Notebookcheck

Breve análisis del Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)

Allen Ngo (traducido por Francisco García), 04/26/2017

No es una historia épica. El nuevo Samsung Odyssey podría haber tenido un éxito enorme. En vez de eso, es un sistema básico mediocre sin rasgos sobresalientes que lo separen de la creciente multitud gaming salvo por su horrendo y ruidoso ventilador.

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Procesador
Intel Core i7-7700HQ 2.8 GHz
Adaptador gráfico
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 2048 MB, Núcleo: 1354 MHz, Memoría: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 375.63, Optimus
Memoría
16384 MB 
, PC4-19200 DDR4, 1300 MHz, 15-15-15-35, Dual-Channel, 2x SODIMM
pantalla
15.6 pulgadas 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels 141 PPI, IPS, ID: BOE0689, Name: NV156FHM-N46, lustroso: no
Placa base
Intel HM175
Disco duro
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, 128 GB 
, Secondary: 1 TB Seagate ST1000M035-1RK172 HDD
Tarjeta de sonido
Conexant @ Intel Skylake PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Conexiones
2 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Conexiones: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD reader
Equipamento de red
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Tamaño
Alto x ancho x profundidad (en mm): 23.9 x 378 x 260.1
Battería
43 Wh, 3780 mAh Litio-Polimero
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Características adicionales
Altavoces: 1.5 W stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, Luz de Teclado: si, Samsung Recovery, Samsung Settings, Samsung Update, WiFi Sharing, 12 Meses Garantía
Peso
2.5 kg, Suministro de Electricidad: 747 g

 

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
Temperatura del cuarto
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Máximo: 261.4 cd/m² Médio: 249 cd/m² Minimum: 4.69 cd/m²
iluminación: 90 %
Brillo con batería: 255.9 cd/m²
Contraste: 533:1 (Negro: 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 total (Programa/Opciones)
12% / 1%
18% / 14%
-2% / 27%
23% / 26%
102% / 82%

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Tiempos de respuesta del display

Los tiempos de respuesta del display muestran lo rápido que puede cambiar la pantalla de un color al siguiente. Tiempos lentos de respuesta pueden llevar a imágenes persistentes alrededor de objetos en movimiento o a displays borrosos. Particularmente los aficionados a los juegos 3D frenéticos deberían usar una pantalla con tiempos de respuesta rápidos.
       Tiempo de respuesta de Negro a Blanco
33.6 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada↗ 18.8 ms subida
↘ 14.8 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 240 (máximo) ms. » 85 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores.
Eso quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta es peor que la media (26.9 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados.
       Tiempo de respuesta 50% Gris a 80% Gris
38.8 ms ... subida ↗ y bajada ↘ combinada↗ 20.8 ms subida
↘ 18 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. » 38 % de todos los dispositivos son mejores.
Esto quiere decir que el tiempo de respuesta medido es mejor que la media (43.4 ms) de todos los dispositivos testados.

Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Para atenuar el brillo de pantalla algunos portátiles están encendiendo y apagando la retroiluminación muy rápidamente. Esto se hace a una frecuencia que no debiera detectarse a simple vista. Si la frecuencia es demasiado lenta, la gente sensible podría experimentar problemas visuales, dolores de cabeza e incluso ver parpadeos.
Parpadeo de Pantalla / PWM detectado 19230 Hz99 % de brillo

La retroiluminación del display parpadea a 19230 Hz (seguramente usa PWM - Pulse-Width Modulation) a un brillo del 99 % e inferior. Sobre este nivel de brillo no debería darse parpadeo / PWM.

La frecuencia de 19230 Hz es bastante alta, por lo que la mayoría de gente sensible al parpadeo no debería ver parpadeo o tener fatiga visual.

Comparación: 58 % de todos los dispositivos testados no usaron PWM para atenuar el display. Si se usó, medimos una media de 5114 (mínimo: 43 - máxmo: 142900) Hz.

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%

* ... más pequeño es mejor

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
ayuda
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 puntos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5362 puntos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5305 puntos
ayuda
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 ∼39% +99%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼26% +31%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1050 2GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop), 4790K
3199 Points ∼24% +19%
Asus ROG Strix GL553VD-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2714 Points ∼20% +1%
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
2685 Points ∼20%
Gigabyte P55K v5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M, 6700HQ
2507 Points ∼19% -7%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼15% -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 puntos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
84774 puntos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
20291 puntos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5455 puntos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
2678 puntos
ayuda
bajo 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

Ruido

Ocioso
28.1 / 29.1 / 29.1 dB(A)
HDD
29.1 dB(A)
Carga
49.2 / 49.2 dB(A)
 
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distancia)   environment noise: 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

* ... más pequeño es mejor

 58.4 °C51.2 °C45.2 °C 
 48.2 °C47 °C29.2 °C 
 26.8 °C27 °C26.2 °C 
Máximo: 58.4 °C
Médio: 39.9 °C
43.4 °C40.6 °C54.2 °C
24.2 °C33.8 °C35.2 °C
25.8 °C25 °C26.2 °C
Máximo: 54.2 °C
Médio: 34.3 °C
Conector de corriente  43 °C | Temperatura del cuarto 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
» 98% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% 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, 6% 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 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo de corriente
Off / Standbydarklight 0.28 / 0.78 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 6.7 / 8.9 / 10.8 Watt
Carga midlight 81.8 / 122.7 Watt
 color bar
Clave: 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

* ... más pequeño es mejor

Tiempo de Ejecución de la Batería
Ocioso (sin WLAN, min brillo)
10h 12min
Navegando con WLAN v1.3
4h 23min
Carga (máximo brillo)
1h 16min
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
Duración de Batería
-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

+ relatively cool core temperatures under gaming load
+ strong CPU and GPU performance; no throttling
+ NVMe M.2 SSD + SATA III bay
+ system monitor utility
+ accessible internals
+ good key feedback

Contra

- average display response times; no 120 Hz/5 ms or G-Sync display options
- loud fans when gaming; no fan control software
- small battery capacity; average battery life
- lid could be more rigid; creaky case
- warm WASD keys when gaming
- no USB Type-C or DisplayPort
- weak speakers; poor bass
- very slow SD card reader
- loud key clatter

Error: More than one (2) Pro / Contra Item for this review found!

Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US
Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M-X01US

El primer portátil Odyssey nos provoca sentimientos encontrados. Por un lado, el sistema rinde admirablemente sin ralentizaciones CPU o GPU y funciona con temperaturas aceptablemente bajas para un portátil gaming. Su capacidad de mantener altos valores Turbo Boost es algo con lo que los portátiles gaming superdelgados tienden a tener problemas, por lo que el Odyssey al menos tiene el rendimiento al dedillo.

Fuera de su fiable rendimiento, el Odyssey tiene problemas con otros factores. Notablemente, el ruido del ventilador es muy alto durante el juego, incluso para un portátil gaming. Con casi 50 dB(A), este nivel se espera de GPUs más potentes como GTX 1070 o GTX 1080 - no la GTX 1050. Los controles manuales de ventilador habrían ganado mucho si permitieran que el usuario equilibrara ruido y temperaturas internas para experiencias de juego más disfrutables.

Los recortes también se vuelven más obvios cuanto más tiempos pasamos con el portátil. El lector SD es lento, la conectividad está en los huesos, ya VRAM de la GPU está a la mitad, la capacidad de batería es escasa, y tanto el contraste como el color no son tan profundos como en alternativas más costosas. Las teclas WASD extra cálidas también son una extraña decisión de diseño; un fabricante de coches nunca diseñaría un volante incómodamente cálido por el mismo motivo por el que un portátil gaming nunca debería tener teclas WASD incómodamente cálidas.

El HP Pavilion 15t con las mismas CPU y GPU tambié está en el segmento de $1100 a $1200 USD como nuestra configuración del Odyssey. Si bien el Samsung brilla con su rendimiento, en el resto de aspecots es del montón y no ofrece bastante para que supere otros portátiles GTX 1050.

El primer portátil gaming Samsung Odyssey ha llegado por fin y.. es soso y nada especial. Los rendimientos CPU y GPU son geniales sin ralentización alguna, pero el ruido de ventilador es severo.

Ésta es una versión acortada del análisis original. Puedes leer el análisis completo en inglés aquí.

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

Acabado
63 / 98 → 64%
Teclado
67%
Ratón
69%
Conectividad
49 / 81 → 60%
Peso
60 / 66 → 89%
Battería
78%
Pantalla
81%
Rendimiento de juegos
89%
Rendimiento de la Aplicación
94%
Temperatura
85 / 95 → 89%
Ruido
80 / 90 → 89%
Audio
50%
Cámara
37 / 85 → 43%
Médio
69%
77%
Gaming - media ponderada

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análisis y pruebas de ordenadores portátiles y móviles teléfonos > Análisis > Breve análisis del Samsung Odyssey NP800G5M (7700HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)
Allen Ngo, 2017-04-26 (Update: 2017-04-26)