-19200 DDR4, 1300 MHz, 15-15-15-35, Dual-Channel, 2x SODIMM
Schermo
15.6 pollici 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 141 PPI, IPS, ID: BOE0689, Nome: NV156FHM-N46, lucido: no
Scheda madre
Intel HM175
Harddisk
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, 128 GB 
, Secondario: 1 TB Seagate ST1000M035-1RK172 HDD
Scheda audio
Conexant @ Intel Skylake PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Porte di connessione
2 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0 / 3.1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Connessioni Audio: 3.5 mm combo, Lettore schede: SD reader
Rete
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Dimensioni
altezza x larghezza x profondità (in mm): 23.9 x 378 x 260.1
Batteria
43 Wh, 3780 mAh polimeri di litio
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Altre caratteristiche
Casse: 1.5 W stereo, Tastiera: Chiclet, Illuminazione Tastiera: si, Samsung Recovery, Samsung Settings, Samsung Update, WiFi Sharing, 12 Mesi Garanzia
Peso
2.5 kg, Alimentazione: 747 gr

 

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: SD reader, 2x USB 2.0, Kensington Lock
Right: SD reader, 2x USB 2.0, Kensington Lock
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI, USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI, USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
120.5 MB/s ∼100% +468%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
78.8 MB/s ∼65% +272%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
21.2 MB/s ∼18%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
252.6 MB/s ∼100% +1311%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
86.9 MB/s ∼34% +385%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
17.9 MB/s ∼7%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
659 MBit/s ∼100% +92%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
541 MBit/s ∼82% +58%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
343 MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
524 MBit/s ∼100% +54%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
513 MBit/s ∼98% +50%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
341 MBit/s ∼65%
245.6
cd/m²
251.5
cd/m²
234.9
cd/m²
246.8
cd/m²
255.9
cd/m²
241
cd/m²
245.9
cd/m²
261.4
cd/m²
257.8
cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Massima: 261.4 cd/m² Media: 249 cd/m² Minimum: 4.69 cd/m²
Distribuzione della luminosità: 90 %
Al centro con la batteria: 255.9 cd/m²
Contrasto: 533:1 (Nero: 0.48 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.9 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 5.6 | - Ø
70.1% sRGB (Argyll) 44.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.21
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Asus FX502VM-AS73
TN LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
LGD04D4, , 15.6, 3840x2160
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
Sharp SHP1453 LQ156M1, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte P55W v7
LG Philips LP156WF6 (LGD046F), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Apple APPA030, IPS, 15.4, 2880x1800
Response Times
30%
24%
-48%
16%
144%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
38.8 (20.8, 18)
28.4 (11.2, 17.2)
27%
30.4 (12.4, 18)
22%
54 (33.2, 20)
-39%
37 (15, 22)
5%
46 (18, 28)
-19%
Response Time Black / White *
33.6 (18.8, 14.8)
22.4 (6, 16.4)
33%
24.8 (10, 14.8)
26%
52.4 (33.2, 19.2)
-56%
25 (5, 20)
26%
56 (11, 45)
-67%
PWM Frequency
19230 (99)
119000 (80)
519%
Screen
-7%
11%
45%
29%
59%
Brightness
249
205
-18%
255
2%
392
57%
289
16%
401
61%
Brightness Distribution
90
92
2%
87
-3%
89
-1%
87
-3%
90
0%
Black Level *
0.48
0.69
-44%
0.51
-6%
0.26
46%
0.29
40%
0.3
37%
Contrast
533
304
-43%
508
-5%
1538
189%
990
86%
1400
163%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.9
4.7
20%
3.9
34%
4.9
17%
4.92
17%
3.33
44%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.6
1.8
68%
4.5
20%
7.2
-29%
3.66
35%
2.73
51%
Gamma
2.21 109%
2.23 108%
2.43 99%
2.11 114%
2.32 103%
2.48 97%
CCT
7250 90%
6975 93%
7257 90%
6911 94%
6482 100%
6457 101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
44.8
36.2
-19%
59.5
33%
64.2
43%
54
21%
78.09
74%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
70.1
56.6
-19%
98.9
41%
82
17%
99.97
43%
Media totale (Programma / Settaggio)
12% / 1%
18% / 14%
-2% / 27%
23% / 26%
102% / 82%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Tempi di risposta del Display

I tempi di risposta del display mostrano quanto sia veloce lo schermo a cambaire da un colore all'altro. Tempi di risposta lenti poccono creare sovrapposizioni negloi oggetti in movimento. Specialmente i giocatori patiti del 3D dovrebbero usare uno schermo con rempi di risposta bassi.
       Tempi di risposta dal Nero al Bianco
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 18.8 ms Incremento
↘ 14.8 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta lenti nei nostri tests e sarà insoddisfacente per i gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 85 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Tempo di risposta dal 50% Grigio all'80% Grigio
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.8 ms Incremento
↘ 18 ms Calo
Lo schermo mostra tempi di risposta lenti nei nostri tests e sarà insoddisfacente per i gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 39 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.8 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 19230 Hz99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 19230 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 19230 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6262 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
190 Points ∼97% +23%
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
184 Points ∼94% +19%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
162 Points ∼83% +5%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
155 Points ∼79%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
143 Points ∼73% -8%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
134 Points ∼69% -14%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
131 Points ∼67% -15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
899 Points ∼42% +22%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
897 Points ∼42% +22%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼35% +1%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
738 Points ∼34%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
724 Points ∼34% -2%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
678 Points ∼32% -8%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
566 Points ∼26% -23%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
2.19 Points ∼99% +20%
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
2.08 Points ∼94% +14%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼83%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.77 Points ∼80% -3%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
1.67 Points ∼76% -9%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
1.5 Points ∼68% -18%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
1.49 Points ∼67% -19%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus G701VIK-BA049T
Intel Core i7-7820HK
9.91 Points ∼41% +21%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
9.78 Points ∼41% +20%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.18 Points ∼34% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.17 Points ∼34%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
7.94 Points ∼33% -3%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
7.47 Points ∼31% -9%
Toshiba Satellite S70-B-106
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
6.02 Points ∼25% -26%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
7222 Points ∼81% +21%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5954 Points ∼67%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5747 Points ∼65% -3%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
5550 Points ∼63% -7%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
5126 Points ∼58% -14%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
28189 Points ∼57% +25%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22512 Points ∼45%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22217 Points ∼45% -1%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
21755 Points ∼44% -3%
Asus GL702VM-GC102D
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
20111 Points ∼40% -11%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
236 s * ∼3% -12%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
211.321 s * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
176.329 s * ∼2% +17%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
579.909 Seconds * ∼3% -12%
MSI GT80 Titan SLI
Intel Core i7-5700HQ
565.334 Seconds * ∼3% -9%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
519.371 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5
Intel Core i7-7700K
440.036 Seconds * ∼2% +15%

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
6832
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
22512
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
5954
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
67.51 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.17 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.83 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
102.86 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
738 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
155 Points
Aiuto
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
5317 Points ∼82% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
5305 Points ∼81%
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache
4884 Points ∼75% -8%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
4680 Points ∼72% -12%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
2722 Points ∼42% -49%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
7220 Points ∼78% +35%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
5362 Points ∼58%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
4317 Points ∼46% -19%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
4765 Points ∼80% +19%
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
4013 Points ∼67% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
4001 Points ∼67%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
3770 Points ∼63% -6%
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache
3659 Points ∼61% -9%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4001 punti
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5362 punti
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5305 punti
Aiuto
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Asus FX502VM-AS73
SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-46%
19%
-93%
94%
Write 4k QD32
176.4
99.74
-43%
405.5
130%
1.04
-99%
398.1
126%
Read 4k QD32
521.4
369.9
-29%
288.3
-45%
1.06
-100%
509.1
-2%
Write 4k
143.1
70.91
-50%
135.1
-6%
1.05
-99%
134.1
-6%
Read 4k
47.16
29.36
-38%
31.97
-32%
0.57
-99%
45.14
-4%
Write 512
195.8
137.8
-30%
472.3
141%
51.11
-74%
1119
472%
Read 512
460.5
343.5
-25%
705.5
53%
39.06
-92%
977.4
112%
Write Seq
798.4
138.2
-83%
311
-61%
89.64
-89%
1106
39%
Read Seq
1518
502.5
-67%
1115
-27%
93.48
-94%
1684
11%
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Sequential Read: 1518 MB/s
Sequential Write: 798.4 MB/s
512K Read: 460.5 MB/s
512K Write: 195.8 MB/s
4K Read: 47.16 MB/s
4K Write: 143.1 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 521.4 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 176.4 MB/s
3DMark
Fire Strike Extreme Graphics
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5348 Points ∼33% +99%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼21% +31%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
3199 Points ∼19% +19%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2714 Points ∼17% +1%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2685 Points ∼16%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
2507 Points ∼15% -7%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼12% -26%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11261 Points ∼28% +88%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
7791 Points ∼19% +30%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7321 Points ∼18% +22%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
6797 Points ∼17% +13%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6013 Points ∼15% 0%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
5990 Points ∼15%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
5323 Points ∼13% -11%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼10% -31%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
3638 Points ∼9% -39%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
50205 Points ∼31% +32%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
46362 Points ∼28% +22%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
40922 Points ∼25% +8%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
38001 Points ∼23%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
37840 Points ∼23% 0%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
33304 Points ∼20% -12%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
32344 Points ∼20% -15%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
25986 Points ∼16% -32%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
25900 Points ∼16% -32%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
8873 Points ∼56% +19%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
7998 Points ∼50% +8%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7952 Points ∼50% +7%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7440 Points ∼47%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6999 Points ∼44% -6%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
6712 Points ∼42% -10%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
6361 Points ∼40% -15%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
4501 Points ∼28% -40%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼28% -40%
1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14450 Points ∼28% +86%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9824 Points ∼19% +27%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
9768 Points ∼19% +26%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
8571 Points ∼17% +10%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7760 Points ∼15%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7457 Points ∼15% -4%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
7128 Points ∼14% -8%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% -38%
MSI PX60 6QD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 6700HQ
4384 Points ∼9% -44%
3DMark 11 Performance
7872 punti
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
84774 punti
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
20291 punti
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5455 punti
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
2678 punti
Aiuto
basso medio alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 63.6fps
Metro: Last Light (2013) 7843.8fps
Thief (2014) 7340.4fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 4320.8fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 91794725fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 115fps
Fallout 4 (2015) 41.534.2fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 70.138.733.4fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 54.734.129.6fps
Doom (2016) 47.543.5fps
Overwatch (2016) 95.354.2fps
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243Tooltip
The Witcher 3 high

Rumorosità

Idle
28.1 / 29.1 / 29.1 dB(A)
HDD
29.1 dB(A)
Sotto carico
49.2 / 49.2 dB(A)
 
 
 
30 dB
silenzioso
40 dB(A)
udibile
50 dB(A)
rumoroso
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm di distanza)   Rumorosità ambientale: 28.1 dB(A)
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
Gigabyte P55W v7
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D256
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Radeon Pro 460, 6920HQ, Apple SSD SM1024L
Noise
-4%
-3%
-1%
-7%
3%
off / environment *
28.1
28.7
-2%
28.9
-3%
28.4
-1%
30
-7%
29
-3%
Idle Minimum *
28.1
30.6
-9%
32.3
-15%
29
-3%
33
-17%
30.3
-8%
Idle Average *
29.1
30.6
-5%
32.3
-11%
29
-0%
34
-17%
30.3
-4%
Idle Maximum *
29.1
31
-7%
32.3
-11%
32.2
-11%
35
-20%
30.3
-4%
Load Average *
49.2
46.2
6%
43.2
12%
47.1
4%
39
21%
35.1
29%
Load Maximum *
49.2
52.3
-6%
45.2
8%
47.1
4%
50
-2%
46
7%
Witcher 3 ultra *
52

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Carico massimo
 58.4 °C51.2 °C45.2 °C 
 48.2 °C47 °C29.2 °C 
 26.8 °C27 °C26.2 °C 
Massima: 58.4 °C
Media: 39.9 °C
43.4 °C40.6 °C54.2 °C
24.2 °C33.8 °C35.2 °C
25.8 °C25 °C26.2 °C
Massima: 54.2 °C
Media: 34.3 °C
Alimentazione (max)  43 °C | Temperatura della stanza 21 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.139.82539.4363135.835.6403735.95035.6356333.633.48032.332.710031.232.612530.431.116030.23020029.230.925028.23631527.74840027.753.25002747.963026.345.880025.647100025.849125024.949.5160024.551.8200024.650250024.451.6315024.156.440002461.650002459.2630023.958.5800023.861.81000023.959.71250023.863.11600023.957.4SPL3769N2.922.2median 24.9Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01USmedian 50Delta28.435.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHzmedian 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (63.07 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 97% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 10%, average was 18%, worst was 34%
Compared to all devices tested
» 91% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 9%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo di corrente
Off / Standbydarklight 0.28 / 0.78 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 6.7 / 8.9 / 10.8 Watt
Sotto carico midlight 81.8 / 122.7 Watt
 color bar
Leggenda: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01USAsus FX502VM-AS73Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71Gigabyte P55W v7Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
Power Consumption
-57%
0%
-12%
-28%
14%
Idle Minimum *
6.7
14.9
-122%
6.6
1%
7.7
-15%
8
-19%
3
55%
Idle Average *
8.9
15.1
-70%
9
-1%
11.7
-31%
13
-46%
9.9
-11%
Idle Maximum *
10.8
15.2
-41%
10.7
1%
12
-11%
18
-67%
12.5
-16%
Load Average *
81.8
105.8
-29%
77.5
5%
80.5
2%
76
7%
70.6
14%
Load Maximum *
122.7
148.8
-21%
130
-6%
128.4
-5%
143
-17%
90.8
26%
Witcher 3 ultra *
92.2

* ... Meglio usare valori piccoli

Autonomia della batteria
Idle (senza WLAN, min luminosità)
10ore 12minuti
Navigazione WiFi v1.3
4ore 23minuti
Sotto carico (max luminosità)
1ore 16minuti
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 43 Wh
Asus FX502VM-AS73
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 64 Wh
Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD)
7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 56 Wh
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 48 Wh
Gigabyte P55W v7
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 63 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.9 GHz, 460)
6920HQ, Radeon Pro 460, 76 Wh
Autonomia della batteria
-17%
10%
-20%
30%
52%
Reader / Idle
612
363
-41%
565
-8%
440
-28%
789
29%
WiFi v1.3
263
277
5%
334
27%
276
5%
346
32%
619
135%
Load
76
64
-16%
84
11%
47
-38%
98
29%
52
-32%

Pro

+ temperature core relativamente basse sotto carico gaming
+ potenti prestazioni CPU e GPU; nessun throttling
+ NVMe M.2 SSD + bay SATA III
+ system monitor utility
+ interni accessibili
+ buon feedback dei tasti

Contro

- tempi di risposta del display medi; non ci sono opzioni di display 120 Hz/5 ms o G-Sync
- ventola rumorosa durante il gaming; nessun softwar e per il controllo
- batteria con capacità limitata; autonomia media
- la cover potrebbe essere più rigida; case che scricchiola
- i tasti WASD si scaldano durante il gaming
- mancano USB Type-C o DisplayPort
- casse deboli; bassi scarsi
- SD card reader molto lento
- tasti rumorosi
In review: Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
In review: Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US

Le nostre impressioni sul primo portatile Odyssey sono miste. Da un lato il sistema ha prestazioni ammirabili senza throttling di CPU o GPU ed ha temperature basse per un portatile gaming. Le sue capacità di tenere elevati valori clock di Turbo Boost sono qualcosa che il portatili gaming supersottili non riescono a fare facilmente, quindi l'Odyssey ha mostrato buone capacità.

A parte le performance affidabili, l'Odyssey ha anche degli aspetti negativi. Innanzitutto la ventola rumorosa, anche per un portatile gaming. Con quasi 50 dB(A), siamo ai livelli di potenti GPUs come GTX 1070 o GTX 1080 - non della GTX 1050. I controlli manuali della ventola avrebbero consentito di bilanciare meglio la rumorosità e le temperature, in modo da godersi meglio i giochi.

Altri aspetti riguardano lettore SD lento, features di connettività limitate, VRAM GPU dimezzata, batteria con capacità limitata, e sia contrasto che colori non sono profondi come nella concorrenza. I tasti WASD si scaldano ed è strana anche la decisione del design; così come un produttore di auto non farebbe mai uno sterzo scomodo, allo stesso modo un produttore di pc non dovrebbe mai realizzare tasti WASD scomodi.

L'HP Pavilion 15t con stesse CPU e GPU costa da $1100 a $1200 USD ed ha la stessa configurazione dell'Odyssey. Mentre Samsung eccelle nelle core performance, è assolutamente medio in quasi tutti gli altri aspetti e non offre molto rispetto ad altri portatili con GTX 1050.

Il primo portatile gaming Samsung Odyssey è finalmente disponibile .... ma non è nulla di speciale. Prestazioni CPU e GPU sono eccellenti e senza throttling, ma la rumorosità è eclatante.

Nota: si tratta di una recensione breve, con alcune sezioni non tradotte, per la versione integrale in inglese guardate qui.

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US - 04/24/2017 v6
Allen Ngo

Chassis
63 / 98 → 64%
Tastiera
67%
Dispositivo di puntamento
69%
Connettività
49 / 81 → 60%
Peso
60 / 66 → 89%
Batteria
78%
Display
81%
Prestazioni di gioco
89%
Prestazioni Applicazioni
94%
Temperatura
85 / 95 → 89%
Rumorosità
80 / 90 → 89%
Audio
50%
Fotocamera
37 / 85 → 43%
Media
69%
77%
Gaming - Media ponderata

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Recensioni e prove de portatili e telefoni cellulari > Recensioni e prove > Recensioni e prove > Recensione breve del Portatile Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)
Allen Ngo, 2017-04-27 (Update: 2017-04-27)