Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarGPD Pocket 3 convertible UMPC review: Faster than many Intel EVO laptops
After the somewhat disappointing Win Max gaming UMPC hybrid earlier this year, the new GPD Pocket 3 is a return to form on a more traditional UMPC without any of the integrated gamepad buttons. Instead, the Pocket 3 features a rotatable touchscreen a la the old HP tx1000 or Lenovo ThinkPad Twist for switching between laptop mode and tablet mode.
Core specifications are impressive for such a small 16:10 8-inch form factor as the system is powered by the same hardware found on the latest Intel Evo laptops. The Tiger Lake-U Core i7-1195G7 CPU, Iris Xe GPU, 1200p IPS display, Thunderbolt 4, and even PCIe4 NVMe SSD are all available here on the highest-end configuration. Alternatively, the lower-end option comes with the Pentium N6000 instead.
Our test unit is a higher-end Core i7 pre-production unit that's missing a few auxiliary features from the final retail model. Nonetheless, it is still an accurate representation of what users can expect in terms of performance and display quality from the final model. Users can check out the official Pocket 3 Indiegogo page for the full specifications.
More GPD reviews:
Potential Competitors in Comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 86.3 % | 11/2021 | GPD Pocket 3 i7-1195G7, Iris Xe G7 96EUs | 730 g | 20 mm | 8.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 79.3 % | 08/2021 | GPD Win Max 2021 R7 4800U, Vega 8 | 850 g | 26 mm | 8.00" | 1280x800 | |
01/2021 | GPD Win 3 i5-1135G7, Iris Xe G7 80EUs | 553 g | 27 mm | 5.50" | 1280x720 | ||
| 88.5 % | 04/2021 | Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 i7-1160G7, Iris Xe G7 96EUs | 1.1 kg | 14.5 mm | 12.30" | 1920x1280 | |
| 86.7 % | 10/2021 | Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 i7-1165G7, Iris Xe G7 96EUs | 1.3 kg | 14.35 mm | 13.40" | 1920x1200 | |
| 89.4 % | 12/2020 | HP Spectre x360 14t-ea000 i7-1165G7, Iris Xe G7 96EUs | 1.3 kg | 17.2 mm | 13.50" | 1920x1280 |
Case — Sleek and Mostly Strong
GPD uses the same metal chassis materials between the Pocket 3, Win Max, and Win 3 for a similar feel and texture between the lineup. Though the base is strong and rigid, the rotating touchscreen is attached to a very small joint that feels prone to weakening or breaking over time. This is something we'll have to test more thoroughly over the course of a year to see if the joint can hold up to constant use.
The lack of any integrated controller buttons allows the 8-inch Pocket 3 to be both lighter and smaller than the 8-inch Win Max in all three dimensions.
Connectivity — Needs More USB-C Ports
Port options are varied save for one annoying limitation: there is just a single USB-C port for both Thunderbolt 4 and charging. Attaching external monitors, docking stations, or external graphics may therefore prevent you from charging the Pocket 3 if said devices do not support USB charging passthrough. The lesser Pentium Pocket 3 SKU does not come with Thunderbolt support.
Unique to the Pocket 3 is its KVM port which can be converted to HDMI-in or USB-in as shown in the picture to the right. Users would then be able to to control external devices with the integrated Pocket 3 keyboard or use the internal display for external hosts.
Though our pre-production test unit doesn't include one, GPD says retail models will integrate a MicroSD card reader.
Communication
Webcam — Off-Centered
Image quality from the 2 MP webcam is sharper than on many other laptops, but color accuracy remain poor. The webcam is also off-centered as it is on the top left corner of the display instead of the top center. There is no webcam shutter or IR camera, either.
Maintenance
Bottom panel can be easily removed with just a Philips screwdriver. Only the M.2 SSD and battery can be serviced.
Accessories and Warranty
Removable KVM modules and an active stylus are included with certain bundles. A one-year limited warranty applies, but users will have to pay for shipping.
Input Devices — Surprisingly Good for the Size
Keyboard
Interestingly, the keys are slightly clickier and louder than the keys on the Win Max for a relatively more comfortable typing experience. Users will have to get used to the inevitably small surface area.
Touchpad
The small touchpad (~6.3 x 3.3 cm) works reliably and with no jumping or skipping no matter the glide speed. GPD says final retail units will have glass (frosted stalinite) touchpads instead of matte plastic on our pre-production unit. Meanwhile, the mouse keys are quiet yet firm and with decent travel when pressed.
Display — Crisp and Colorful
Display quality from the 8-inch 1200p panel is sharp due to the high PPI. Colors and brightness are in between that of the Win Max and Win 3 which should be more than sufficient for office-type work and multimedia playback. Color coverage is unfortunately narrower than on many mid-range Ultrabooks where >95 percent sRGB has become the norm. The internal display is therefore not recommended for any serious graphics editing.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 438.4 cd/m²
Contrast: 1096:1 (Black: 0.4 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.02 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.1, calibrated: 4.05
ΔE Greyscale 4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
52.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
74.7% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
51.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.29
| GPD Pocket 3 Digital Flat Panel, IPS, 1920x1200, 8.00 | GPD Win Max 2021 LT7911D, IPS, 1280x800, 8.00 | GPD Win 3 IPS, 1280x720, 5.50 | Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 N123NCA-GS1, a-Si IPS LED, 1920x1280, 12.30 | Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 Sharp LQ134N1, IPS, 1920x1200, 13.40 | HP Spectre x360 14t-ea000 LG Philips LGD0663, IPS, 1920x1280, 13.50 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -10% | 17% | 31% | 35% | 30% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 51.1 | 47.2 -8% | 59.5 16% | 67 31% | 69.7 36% | 65.8 29% |
| sRGB Coverage | 74.7 | 65.2 -13% | 89.6 20% | 99.2 33% | 99 33% | 98.2 31% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 52.8 | 47.6 -10% | 61.4 16% | 68.8 30% | 71.7 36% | 67.9 29% |
| Response Times | -37% | 5% | -43% | -39% | -47% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 37.2 ? | 56.8 ? -53% | 40 ? -8% | 63.2 ? -70% | 55.6 ? -49% | 62 ? -67% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 31.2 ? | 37.6 ? -21% | 25.6 ? 18% | 36 ? -15% | 40.4 ? -29% | 39.6 ? -27% |
| PWM Frequency | 201.6 ? | 2500 ? | ||||
| Screen | -15% | -29% | 45% | 17% | 36% | |
| Brightness middle | 438.4 | 374.6 -15% | 468.8 7% | 419 -4% | 555.7 27% | 443.5 1% |
| Brightness | 421 | 361 -14% | 460 9% | 406 -4% | 528 25% | 394 -6% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 92 0% | 93 1% | 94 2% | 90 -2% | 78 -15% |
| Black Level * | 0.4 | 0.45 -13% | 0.45 -13% | 0.23 42% | 0.35 12% | 0.17 57% |
| Contrast | 1096 | 832 -24% | 1042 -5% | 1822 66% | 1588 45% | 2609 138% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.02 | 6.21 -24% | 9 -79% | 1.1 78% | 4.83 4% | 2.7 46% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.59 | 9.89 -3% | 15.5 -62% | 2.2 77% | 8.46 12% | 4.36 55% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.05 | 5.4 -33% | 1.91 53% | 0.5 88% | 0.76 81% | 2.61 36% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4 | 4.5 -13% | 10.9 -173% | 1.5 62% | 6.1 -53% | 3.4 15% |
| Gamma | 2.29 96% | 2.49 88% | 2.13 103% | 2.06 107% | 1.98 111% | 2.09 105% |
| CCT | 7087 92% | 6726 97% | 10972 59% | 6524 100% | 6686 97% | 6144 106% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 56.6 | 62.8 | 62.1 | |||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 89.2 | 99.2 | 98.5 | |||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -21% /
-17% | -2% /
-14% | 11% /
30% | 4% /
13% | 6% /
23% |
* ... smaller is better
The default color temperature is on the cool side for a slightly bluish tone. Colors are otherwise decently calibrated with no major differences before or after our calibration efforts.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 14 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 81 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (22.3 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 37.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 45 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (35.1 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 19035 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Outdoor visibility is most similar to the Win 3 due to both units having almost the same contrast levels. Glare is largely unavoidable on the glossy touchscreen and so users will want to increase the font scaling for easier readability. Colors become washed out if under direct sunlight.
Performance — Highly Dependent on BIOS Settings
Testing Conditions
The processor power limits can be adjusted via the BIOS menu. For our benchmark tests, we used the default power settings as shipped by the manufacturer (PL1=15, PL2=20) as shown by the picture below. Users can alternatively run the processor at a higher power limit (PL1=20, PL2=25) or lower power limit (PL1=12, PL2=15) if desired. We will be comparing what differences users can expect between the default and higher power settings.
Processor
Multi-thread CPU performance is roughly 30 to 35 percent slower than the average Core i7-1195G7 in our database when running on the default BIOS power level. If running on the higher BIOS power level, this performance deficit will become narrower at just 10 percent. On the flip side, single-thread performance changes little between the two power level settings.
Upgrading from the lesser Pentium N6000 SKU will boost raw CPU performance by 2x to 3x.
Cinebench R15 Multi Loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 5.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 5.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
| Performance Rating | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (4378 - 7361, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (20576 - 30422, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (1310 - 2026, n=9) | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (38530 - 56262, n=9) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (3209 - 4937, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (12142 - 18123, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (30854 - 70936, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (231 - 399, n=10) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (2300 - 3949, n=9) | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (13455 - 35235, n=9) | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
System Performance
PCMark scores are excellent in spite of the below average CPU and GPU performance when on the default BIOS power level. We appreciate that the system isn't loaded with any bloatware.
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs (4737 - 5941, n=6) | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| HP Spectre x360 14t-ea000 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Win 3 | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 5153 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (23332 - 57053, n=9) | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (24068 - 53332, n=9) | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (22151 - 58855, n=9) | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Average Intel Core i7-1195G7 (69.8 - 112.7, n=10) | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC Latency
LatencyMon shows no DPC issues when opening multiple browser tabs on our homepage. 4K video playback at 60 FPS is smooth and with no dropped frames as well.
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| HP Spectre x360 14t-ea000 | |
| GPD Win 3 | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
* ... smaller is better
Storage Devices — Full Support for PCIe4 x4 Drives
Sequential read and write rates on our 1 TB BIWIN NQ200 drive top out at about 3500 MB/s and 2800 MB/s, respectively, according to CrystalDiskMark 5. However, performance degrades rather quickly after just a couple of minutes according to our DiskSpd loop test since the drive lacks a heat spreader.
| Drive Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average BiWin NQ200 1TB CNF82GS1D00-1TB | |
| GPD Pocket 3 | |
| GPD Win 3 | |
| GPD Win Max 2021 | |
| HP Spectre x360 14t-ea000 | |
| Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X12 20UVS03G00 | |
* ... smaller is better
Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
GPU Performance — Iris Xe
Graphics performance at the default BIOS power level is disappointing at 30 to 35 percent slower than the average Iris Xe 96 EUs in our database. Fortunately, running on the higher BIOS power level will boost our GPU to match where we would expect the average Iris Xe 96 EUs to perform. Running 3DMark 11 on the higher power level, for example, would return a GPU score of 6350 points compared to only 2942 points if on the default power level. Similar differences can be observed when gaming as well.
