Notebookcheck

Eurocom Q6 (i7-8750H, GTX 1070 Max-Q, FHD) Laptop Review

Allen Ngo 👁, 06/06/2018

Super slim and fast. Last year's Eurocom Q5 has gotten some changes both internal and external, but it's the new processor swap that has us excited. The Eurocom Q6 offers the same GTX 1070-level graphics as its predecessor with Intel's hexa-core Coffee Lake-H CPU.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Coffee Lake-H is now widely available and so manufacturers have been updating their existing Intel 7th gen SKUs to the latest 8th gen CPUs. Aside from the obvious CPU swap, this year's Eurocom Q6 offers small superficial changes over the 2017 Q5. Users can otherwise expect an identical experience between the Q5 the Q6 when it comes to chassis rigidity, keyboard feel, speakers, serviceability, and connectivity features. We recommend checking out our existing review on the Eurocom Q5 for more information since the Q6 is very similar.

Core options for the 15.6-inch Q6 include the quad-core i5-8300H or hexa-core i7-8750H CPUs, FHD or 4K UHD displays, and a fixed GTX 1070 Max-Q GPU. New to the Q6 is the addition of a 144 Hz FHD panel for ultra-smooth gameplay. Judging by the specifications and ultrathin design alone, it's clear that the Q6 is intended to compete directly with ultraportable gaming notebooks like the MSI GS63/GS65, Gigabyte Aero 15/15X, Aorus X5, Asus Zephyrus, and the upcoming Razer Blade 15.

Eurocom Q6
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q - 16384 MB, Core: 1101 MHz, Memory: 8008 MHz, GDDR5, 389.27, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2666, 1333.3 MHz, PC4-21300, Dual-Channel, 15-17-17-35
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, LG Philips LGD05C0, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Soundcard
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Connections
5 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, 3.5 mm microphone, Card Reader: SDXC reader
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter (a/b/g/h/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18.6 x 380 x 249 ( = 0.73 x 14.96 x 9.8 in)
Battery
55 Wh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 2 W stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Control Center 2.0, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.16 kg ( = 76.19 oz / 4.76 pounds), Power Supply: 650 g ( = 22.93 oz / 1.43 pounds)
Price
1900 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

In terms of design, changes from the Q5 to the Q6 are largely skin deep. The accent marks on the outer lid and red ventilation grilles on the rear have been dropped in favor of completely smooth surfaces and matte gray hinges, respectively. The Power button has also been moved to the more common top right corner location. Its dimensions, internal slots, and weight are otherwise identical to the Q5.

Connectivity

The Q6 is one of the few gaming laptops shipping with dedicated mini-DisplayPort ports and even a mini SIM slot. Still, it's disappointing to see no Thunderbolt 3 ports yet again. Ports are easy to reach but they are positioned too closely to the front edges.

Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x mini DisplayPort 1.2, 2x USB 3.1 Type-C (Gen. 1), 2x USB 3.0 (Source: Eurocom)
Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x mini DisplayPort 1.2, 2x USB 3.1 Type-C (Gen. 1), 2x USB 3.0 (Source: Eurocom)
Right: 3.5 mm microphone, 3.5 mm headset, USB 3.0, SDXC card reader, mini SIM, Gigabit RJ-45, Kensington Lock (Source: Eurocom)
Right: 3.5 mm microphone, 3.5 mm headset, USB 3.0, SDXC card reader, mini SIM, Gigabit RJ-45, Kensington Lock (Source: Eurocom)

SD Card Reader

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
194 MB/s ∼100% +14%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
191 MB/s ∼98% +12%
Eurocom Q6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
170.67 MB/s ∼88%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
242 MB/s ∼100% +17%
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
240 MB/s ∼99% +16%
Eurocom Q6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
207.24 MB/s ∼86%

Communication

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s ∼100% +2%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
660 MBit/s ∼98% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
658 MBit/s ∼98%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
662 MBit/s ∼100% +7%
Eurocom Q6
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
620 MBit/s ∼94%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
587 MBit/s ∼89% -5%

Maintenance

Serviceability continues to be a strong point for Eurocom when compared to competitors. Support for 4G LTE is a notable feature not commonly found on most other gaming laptops.

Eurocom says existing Q5 owners can replace and upgrade the motherboard to CFL-H to support all the new hardware features of the Q6 series. The option is an excellent demonstration of the versatility of a Clevo chassis even though it will still require a bit of technical skill in practice.

(Source: Eurocom)
(Source: Eurocom)

Software

Clevo has overhauled the Control Center software to be easier to use while showing users more information at a time. We like the new approach especially since owners of Clevo systems tend to be enthusiasts who can understand and appreciate the real-time analytics. Our main complaints are that the window is rather big with lots of empty space, cannot be resized, and lacks both real-time recording and overlay features when gaming in full-screen mode.

System idle
System idle
Triple-zone RGB lighting controls with FlexiKey Macro options
Triple-zone RGB lighting controls with FlexiKey Macro options
Power Profile settings
Power Profile settings
UI color options
UI color options

Warranty

The one-year limited warranty applies with options to extend up to three years.

Input Devices

Keyboard and Touchpad

The perimeter of the keyboard is slightly different, but keys and feedback are otherwise the same as on the Q5. Users accustomed to the SteelSeries keyboard of the MSI GS series will find a very similar experience on the Q6.

More gaming laptops from MSI, Aorus, and Razer have already moved on to per-key RGB lighting and we're hoping to see the same from Clevo and Eurocom in the future.

Display

Panel options include FHD at 60 Hz, 120 Hz, or 144 Hz and 4K UHD at 60 Hz. Our test unit is equipped with the new 144 Hz FHD panel that exhibits noticeably smoother cursor control and frame rates during everyday use when compared to a standard 60 Hz panel. In fact, the LG Philips LGD05C0 panel on our Eurocom demo is the same 144 Hz panel as found on the Gigabyte Aero 15X v8. Unsurprisingly, both are very similar in terms of colors and response times. The backlight on our Eurocom is a bit brighter but at the cost of a slightly lower contrast ratio.

Subjectively, texts and images are crisp without any major graininess issues common on many matte panels. There is unfortunately some light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom edge of our unit that is noticeable during movie playback.

It's worth noting that the 4K UHD panel for the Q6 (AU Optronics B156ZAN02.2) is different than the one on the Q5 (LG Philips LP156UD1-SPB1). We lamented the fact that the Q5 made use of a WRGB panel instead of a standard RGB pixel array and so we're glad to see Eurocom switch over to the more traditional RGB option for the Q6.

Moderate bleeding around the edges
Moderate bleeding around the edges
RGB subpixel array (141 PPI)
RGB subpixel array (141 PPI)
298.7
cd/m²
307.4
cd/m²
318.6
cd/m²
302.9
cd/m²
326.6
cd/m²
332.1
cd/m²
293.6
cd/m²
312.9
cd/m²
318.5
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 332.1 cd/m² Average: 312.4 cd/m² Minimum: 18.32 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 326.6 cd/m²
Contrast: 778:1 (Black: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.54 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2, calibrated: 1.63
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
94.5% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 60.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.14
Eurocom Q6
LG Philips LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Eurocom Q5
ID: LGD04D4, Name: LG Philips LP156UD1-SPB1, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Aorus X5 v8
AU Optronics B156HAN07.0 (AUO70ED), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
15.4, 2880x1800
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
AU Optronics B156HAN08.0 (AUO80ED), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-145%
-20%
-174%
-20%
-10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
15.2 (8.4, 6.8)
32.4 (16, 16.4)
-113%
18.8 (10, 8.8)
-24%
42.4 (20.4, 22)
-179%
17.6 (9.2, 8.4)
-16%
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
-11%
Response Time Black / White *
10.4 (6, 4.4)
28.8 (18.8, 10)
-177%
12 (7.6, 4.4)
-15%
28 (14.8, 13.2)
-169%
12.8 (7.6, 5.2)
-23%
11.2 (6, 5.2)
-8%
PWM Frequency
Screen
-44%
13%
33%
6%
19%
Brightness middle
326.6
287.5
-12%
271
-17%
534
64%
254
-22%
313
-4%
Brightness
312
279
-11%
259
-17%
502
61%
262
-16%
300
-4%
Brightness Distribution
88
87
-1%
87
-1%
86
-2%
89
1%
78
-11%
Black Level *
0.42
0.65
-55%
0.27
36%
0.31
26%
0.22
48%
0.33
21%
Contrast
778
442
-43%
1004
29%
1723
121%
1155
48%
948
22%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.54
4.5
-77%
1.81
29%
1.8
29%
2.37
7%
1.29
49%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.7
8.9
-89%
3.33
29%
3.8
19%
4.71
-0%
2.04
57%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.63
1.84
-13%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.9
4.6
-142%
1.09
43%
2.4
-26%
1.58
17%
0.69
64%
Gamma
2.14 103%
2.39 92%
2.45 90%
2.27 97%
2.48 89%
2.43 91%
CCT
6562 99%
7393 88%
6435 101%
6563 99%
6785 96%
6550 99%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60.9
59
-3%
61
0%
77.92
28%
60
-1%
60
-1%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
94.5
92.3
-2%
93
-2%
99.94
6%
92
-3%
94
-1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-95% / -60%
-4% / 8%
-71% / -2%
-7% / 2%
5% / 14%

* ... smaller is better

Color space covers almost the entire sRGB spectrum and about 61 percent of AdobeRGB to be similar to the 4K UHD panel on the Q5. This is comparable to other enthusiast-level gaming laptops but narrower than on the MacBook Pro 15.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB

Additional measurements with a X-Rite spectrophotometer reveal very accurate grayscale and colors out of the box. Our calibration efforts improve colors even further, but the change is minimal at best.

Grayscale before calibration
Grayscale before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
10.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6 ms rise
↘ 4.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.4 ms rise
↘ 6.8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is acceptable when under shade and with the brightness setting on maximum. Direct sunlight will still overwhelm the backlight and wash out onscreen content. Viewing angles are thankfully wide as one would expect from an IPS panel. Users opting for the 120 Hz TN option will not have the same luxury.

Outdoors under direct sunlight
Outdoors under direct sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under direct sunlight
Outdoors under direct sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles

Performance

Processor

Much like the 8th gen i7-8550U and 7th gen i7-7500U, the 8th gen i7-8750H provides a large performance boost over the 7th gen i7-7700HQ that it supplants. CineBench benchmarks show the Q6 to be 10 to 40 percent faster than the Q5 depending on the workload. Performance is within 1 to 2 percentage points from the average of ten i7-8750H CPUs in our database.

Turbo Boost sustainability is good but not perfect. As shown by our graph below, running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop results in an initial highest score before quickly falling in subsequent runs. Its initial score of 1069 stabilizes to around 960 points for a performance drop of about 10 percent. In comparison, the i7-7700HQ in the Q5 drops by about 5 percent when running the same CineBench loop test.

See our CPU page on the Core i7-8750H for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R15
CineBench R15
010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
192 Points ∼88% +13%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼80% +3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (163 - 177, n=51)
173 Points ∼79% +2%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
170 Points ∼78% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
170 Points ∼78%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
168 Points ∼77% -1%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
162 Points ∼74% -5%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
152 Points ∼70% -11%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
149 Points ∼68% -12%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
140 Points ∼64% -18%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
131 Points ∼60% -23%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
1359 Points ∼31% +29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1129 Points ∼26% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (863 - 1251, n=54)
1105 Points ∼25% +5%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
1053 Points ∼24% 0%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
1050 Points ∼24%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
770 Points ∼18% -27%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
738 Points ∼17% -30%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
678 Points ∼15% -35%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
660 Points ∼15% -37%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
604 Points ∼14% -42%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
514 Points ∼12% -51%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
2.16 Points ∼89% +11%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
2 Points ∼82% +3%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
1.98 Points ∼81% +2%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1.89 - 2, n=34)
1.965 Points ∼81% +1%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.95 Points ∼80%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.84 Points ∼75% -6%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.73 Points ∼71% -11%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
1.72 Points ∼70% -12%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
1.68 Points ∼69% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1.55 Points ∼64% -21%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
1.52 Points ∼62% -22%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
14.98 Points ∼55% +29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
12.5 Points ∼46% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (9.54 - 13.5, n=35)
12.3 Points ∼45% +6%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.82 Points ∼44% +2%
Eurocom Q6
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.62 Points ∼43%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
8.47 Points ∼31% -27%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.14 Points ∼30% -30%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
7.67 Points ∼28% -34%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
7.49 Points ∼28% -36%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
6.2 Points ∼23% -47%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
5.92 Points ∼22% -49%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
7243 Points ∼67%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
6730 Points ∼62%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (6292 - 6643, n=13)
6491 Points ∼60%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
6482 Points ∼60%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
6062 Points ∼56%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5877 Points ∼54%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
5550 Points ∼51%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
5433 Points ∼50%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
4330 Points ∼40%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
38810 Points ∼78%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (29952 - 35307, n=13)
33121 Points ∼67%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
25561 Points ∼51%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
23585 Points ∼47%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
23052 Points ∼46%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
21824 Points ∼44%
Razer Blade (2016) FHD
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
20639 Points ∼41%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
20061 Points ∼40%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
17971 Points ∼36%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
353.153 s * ∼4%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
331.085 s * ∼4%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
253.57 s * ∼3%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
252.12 s * ∼3%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
225.617 s * ∼3%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
215.4 s * ∼3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (125 - 181, n=6)
158 s * ∼2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
120.923 s * ∼1%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1 - 10645, n=39)
2896 Seconds * ∼13%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
693.994 Seconds * ∼3%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
654.006 Seconds * ∼3%
Eurocom Q5
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
561.342 Seconds * ∼2%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
547.965 Seconds * ∼2%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
545.92 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
467.526 Seconds * ∼2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
465.128 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.95 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
11.62 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
76.28 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
170 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1050 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
118.53 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

PCMark scores are about 5 to 20 percent higher than the Q5 due to the processor update alone. However, PCMark scores may also be affected by the difference in display resolution as well since our Q5 was equipped with a 4K panel. Competing systems equipped with the GTX 1070 Max-Q score similarly to our Eurocom.

We experienced no notable software issues during our time with the test unit.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10 - Score
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
6620 Points ∼85% +23%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
6154 Points ∼79% +15%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5362 Points ∼69%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5119 Points ∼66% -5%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5095 Points ∼66% -5%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5953 Points ∼91% +4%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5751 Points ∼88%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5621 Points ∼86% -2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
5181 Points ∼80% -10%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
4891 Points ∼75% -15%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5773 Points ∼95% +24%
Eurocom Sky X4C
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8700K, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
5225 Points ∼86% +13%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4665 Points ∼77% 0%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
4644 Points ∼76%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
3829 Points ∼63% -18%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4644 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5751 points
Help

Storage Devices

The M.2 2280 and SATA III storage bays return from the Q5 and so does the 512 GB Samsung SSD 960 Pro for our particular test unit. In comparison, competing models like the MSI GS65 and Gigabyte Aero 15X have two M.2 2280 slots and one M.2 2280 slot, respectively. As usual, Eurocom offers a very wide range of storage options between the M.2 and 2.5-inch SATA III drives should users want to configure with less or more storage.

See our table of HDDs and SSDs for more benchmark comparisons.

CDM 5
CDM 5
AS SSD
AS SSD
Eurocom Q6
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Eurocom Q5
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Eurocom Sky X4C
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 1TB m.2 NVMe
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
AS SSD
-39%
13%
24%
2%
Copy Game MB/s
633.24
682.33
8%
1054.98
67%
Copy Program MB/s
363.41
301.53
-17%
467.16
29%
Copy ISO MB/s
1768.37
1967.04
11%
1908.08
8%
Score Total
3894
2536
-35%
4001
3%
4615
19%
4122
6%
Score Write
1693
939
-45%
1705
1%
1703
1%
2051
21%
Score Read
1477
1092
-26%
1529
4%
1945
32%
1346
-9%
Access Time Write *
0.039
0.046
-18%
0.028
28%
0.03
23%
0.035
10%
Access Time Read *
0.049
0.119
-143%
0.036
27%
0.032
35%
0.073
-49%
4K-64 Write
1402.71
742.09
-47%
1366.04
-3%
1374.74
-2%
1760.16
25%
4K-64 Read
1194.78
847.34
-29%
1230.69
3%
1645.75
38%
1170.26
-2%
4K Write
96.21
80.44
-16%
136.19
42%
129.64
35%
107.15
11%
4K Read
29.62
23.36
-21%
49.3
66%
44.83
51%
48.94
65%
Seq Write
1943.43
1163.11
-40%
2029.39
4%
1988.74
2%
1834.04
-6%
Seq Read
2522.91
2212.97
-12%
2493.24
-1%
2541.23
1%
1266.1
-50%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3321 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1985 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 317.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 245.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1150 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1096 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 47.29 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 114 MB/s

GPU Performance

Despite being paired with a faster 8th gen Core CPU, the GTX 1070 Max-Q in the Q6 is not suddenly any faster than the same GPU in last year's Q5. 3DMark benchmarks place the Q6 within 1 to 2 percentage points from the GTX 1070 Max-Q in the Q5. Users can expect raw performance to be 25 percent faster than the standard GTX 1060 but 15 percent slower than the standard GTX 1070.

Gaming performance is excellent and where we expect it to be for a system with GTX 1070 Max-Q graphics. In order to take full advantage of the native 144 Hz refresh rate, however, settings will need to be turned down to basic levels to reach those high frame rates.

See our page on the GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q GPU for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
3DMark
3840x2160 Fire Strike Ultra Graphics
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
4232 Points ∼42% +27%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (3210 - 3662, n=8)
3335 Points ∼33% 0%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
3324 Points ∼33%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
3262 Points ∼32% -2%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
2299 Points ∼23% -31%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
1025 Points ∼10% -69%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
22555 Points ∼56% +53%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
21422 Points ∼53% +46%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
18505 Points ∼46% +26%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
17046 Points ∼42% +16%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (14146 - 16165, n=16)
14910 Points ∼37% +1%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
14694 Points ∼36%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
14557 Points ∼36% -1%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% -22%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11483 Points ∼28% -22%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
9608 Points ∼24% -35%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
4645 Points ∼11% -68%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
14080 Points ∼78% +36%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
11707 Points ∼65% +13%
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
11498 Points ∼63% +11%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
10351 Points ∼57%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (7458 - 12069, n=18)
9753 Points ∼54% -6%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
9607 Points ∼53% -7%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
9319 Points ∼51% -10%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
8343 Points ∼46% -19%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼43% -24%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7696 Points ∼42% -26%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5808 Points ∼32% -44%
1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI Gaming X GeForce GTX 1080 Desktop PC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop), 4790K
32126 Points ∼63% +75%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
28918 Points ∼57% +57%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK
24425 Points ∼48% +33%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
21925 Points ∼43% +19%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (17680 - 20829, n=18)
19016 Points ∼37% +4%
Eurocom Q5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ
18684 Points ∼37% +2%
Eurocom Q6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
18363 Points ∼36%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% -17%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14550 Points ∼29% -21%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
12472 Points ∼24% -32%
Asus GL552VW-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5779 Points ∼11% -69%
3DMark 11 Performance
15801 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
34682 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
12903 points
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
6588 points
Help
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 327.9246.7230.8132.1fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 236.2165.29748.9fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 202.7166.297.882.4fps
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, 2x Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP (RAID 0)
76.8 fps ∼100% +57%
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK, LiteOn CX2-8B256
64.2 fps ∼84% +31%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
60 fps ∼78% +23%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (46 - 55.3, n=19)
51.5 fps ∼67% +5%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
48.9 fps ∼64%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
46 fps ∼60% -6%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
37 fps ∼48% -24%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
36.8 fps ∼48% -25%
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
Alienware 15 R3 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7820HK, LiteOn CX2-8B256
151.7 fps ∼100% +15%
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
132.1 fps ∼87%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
130.5 fps ∼86% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (110 - 139, n=10)
127 fps ∼84% -4%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
100.4 fps ∼66% -24%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
82.4 fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
  (77.1 - 85.9, n=7)
82 fps ∼100% 0%
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
79.7 fps ∼97% -3%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
57 fps ∼69% -31%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, SK hynix SC311 M.2
45.3 fps ∼55% -45%

Stress Test

We stress the system to identify for any potential throttling or stability issues. When running Prime95 to stress the CPU, the processor can be observed running stably at 2.7 GHz (or 500 MHz above the base clock rate of the i7-8750H) but at a relatively high core temperature of 83 C. Higher Turbo Boost clock rates are only possible within the first few seconds of initiating Prime95 because once the CPU reaches 92 C, it automatically throttles to 2.7 GHz in order to maintain safer core temperatures. Running both Prime95 and FurMark simultaneously to stress the CPU and GPU will throttle the CPU even further to its base clock rate of 2.2 GHz. Fortunately, this never dips any slower which would have been unfavorable especially for a performance laptop.

Running Witcher 3 is more representative of real-world gaming loads. Interestingly, results here are very different from the Prime95 test above. CPU temperature can be as warm as 98 C with much higher clock rates of up to 3.9 GHz when the game demands it. GPU clock rate remains stable at 923.5 MHz whereas a standard GTX 1070 can be significantly faster at 1468 MHz. We believe that the GPU in the Q6 can run faster since its core temperature is relatively cool at 66 C when gaming compared to the very warm CPU, but it may be limited by the 150 W AC adapter.

Running on batteries limits CPU and GPU potential. A 3DMark 11 run on battery power returns Physics and Graphics scores of 6769 and 11144 points, respectively, compared to 11737 and 18363 points when on mains.

System idle
System idle
Prime95 stress
Prime95 stress
Witcher 3 stress
Witcher 3 stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
System idle (Control Center)
System idle (Control Center)
Prime95+FurMark stress (Control Center)
Prime95+FurMark stress (Control Center)
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 2.7 -- 83 42
FurMark Stress -- 847.5 70 73
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 2.2 923.5 83 70
Witcher 3 Stress ~3.8 923.5 92 66

Emissions

System Noise

Fan noise is unsurprisingly nearly the same as on the Q5. We recommend running the system on Power Saver mode if word processing or streaming to keep fan noise as low as possible. The fans become sensitive to speed changes when on the High Performance profile.

If gaming, fan noise become stable at about 43 dB(A) to be similar to the GS65 yet significantly quieter than the Zephyrus M GM501 under similar conditions. Of course, the drawback is that the CPU in the Eurocom will be running much warmer as shown by our Stress Test section above.

The manual "Maximum" fan setting will bump both systems fans to their maximum RPMs to almost 51 dB(A). This will help in cooling the very warm CPU temperatures when gaming albeit at the obvious cost of even louder fan noise.

We can notice no coil whine or electronic noise on our unit.

Noise Level

Idle
30.4 / 30.5 / 33.3 dB(A)
Load
42.3 / 50.8 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 28.3 dB(A)
Eurocom Q6
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Eurocom Q5
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Noise
-3%
-11%
-7%
1%
-5%
off / environment *
28.3
29
-2%
30
-6%
29
-2%
30
-6%
29
-2%
Idle Minimum *
30.4
31.5
-4%
33
-9%
30
1%
30
1%
30
1%
Idle Average *
30.5
33.8
-11%
35
-15%
31
-2%
31
-2%
31
-2%
Idle Maximum *
33.3
33.8
-2%
40
-20%
35
-5%
34
-2%
33
1%
Load Average *
42.3
41.7
1%
45
-6%
49
-16%
43
-2%
49
-16%
Witcher 3 ultra *
43.3
41.7
4%
50
-15%
51
-18%
42
3%
50
-15%
Load Maximum *
50.8
54.2
-7%
55
-8%
54
-6%
44
13%
52
-2%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Quadruple exhaust vents (Witcher 3 load)
Quadruple exhaust vents (Witcher 3 load)

Surface temperatures are flat in the low 30 C range when idling on desktop. When gaming, hot spots can grow to as warm as 53 C. While still warmer than we would like, it is at least comparatively cooler than on the GS65 which can be as warm as 63 C under similar gaming loads.

Temperature development is unfortunately concentrated on the left half of the Q6 due to the positioning of the CPU inside. Thus, the left side of the keyboard and palm rest will always be noticeably warmer than the right. This is unfavorable for gaming purposes since the commonly used WASD keys should be as cool as possible for maximum comfort. The Asus FX504 does a better job at keeping these important keys cool under load while the Asus GM501 provides a more symmetrical and agreeable temperature gradient.

System idle (top)
System idle (top)
System idle (bottom)
System idle (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Maximum stress (top)
Maximum stress (top)
Maximum stress (bottom)
Maximum stress (bottom)
Max. Load
 49 °C
120 F
45.2 °C
113 F
40 °C
104 F
 
 45.4 °C
114 F
43.2 °C
110 F
33.2 °C
92 F
 
 33.6 °C
92 F
37.6 °C
100 F
27.6 °C
82 F
 
Maximum: 49 °C = 120 F
Average: 39.4 °C = 103 F
41.4 °C
107 F
52.6 °C
127 F
53 °C
127 F
33 °C
91 F
44 °C
111 F
48.6 °C
119 F
31.2 °C
88 F
37 °C
99 F
39.4 °C
103 F
Maximum: 53 °C = 127 F
Average: 42.2 °C = 108 F
Power Supply (max.)  46.4 °C = 116 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.4 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 49 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 39.3 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 53 °C / 127 F, compared to the average of 41.7 °C / 107 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.5 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 41.6 °C / 107 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 37.6 °C / 99.7 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.7 °C / 83.7 F (-8.9 °C / -16 F).

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Idling on desktop demands anywhere between 11 W and 22 W depending on the brightness and Power Profile while gaming will draw about 140 W. Power consumption is very similar to the MSI GS65 since they both share the same CPU, GPU, and display resolution. Systems with "proper" GTX 1070 GPUs will be more power hungry when gaming by as much as 25 W or more.

Maximum load draws 150 W from the medium-sized (~16 x 7.5 x 2.5 cm) 150 W AC adapter. In other words, there is no overhead available from the adapter. We would have preferred a more capable 180 W or 200 W AC adapter for the 10 to 20 percent power overhead as is common practice from most manufacturers. In fact, the Q5 actually ships with the more capable 180 W adapter and so we're not sure why Eurocom downgraded it to 150 W this time around.

(June 21, 2018 Update: Eurocom has informed us that the 150 W AC adapter with our test unit was shipped by mistake. All Q6 SKUs ship with 180 W AC adapters. Future SKUs will have the option for 200 W AC adapters to potentially boost performance even further.)

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.25 / 1.6 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 11.6 / 16.3 / 21.5 Watt
Load midlight 100.7 / 150.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Eurocom Q6
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Eurocom Q5
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Aorus X5 v8
8850H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Omen 15t-ce000
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Power Consumption
15%
-60%
11%
-2%
-24%
Idle Minimum *
11.6
9
22%
25
-116%
7
40%
15.4
-33%
16
-38%
Idle Average *
16.3
13.5
17%
31
-90%
11
33%
22.4
-37%
19
-17%
Idle Maximum *
21.5
13.7
36%
33
-53%
20
7%
22.4
-4%
26
-21%
Load Average *
100.7
87.8
13%
102
-1%
98
3%
78.1
22%
103
-2%
Load Maximum *
150.3
158.6
-6%
239
-59%
182
-21%
133.52
11%
223
-48%
Witcher 3 ultra *
140.1
129
8%
194
-38%
132
6%
97.5
30%
164
-17%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Battery life is shorter than on the Q5 when subjected to similar WLAN loads despite both carrying identical 55 Wh internal battery packs. The delta could be attributed to unforeseen background activity or even differences in resolution and refresh rate between our Q5 and Q6 units. Even so, 3.5 to 4 hours of real-world browsing is about average for a gaming notebook.

Charging from near empty to full capacity still takes between 1.5 to 2 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
5h 06min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
3h 39min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 12min
Eurocom Q6
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 55 Wh
Eurocom Q5
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 55 Wh
Aorus X5 v8
8850H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 92.24 Wh
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 82 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh
HP Omen 15t-ce000
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 70 Wh
Battery Runtime
12%
9%
48%
133%
2%
Reader / Idle
306
466
52%
294
-4%
507
66%
762
149%
298
-3%
WiFi v1.3
219
258
18%
362
65%
513
134%
208
-5%
Load
72
47
-35%
87
21%
81
13%
156
117%
83
15%

Pros

+ new Control Center 2.0 software; improved fan controls
+ relatively cool GPU temperature when gaming
+ accurate grayscale and colors out of the box
+ near complete sRGB coverage
+ no PWM; fast response times
+ easy serviceability
+ 4G LTE compatible
+ dual storage bays
+ 144 Hz IPS panel
+ thin

Cons

- very high CPU temperature when gaming
- unable to sustain maximum Turbo Boost
- warm WASD keys when gaming
- thick bezels and footprint
- no per-key RGB backlight
- poor bass reproduction
- average battery life
- no Thunderbolt 3

Verdict

In review: Eurocom Q6. Test model provided by Eurocom US
In review: Eurocom Q6. Test model provided by Eurocom US

Our general comments for the Q5 still apply here for the Q6. Potential users interested in the Q6 should make the most of the system by utilizing its accessible 2.5-inch SATA III bay and 4G LTE connectivity as these are uncommon in the world of super-thin gaming notebooks.

The biggest challenge for the Q6 is that it doesn't offer all that much more over the Q5 in terms of features and gaming performance. This isn't necessarily bad because the Q5 is a respectable gaming system to begin with, but the Q6 is launching in the same quarter as heavy-hitters like the MSI GS65 and Gigabyte Aero 15X. Both alternatives offer narrow bezels, the same CPU and GPU options, and similar 144 Hz panels all while being significantly lighter and more portable for the same ~$2000 price point. Even "thick bezel" newcomers like the Asus Zephyrus M GM501 or Aorus X5 v8 offer Thunderbolt 3, per-key RGB lighting, or both. In short, the Eurocom Q series is beginning to show its age and it risks falling behind even further should next year's refresh be yet another minor update. The Q6 will have to come down in price if it hopes to be more competitive against the latest models from MSI, Asus, Aorus, and Razer.

Performance is solid if not a little too warm. For the price, however, the Q6 is sorely missing modern luxuries that alternatives are offering like Thunderbolt 3, per-key RGB lighting, and narrow bezels. The series is at a standstill for the moment while competitors are zooming by with fresher designs and more features.

Eurocom Q6 - 06/22/2018 v6
Allen Ngo

Chassis
76 / 98 → 78%
Keyboard
81%
Pointing Device
83%
Connectivity
66 / 81 → 81%
Weight
62 / 10-66 → 93%
Battery
73%
Display
90%
Games Performance
96%
Application Performance
97%
Temperature
79 / 95 → 83%
Noise
75 / 90 → 83%
Audio
45%
Camera
50 / 85 → 59%
Add Points
-1%
Average
69%
83%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 5 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Eurocom Q6 (i7-8750H, GTX 1070 Max-Q, FHD) Laptop Review
Allen Ngo, 2018-06- 6 (Update: 2018-06-21)
Allen Ngo
Allen Ngo - US Editor in Chief
After graduating with a B.S. in environmental hydrodynamics from the University of California, I studied reactor physics to become licensed by the U.S. NRC to operate nuclear reactors. There's a striking level of appreciation you gain for everyday consumer electronics after working with modern nuclear reactivity systems astonishingly powered by computers from the 80s. When I'm not managing day-to-day activities and US review articles on Notebookcheck, you can catch me following the eSports scene and the latest gaming news.