Notebookcheck

HP 250 G6 (i3-6006U, SSD, FHD) Laptop Review

Sascha Mölck, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 03/19/2018

Cheap office computer. The HP 250 G6 costs around €500 (~$615), for which you get a 15.6-inch notebook with a Core i3 processor, 8 GB of RAM, a Full HD display, an SSD, and a good battery life.
Update: HP 250 G6 4BD30ES Kaby Lake version with an Intel Core i3-7020U and SanDisk SSD tested.

The HP 250 GX series are typically simple 15.6-inch cheap office notebooks. Our test device is powered by a Core i3 processor with 8 GB of RAM and a Full HD display. This notebook is from the sixth generation in the series and is one which we are acquainted with having already reviewed its sibling, the HP 255 G6. We will be using the Acer Aspire 3 A315-51Asus ASUSPRO P541UALenovo V110-15IKB, and the Acer Extensa 2540-580K as comparison devices.

In this review, we will not be examining the case, connectivity, input devices or speakers as they are physically identical to those found in the already reviewed 255 G6. However, we will cover these areas on matters where the two devices differ.

Update 11.06.2018: HP 250 G6 4BD30ES Kaby Lake version with an Intel Core i3-7020U and SanDisk SSD tested.

The 250-series notebooks are undoubtedly the bread and better for HP. The devices are cheap and there are numerous configurations that are sold globally. The 250 series are solid workhorses for using in and outside of the office. They do their job comfortably without attracting attention; HP has not used any premium materials or components used in these devices.

We also received the Kaby Lake Core i3 version that has a 256 GB M.2 SSD. We have decided to supplement our existing review rather than creating a new article as everything about the two devices is the same except for the display, the processor and the SSD.

The new device has several questions to answer. Can the Core i3 Kaby Lake processor improve on its Skylake sibling? Is the new processor more economical and does it improve battery life? Does the different display and SSD affect the quality or performance of the device overall?

We will answer all these questions in the ensuing sections of this review. We have included an additional conclusion too. 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

HP 250 G6 2UB93ES (250 G6 Series)
Graphics adapter
Intel HD Graphics 520, Core: 300-900 MHz, Single-Channel, 23.20.16.4944
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4-2400, Single-Channel
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, BOE BOE0687, TN LED, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Skylake-U Premium PCH
Storage
Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ, 256 GB 
, SATA III, M.2 2280, 191 GB free
Soundcard
Realtek ALC282 @ Intel Sunrise Point-LP PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 VGA, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Audio combo connection, Card Reader: SD, TPM 2.0
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2
Optical drive
HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 25 x 384 x 243 ( = 0.98 x 15.12 x 9.57 in)
Battery
41.6 Wh, 2850 mAh Lithium-Ion, removeable, 14.6 V
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: VGA
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: no, Cyberlink Power Media Player 14, McAfee LiveSafe (trial version), MS Office 365 (trial version), 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2 kg ( = 70.55 oz / 4.41 pounds), Power Supply: 291 g ( = 10.26 oz / 0.64 pounds)
Price
499 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

As with the 255 G6, the 250 G6's case is made of plastic. HP differentiates the two devices by finishing the 250 G6 in silver, while the 255 G6 is black with a textured finish.

Size Comparison

384 mm / 15.1 inch 243 mm / 9.57 inch 25 mm / 0.984 inch 2 kg4.41 lbs381 mm / 15 inch 252 mm / 9.92 inch 28 mm / 1.102 inch 2 kg4.41 lbs381.6 mm / 15 inch 256 mm / 10.1 inch 24.9 mm / 0.98 inch 2.4 kg5.29 lbs381.6 mm / 15 inch 259 mm / 10.2 inch 21.6 mm / 0.85 inch 2.4 kg5.29 lbs380 mm / 15 inch 262 mm / 10.3 inch 22.9 mm / 0.902 inch 1.9 kg4.19 lbs
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
83.8 MB/s ∼100% +246%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
77 MB/s ∼92% +218%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
74.5 MB/s ∼89% +208%
Average of class Office
  (10.2 - 191, n=280)
62.6 MB/s ∼75% +159%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.4 MB/s ∼32% +9%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26 MB/s ∼31% +7%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
24.2 MB/s ∼29%
HP 255 G6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
18.4 MB/s ∼22% -24%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
86 MB/s ∼100% +188%
Average of class Office
  (9.5 - 255, n=255)
78.9 MB/s ∼92% +164%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
76.7 MB/s ∼89% +157%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
29.9 MB/s ∼35%
HP 255 G6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
29.5 MB/s ∼34% -1%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27.6 MB/s ∼32% -8%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27.5 MB/s ∼32% -8%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
311 MBit/s ∼100% +4%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
311 MBit/s ∼100% +4%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
300 MBit/s ∼96% 0%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
299 MBit/s ∼96%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
287 MBit/s ∼92% -4%
HP 255 G6
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
186 MBit/s ∼60% -38%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
350 MBit/s ∼100%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
345 MBit/s ∼99% -1%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
342 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
335 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
335 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
HP 255 G6
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
261 MBit/s ∼75% -25%

Maintenance

Unlike its sibling, the 250 G6 has no dedicated maintenance cover. This means that to repair and maintain the internal components you will have to remove the base plate as with other laptops. Firstly, remove the battery and the optical drive, followed by the screws on the base plate. HP hides one screw under each rubber foot, be sure to remove these. Once all the screws have been removed, carefully pry the base plate up with something such as a flat plastic spatula to avoid damaging the plastics. Once removed, the internal components will be visible, including the fan, the RAM slots, the SSD, the Wi-Fi module, and the BIOS battery.

A view of the internal components
A view of the internal components

Display - BOE

BOE BOE0687 sub-pixel array
BOE BOE0687 sub-pixel array

The 250 G6 has a matte 15.6-inch TN display with a 1,920x1,080 native resolution. We measured the contrast at 484:1 and the brightness at 178.4 cd/m², both of which are too low in our opinion and make for a dark display.

Unfortunately, there is PWM display flickering below and including 90% brightness. Fortunately, this is at a high frequency of 2,500 Hz, meaning that those who are sensitive to PWM should be spared headaches and eye strain.

187
cd/m²
187
cd/m²
188
cd/m²
171
cd/m²
184
cd/m²
182
cd/m²
151
cd/m²
189
cd/m²
167
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
BOE BOE0687
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 189 cd/m² Average: 178.4 cd/m² Minimum: 8.2 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 80 %
Center on Battery: 176 cd/m²
Contrast: 484:1 (Black: 0.38 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 11.29 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 12.43 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
59% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 37% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.34

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 2500 Hz ≤ 90 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2500 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 90 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2500 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
HP 255 G6
TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
TN-LED, 1366x768, 15.6
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
TN LED, 1366x768, 15.6
Response Times
87%
304%
2%
-30%
305%
-2%
-84%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
42 (23, 19)
39 (21, 18)
7%
41 (21, 20)
2%
44 (22, 22)
-5%
47 (27, 20)
-12%
48 (26, 22)
-14%
47 (25, 22)
-12%
68 (32, 36)
-62%
Response Time Black / White *
13 (8, 5)
19 (14, 5)
-46%
22 (18, 4)
-69%
12 (8, 4)
8%
11 (7, 4)
15%
16 (11, 5)
-23%
12 (8, 4)
8%
26 (20, 6)
-100%
PWM Frequency
2500 (90)
10000 (20)
300%
27000 (90)
980%
200 (90)
-92%
26320 (80)
953%
217 (90)
-91%
Screen
4%
-1%
26%
26%
1%
7%
3%
Brightness middle
184
243
32%
215
17%
241
31%
262
42%
226
23%
222
21%
226
23%
Brightness
178
233
31%
217
22%
229
29%
250
40%
203
14%
210
18%
217
22%
Brightness Distribution
80
75
-6%
92
15%
87
9%
83
4%
77
-4%
89
11%
91
14%
Black Level *
0.38
0.45
-18%
0.68
-79%
0.46
-21%
0.47
-24%
0.34
11%
0.58
-53%
Contrast
484
540
12%
316
-35%
524
8%
481
-1%
653
35%
390
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
11.29
11.69
-4%
9.14
19%
3.4
70%
11.78
-4%
11.6
-3%
9.84
13%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
19.48
20.08
-3%
15.46
21%
7.61
61%
20.05
-3%
19.63
-1%
16.77
14%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
12.43
13.12
-6%
10.08
19%
1.7
86%
10.07
19%
12.18
2%
12.63
-2%
11.1
11%
Gamma
2.34 94%
2.24 98%
2.07 106%
2.36 93%
2.36 93%
2.13 103%
2.13 103%
2.35 94%
CCT
13823 47%
16905 38%
10158 64%
6750 96%
10532 62%
13366 49%
13294 49%
11979 54%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
37
37
0%
36
-3%
34
-8%
38
3%
34
-8%
39
5%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
59
59
0%
56
-5%
54
-8%
59
0%
54
-8%
61
3%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
46% / 23%
152% / 70%
14% / 22%
-2% / 2%
153% / 71%
3% / 6%
-41% / -17%

* ... smaller is better

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
13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8 ms rise
↘ 5 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. » 15 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 23 ms rise
↘ 19 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 55 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

An ideal Delta E 2000 color value is anything less than three. HP has set the value on the 250 G6 far higher, at 11.29. This results in poor color distribution, which is worsened by the strong blue tinge from which the display suffers.

CalMAN – ColorChecker
CalMAN – ColorChecker
CalMAN – Grayscale
CalMAN – Grayscale
CalMAN – Saturation
CalMAN – Saturation

The TN display has poor viewing angles, which means that the 250 G6’s display is practically unreadable from any off-center angle. We found the display to be readable outdoors when the sun was not too bright.

Using the 250 G6 outdoors – photographed in bright sunshine and in direct sunlight
Using the 250 G6 outdoors – photographed in bright sunshine and in direct sunlight
Using the 250 G6 outdoors – photographed in bright sunshine with the sun behind the notebook
Using the 250 G6 outdoors – photographed in bright sunshine with the sun behind the notebook

Display - Chi Mei

Chi Mei 4BD30ES sub-pixel array
Chi Mei 4BD30ES sub-pixel array

OEMs, HP included, frequently use multiple display partners to equip the same device. Two of the same models can have different displays, which is the case here. Moreover, there is no way of telling which display is in which device without running several tests or by comparing them side by side. Our first test device had a BOE display, but this time we have a Chi Mei display. Our new test device still has a TN, matte and 1080p display, but other values differ slightly. The contrast ratio has dropped from 484:1 to 390:1, both of which are awful. Our new test device has worse viewing angles too.

The Chi Mei display gets slightly brighter than the BOE, but not to the degree that most people would notice. Both displays are difficult to read outside despite their matte finishes. The PWM frequency has decreased to 250 Hz, which may cause more people to suffer from eye strain and headaches, particularly those who are PWM sensitive. No PWM is best, but a higher frequency tends to bother fewer people.

192
cd/m²
183
cd/m²
189
cd/m²
178
cd/m²
191
cd/m²
163
cd/m²
148
cd/m²
153
cd/m²
150
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
Chi Mei CMN15E3
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 192 cd/m² Average: 171.9 cd/m² Minimum: 5.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 77 %
Center on Battery: 182 cd/m²
Contrast: 390:1 (Black: 0.49 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 11.81 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 4.91
ΔE Greyscale 12.34 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
55% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 35% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.17

The Chi Mei panel covers just 55% of the sRGB colour space, which is 4% lower than the BOE display manages. CalMAN also demonstrates that the Chi Mei panel has a blue tint to it, but we largely corrected this with further calibration. We have included our calibrated ICC colour profile for the Chi Mei display should you like to use it. Please make sure that your device has a Chi Mei CMN153E display, as applying the colour profile to a different display can worsen its colour accuracy. Calibrating the Chi Mei display reduced greyscale DeltaE divergences from 12 to 5, while it removed most of the blue tint too.

CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker - calibrated
CalMAN: ColorChecker - calibrated
CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Greyscale - calibrated
CalMAN: Greyscale - calibrated
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - calibrated
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - calibrated
55% sRGB coverage
55% sRGB coverage
35% AdobeRGB coverage
35% AdobeRGB coverage

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 250 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

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
14 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ ms rise
↘ 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. » 16 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
39 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ ms rise
↘ ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

Performance

The 250 G6 is a simple 15.6-inch office notebook that has enough performance for office and internet applications. There are several variants of the 250 G6, with prices starting at around €380 (~$468). Our test device is currently available from €480 (~$590).

Processor

The 250 G6 is powered by an Intel Core i3-6006U Skylake dual-core processor that should provide enough performance for office use. The i3-6006U is an ultra-low voltage (ULV) model that supports hyperthreading, meaning that there are four threads across two cores. The CPU can clock up to 2 GHz and does not support Turbo Boost. The CPU ran at maximum clock speed throughout our CPU tests irrespective of whether it was running on battery or on mains power.

We benchmarked the CPU by running a Cinebench R15 multi-thread test for thirty minutes in a continuous loop. The results demonstrate that the processor maintained its clock speed throughout with thermal throttling.

Equally, we encountered the same experience when we ran Prime95 and FurMark benchmarks on one-hour loops. The CPU maintains clock speeds of between 1.7 and 1.9 GHz, with no performance difference between battery and mains power.

The Core i3-7020U constantly runs at 2.3 GHz during a Cinebench R15 multi-threaded benchmark loop.
The Core i3-7020U constantly runs at 2.3 GHz during a Cinebench R15 multi-threaded benchmark loop.

Update 11.6.2018: Core i3-7020U processor

The Core i3-7020U in our new test device operated constantly at 2.3 GHz during a Cinebench R15 multi-core benchmark, the behaviour of which is identical to the Core i3-6006U in our first test device. The Core i3-7020U scored seventeen points more than its Skylake sibling, which is surprising as the Core i3-6006U operates at 300 MHz lower clock speed.

The Core i3-7020U is a dual-core processor that can execute up to four threads simultaneously thanks to Intel Hyper-Threading. However, the CPU does not support Intel Turbo Boost. Positively, the core temperature reached a maximum of 57 °C during our tests, which would indicate that the HP 250 G6 could adequately cool a more powerful processor like a quad-core Kaby Lake R CPU. HWiNFO 64 reports that the HP 250 G6 already supports a Kaby Lake R chipset, so we expect to see the device also configurable with corresponding Intel Core 8xxxU processors soon.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
3203
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
7293
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
5891
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
83 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
213 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
34.12 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Help
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
130 Points ∼60% +57%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
127 Points ∼58% +53%
Average of class Office
  (20 - 199, n=538)
112 Points ∼51% +35%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Intel Core i5-7200U
108 Points ∼50% +30%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
95 Points ∼44% +14%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
84 Points ∼39% +1%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
84 Points ∼39% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
83 Points ∼38%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (69 - 84, n=5)
78 Points ∼36% -6%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
69 Points ∼32% -17%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel Core i3-6006U
69 Points ∼32% -17%
HP 255 G6
AMD A6-9220
68 Points ∼31% -18%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
53 Points ∼24% -36%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Average of class Office
  (36 - 1050, n=545)
345 Points ∼8% +62%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
332 Points ∼8% +56%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Intel Core i5-7200U
318 Points ∼7% +49%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
315 Points ∼7% +48%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
241 Points ∼6% +13%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
218 Points ∼5% +2%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
216 Points ∼5% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
213 Points ∼5%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (154 - 218, n=5)
202 Points ∼5% -5%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel Core i3-6006U
154 Points ∼4% -28%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
114 Points ∼3% -46%
HP 255 G6
AMD A6-9220
109 Points ∼2% -49%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
91 Points ∼2% -57%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
5007 Points ∼46% +56%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
4945 Points ∼46% +54%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
3587 Points ∼33% +12%
Average of class Office
  (667 - 8356, n=681)
3343 Points ∼31% +4%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
3236 Points ∼30% +1%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
3227 Points ∼30% +1%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (3203 - 3236, n=3)
3222 Points ∼30% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
3203 Points ∼30%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
2432 Points ∼22% -24%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
1871 Points ∼17% -42%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
11330 Points ∼17% +55%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
11082 Points ∼17% +52%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
8169 Points ∼13% +12%
Average of class Office
  (1242 - 32009, n=669)
7898 Points ∼12% +8%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
7388 Points ∼11% +1%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
7364 Points ∼11% +1%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (7293 - 7388, n=3)
7348 Points ∼11% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
7293 Points ∼11%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
3941 Points ∼6% -46%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
3268 Points ∼5% -55%
Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
6932 Points ∼9% +58%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
6793 Points ∼8% +55%
Average of class Office
  (1016 - 14277, n=191)
5803 Points ∼7% +32%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
5270 Points ∼7% +20%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
4415 Points ∼5% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
4384 Points ∼5%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (4265 - 4415, n=3)
4355 Points ∼5% -1%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
4265 Points ∼5% -3%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
2921 Points ∼4% -33%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
2348 Points ∼3% -46%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
3191 Points ∼65% +58%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
3166 Points ∼65% +57%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
2510 Points ∼51% +24%
Average of class Office
  (595 - 4820, n=191)
2325 Points ∼48% +15%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
2018 Points ∼41%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
2012 Points ∼41% 0%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (1943 - 2018, n=3)
1991 Points ∼41% -1%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
1943 Points ∼40% -4%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
1798 Points ∼37% -11%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
1415 Points ∼29% -30%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
7439 Points ∼21% +55%
Average of class Office
  (1834 - 15294, n=64)
7346 Points ∼20% +53%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
7174 Points ∼20% +49%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
5455 Points ∼15% +14%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
4914 Points ∼14% +2%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (4723 - 4914, n=3)
4814 Points ∼13% 0%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
4805 Points ∼13%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
4723 Points ∼13% -2%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
2805 Points ∼8% -42%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
2307 Points ∼6% -52%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
3808 Points ∼60% +51%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
3774 Points ∼60% +50%
Average of class Office
  (934 - 4892, n=64)
3205 Points ∼51% +27%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
2816 Points ∼45% +12%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
2593 Points ∼41% +3%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (2468 - 2593, n=3)
2526 Points ∼40% 0%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
2516 Points ∼40%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U
2468 Points ∼39% -2%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
1885 Points ∼30% -25%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
1512 Points ∼24% -40%
Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Average of class Office
  (1736 - 21722, n=82)
9475 Points ∼16% +90%
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
7744 Points ∼13% +56%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
7516 Points ∼13% +51%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
5630 Points ∼10% +13%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
5109 Points ∼9% +3%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (4975 - 5109, n=2)
5042 Points ∼9% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
4975 Points ∼9%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
2857 Points ∼5% -43%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
2402 Points ∼4% -52%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U
3958 Points ∼62% +54%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U
3870 Points ∼61% +50%
Average of class Office
  (957 - 5574, n=82)
3629 Points ∼57% +41%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
2943 Points ∼46% +14%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U
2639 Points ∼42% +2%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (2575 - 2639, n=2)
2607 Points ∼41% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
2575 Points ∼41%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220
1960 Points ∼31% -24%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010
1610 Points ∼25% -37%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel Core i5-7200U (Edge 41)
221.69 Points ∼63% +84%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel Core i5-7200U (Edge 41)
193.4 Points ∼55% +61%
Average of class Office
  (36.7 - 290, n=248)
178 Points ∼51% +48%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U (Edge 40)
157.15 Points ∼45% +30%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel Core i3-6006U (Edge 38)
142.55 Points ∼41% +18%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel Core i3-6006U (Edge 40)
140.38 Points ∼40% +17%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U (Edge 41)
120.48 Points ∼34%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U
  (97.6 - 143, n=5)
120 Points ∼34% 0%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD A6-9220 (Edge 41)
118.22 Points ∼34% -2%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel Core i3-6006U
98.86 Points ∼28% -18%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD E2-9010 (Edge 41)
84.415 Points ∼24% -30%
HP 255 G6
AMD A6-9220
80.545 Points ∼23% -33%

System Performance

System performance is smooth with no issues during our tests. The good PCMark benchmark results confirm our impressions that the 250 G6 has enough power for office and internet use. It is worth noting that performance could be increased by adding a second identical RAM module. This would activate dual-channel memory mode, which would boost performance.

Update 11.6.2018: The Kaby Lake processor is not much of an improvement.

The Core i3-7020U achieves largely the same scores in system performance benchmarks as its Skylake sibling. The Kaby Lake processor scores 4% more in PCMark 8 Home and only 1% more in PCMark 10.

The Core i3-7020U is architecturally different to the Core i3-6006U and runs up to 300 MHz faster too. The Kaby Lake series does not offer a core-count increase as the Kaby Lake R series does, but why is the performance difference so negligible between our two test devices?

PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 10 Score
PCMark 10 Score
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2845 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
3293 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
3617 points
Help
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Kingston RBUSC180DS37256GH
3752 Points ∼62% +32%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Intel 545s SSDSC2KW256G8L
3663 Points ∼60% +29%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3295 Points ∼54% +16%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, SK Hynix HFS128G32TND
3269 Points ∼54% +15%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
HD Graphics 610, 4415U, Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
3230 Points ∼53% +14%
Average of class Office
  (1169 - 4770, n=410)
3058 Points ∼50% +7%
Average Intel Core i3-6006U, Intel HD Graphics 520
  (2801 - 3269, n=5)
2945 Points ∼48% +4%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, TOSHIBA MQ01ABD075
2937 Points ∼48% +3%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, Hynix HFS128G39TND
2872 Points ∼47% +1%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
2845 Points ∼47%
HP 255 G6
Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), A6-9220, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
2520 Points ∼41% -11%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), A6-9220, Kingston RBUSNS8180DS3128GH
2337 Points ∼38% -18%
Lenovo V110-15AST
Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), E2-9010, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
1971 Points ∼32% -31%

Storage Devices

The 250 G6 is equipped with a Samsung M.2-2280 SATA III 256 GB SSD, of which 191 GB is usable after installing Windows 10. We measured good transfer speeds.

A view of the M.2-2280 SSD
A view of the M.2-2280 SSD

Update 11.6.2018

The main reason is that our test device has a slower SSD. Our first test device had a Samsung PM871a, while our second HP 250 G6 has a SanDisk SD9SN8W-256G installed. In short, the SanDisk SSD is 27% slower on average in benchmarks than the PM871a. The difference is particularly noticeable when comparing 4K read and write speeds, although the difference between sequential read and write speeds is negligible.

Storage benchmarks Samsung SSD PM871a (unhide)

Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
Sequential Read: 488 MB/s
Sequential Write: 455 MB/s
512K Read: 426.4 MB/s
512K Write: 390.7 MB/s
4K Read: 37.68 MB/s
4K Write: 76.89 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 286.5 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 253.1 MB/s

Storage benchmarks: Sandisk SD9SN8W-256G

SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
Sequential Read: 470.1 MB/s
Sequential Write: 424.8 MB/s
512K Read: 304.7 MB/s
512K Write: 244.8 MB/s
4K Read: 26.3 MB/s
4K Write: 53.53 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 169.3 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 149.1 MB/s
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Kingston RBUSC180DS37256GH
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
HP 255 G6
Toshiba MQ01ABD100
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
Kingston RBUSNS8180DS3128GH
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel 545s SSDSC2KW256G8L
Lenovo V110-15AST
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
SK Hynix HFS128G32TND
Average Samsung SSD PM871a MZNLN256HMHQ
 
Average of class Office
 
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-16%
1%
-2%
-92%
1%
-92%
-28%
3%
-40%
Write 4k QD32
253.1
257.3
2%
317.1
25%
300.2
19%
0.952
-100%
270.1
7%
0.347
-100%
134.1
-47%
256 (222 - 274, n=6)
1%
122 (0.154 - 706, n=694)
-52%
Read 4k QD32
286.5
283.7
-1%
310.1
8%
245.9
-14%
0.881
-100%
314.4
10%
0.972
-100%
287.2
0%
311 (287 - 388, n=6)
9%
152 (0.015 - 652, n=694)
-47%
Write 4k
76.89
71.93
-6%
77.71
1%
86.66
13%
0.984
-99%
89.06
16%
0.209
-100%
74.7
-3%
95.1 (76.9 - 123, n=6)
24%
44.5 (0.009 - 197, n=706)
-42%
Read 4k
37.68
24.15
-36%
33.06
-12%
26.95
-28%
0.429
-99%
36.92
-2%
0.42
-99%
30.67
-19%
37 (30.9 - 40.5, n=6)
-2%
17 (0.218 - 148, n=706)
-55%
Write 512
390.7
282.3
-28%
441.3
13%
446.8
14%
44.97
-88%
324.7
-17%
75.58
-81%
133.7
-66%
318 (83.2 - 398, n=6)
-19%
229 (13.7 - 2566, n=703)
-41%
Read 512
426.4
356.3
-16%
318.3
-25%
328
-23%
36.65
-91%
393.4
-8%
28.95
-93%
333.7
-22%
444 (424 - 467, n=6)
4%
277 (16.3 - 2149, n=703)
-35%
Write Seq
455
284.2
-38%
467.1
3%
456.1
0%
102.8
-77%
407.3
-10%
83.57
-82%
133.5
-71%
454 (404 - 502, n=6)
0%
305 (21.1 - 1995, n=706)
-33%
Read Seq
488
477.4
-2%
473.9
-3%
485.8
0%
109.2
-78%
536.2
10%
81.58
-83%
513.8
5%
507 (488 - 521, n=6)
4%
427 (37.1 - 2860, n=706)
-12%

Graphics Card

An Intel HD Graphics 520 handles the 250 G6’s graphics. The GPU can clock up to 900 MHz and supports DirectX 12. 3DMark benchmark results are as expected for this GPU given that it is operating with a single-channel RAM. The GPU performance could also be improved by enabling dual-channel mode and adding a second identical RAM module. Doing so would boost the GPU performance.

During our Prime95 and FurMark stress tests, the GPU consistently clocked at 850 MHz irrespective of the 250 G6 being on battery or on mains power.

3DMark 11 Performance
1322 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
4501 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
699 points
Help
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1605 Points ∼100% +32%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1535 Points ∼96% +26%
Average of class Office
  (185 - 5332, n=662)
1323 Points ∼82% +8%
Average Intel HD Graphics 520
  (1060 - 1520, n=130)
1296 Points ∼81% +6%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6006U
1220 Points ∼76%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6006U
1141 Points ∼71% -6%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6006U
1090 Points ∼68% -11%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6006U
1085 Points ∼68% -11%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1067 Points ∼66% -13%
HP 255 G6
AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), AMD A6-9220
989 Points ∼62% -19%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), AMD A6-9220
956 Points ∼60% -22%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel HD Graphics 610, Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
880 Points ∼55% -28%
Lenovo V110-15AST
AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), AMD E2-9010
714 Points ∼44% -41%

Gaming Performance

The 250 G6 could be used to play games, but only those that have low system requirements. Even then, you would have to be content with playing at low quality and at low resolutions. Frame rates could be improved by activating dual-channel mode, but do not expect performance hungry games such as “Final Fantasy XV” to be playable.

low med. high ultra
Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011) 55.4 32.7 13.2 fps
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011) 36.3 20.1 12.3 6.1 fps
Anno 2070 (2011) 74 34.4 20.5 9.5 fps
BioShock Infinite (2013) 42 23.7 19.7 6.3 fps
Risen 3: Titan Lords (2014) 24.6 16.5 5.1 fps
Dishonored 2 (2016) 5.6 3.1 fps
Warhammer 40.000: Dawn of War III (2017) 18.6 6.5 fps
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017) 15 7 fps
The Evil Within 2 (2017) 9 4.6 fps
ELEX (2017) 10.1 5.2 fps
Destiny 2 (2017) 9.7 fps
Assassin´s Creed Origins (2017) 8 5 fps
Call of Duty WWII (2017) 20.9 14.2 fps
Need for Speed Payback (2017) 10.8 6.2 fps
Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) 14.6 4.9 fps
Fortnite (2018) 25.8 7.1 fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 7 fps
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) 10.3 5 fps
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 18.8 12.6 fps

Emissions

Noise Emissions

The fan is permanently on by default, the cause of which is that HP has set the fan to “always on” in the BIOS. This can be disabled, resulting in a far quieter experience with the fan hardly ramping up under load. During our stress test, we measured maximum fan noise at only 33 dB(A).

Noise Level

Idle
31.6 / 31.6 / 31.7 dB(A)
HDD
31.6 dB(A)
DVD
38 / dB(A)
Load
33.1 / 33 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: 30.4 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.434.733.734.633.42533.348.832.334.433.33135.653.735.837.835.64032.643.934.433.732.6504040.440.641406330.832.430.43030.88028.827.726.427.628.81002726.526.427.42712525.22724.62825.216023.423.924.124.423.420023.924.323.222.923.925022.22222.322.422.231521.821.721.521.621.840021.621.820.520.421.650020.320.419.619.720.363020.32019.519.120.380021.621.320.617.721.6100023.723.821.717.723.7125022.521.820.417.822.5160023.823.520.317.723.8200021.921.119.11821.925002019.718.71820315019.819.718.818.219.840001918.718.518.519500018.818.718.618.718.8630018.818.818.618.718.880001919.118.918.9191000018.91918.918.918.91250019.118.918.918.919.116000191918.91919SPL33.233.131.730.833.2N1.91.81.61.51.9median 21.6median 21.1median 19.6median 18.9median 21.6Delta222.11.82hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseHP 250 G6 2UB93ES

Temperature

The 250 G6 during a stress test
The 250 G6 during a stress test

The 250 G6 remains cool even during our stress tests and should pose no problems for working from it on your lap. Under load, surface temperatures reach a maximum of 30 °C (~86 °F) on only two points of the device, with average temperatures under load measuring 26 °C (~79 °F) on the top of the case and 25 °C (~77 °F) on the bottom. At idle we measured average surface temperatures of around 22 °C (~72 °F), and under 24 °C (~75 °F) maximum temperatures.

Max. Load
 29.6 °C
85 F
26.5 °C
80 F
22.1 °C
72 F
 
 30 °C
86 F
26.6 °C
80 F
22 °C
72 F
 
 28.3 °C
83 F
27.9 °C
82 F
23 °C
73 F
 
Maximum: 30 °C = 86 F
Average: 26.2 °C = 79 F
22.5 °C
73 F
23.3 °C
74 F
30.1 °C
86 F
23 °C
73 F
24.2 °C
76 F
29.5 °C
85 F
21.9 °C
71 F
24.3 °C
76 F
28.1 °C
83 F
Maximum: 30.1 °C = 86 F
Average: 25.2 °C = 77 F
Power Supply (max.)  35.9 °C = 97 F | Room Temperature 21.1 °C = 70 F | FIRT 550-Pocket
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 26.2 °C / 79 F, compared to the average of 29.4 °C / 85 F for the devices in the class Office.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 30 °C / 86 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.1 °C / 86 F, compared to the average of 36.4 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 21.7 °C / 71 F, compared to the device average of 29.4 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28.3 °C / 82.9 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-0.2 °C / -0.3 F).
Thermal imaging of the top case under load
Thermal imaging of the top case under load
Thermal imaging of the bottom case under load
Thermal imaging of the bottom case under load
Thermal imaging of the top case at idle
Thermal imaging of the top case at idle
Thermal imaging of the bottom case at idle
Thermal imaging of the bottom case at idle

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.334.639.32536.734.436.73145.137.845.14042.533.742.5504141416334.43034.48036.227.636.210028.427.428.412530.82830.816030.724.430.720038.722.938.725057.422.457.431562.221.662.240061.820.461.85005619.75663058.219.158.280064.717.764.7100068.817.768.8125070.117.870.116006717.767200064.51864.5250067.41867.4315068.118.268.1400069.418.569.4500062.418.762.4630064.718.764.7800071.318.971.31000069.618.969.61250068.818.968.81600063.71963.7SPL79.530.879.5N46.21.546.2median 64.5median 18.9median 64.5Delta8.41.88.435.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP 250 G6 2UB93ES Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.34 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.1% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 36% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, 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
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
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 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency diagram in comparison (checkboxes are de/selectable)

Power Consumption

The 250 G6 is energy efficient, thanks to its Core i3 processor. At idle, we measured a maximum power draw of 6.3 W, which rose to 24.3 W during our stress tests. The 45 W rated power supply will therefore, provide enough power to charge the device even when it is under maximum load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.38 / 0.4 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.4 / 5.9 / 6.3 Watt
Load midlight 23 / 24.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy

Battery Life

The 250 G6 has surprisingly good battery life. We measure the battery runtime with our practical Wi-Fi test which simulates the load of loading websites. We set the battery profile at “Balanced” with the display at 150 cd/m² and energy saving features turned off. The 250 G6 lasted six hours and forty-nine minutes in this test, easily beating its sister model. The 250 G6 has a longer runtime thanks to its better energy efficiency and larger battery capacity, with the 250 G6 having a 41 Wh battery capacity compared with 255 G6’s 31 Wh capacity.

Update 11.6.2018

Our second test device also has a 42 Wh battery. However, the Core i3-7020U powered device has 30% worse battery life than its Core i3-6006U powered sibling. Our first 250 G6 test device lasted six hours and forty-nine minutes in our Wi-Fi battery life, while our new device runs out of battery after only four hours and forty-five minutes. Our new test device lasts for one hour and forty-nine minutes in a Battery Eater Classic battery life test. We did not run the same test on our first test device though. 

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Edge 41)
6h 49min
Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing 1.3
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh
484 min ∼18% +18%
Average of class Office
  (105 - 1104, n=356)
417 min ∼16% +2%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 41.6 Wh
409 min ∼16%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-36YU
6006U, HD Graphics 520,  Wh
368 min ∼14% -10%
Toshiba Satellite Pro R50-C-16V
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 44 Wh
356 min ∼14% -13%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-55E4
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 37 Wh
350 min ∼13% -14%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
A6-9220, Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), 37 Wh
243 min ∼9% -41%
Lenovo V110-15IKB 80TH001WGE
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 32 Wh
236 min ∼9% -42%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
4415U, HD Graphics 610, 32 Wh
233 min ∼9% -43%
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 34.5 Wh
231 min ∼9% -44%
Lenovo V110-15AST
E2-9010, Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), 24 Wh
167 min ∼6% -59%
HP 255 G6
A6-9220, Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), 31 Wh
149 min ∼6% -64%

Pros

+ matte display
+ full HD resolution
+ remains quiet
+ rarely gets warm
+ SSD
+ AC WiFi
+ removable battery

Cons

- weak brightness
- low contrast
- poor viewing angles
- only one year's warranty
- average WiFi speeds
- slow memory card reader

Verdict

The HP 250 G6 2UB93ES was provided by cyberport
The HP 250 G6 2UB93ES was provided by cyberport

HP has delivered a simple 15.6-inch office laptop. While the Core i3 processor will not break any performance records, it does provide enough performance for office and internet applications. Better still, the device remains cool and quiet throughout.

The HP 250 G6 is a well-rounded office notebook.

The SSD ensures fast and smooth system performance. It would have been better had HP included a maintenance hatch rather than having to remove the entire base plate for general maintenance and repairs. The battery life and keyboard are decent though.

The Full HD display will win no prizes, as it is very dark, with low contrast and poor viewing angles. There are cheaper devices with better displays than the one in the 250 G6. Furthermore, the Wi-Fi transfer speeds are average and HP offers only a one-year warranty.

If the price is a concern, then HP offers an identically equipped variant named the 2UB92ES. This variant is available for between €50 and €80 (~$62 - ~$98 less than our test device and only lacks a Windows 10 licence. With a used licence being available for between €5 and €10 (~$6 - ~$12), there is money to be saved.

The HP 250 G6 4BD30ES Kaby Lake Laptop Review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de
The HP 250 G6 4BD30ES Kaby Lake Laptop Review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Update 11.6.2018: 

The new Kaby Lake version is disappointing. The Kaby Lake processor is slightly faster, but the slower SanDisk SSD all but eradicates any performance gains. Our second test device also has 30% worse battery life, which is surprising.

The HP 250 G6 (Core i3-6006U, SSD, FHD) costs around €450 (~ $515) at the time of writing. By contrast, its sister model costs around €30 (~ $35) more for comparable performance and third the battery life.

The display is made by Chi Mei rather than BOE, but they are both equally bad. We would recommend choosing the Core i3-6006U HP 250 G6 if it is cheaper than the Core i3-7020U model. However, HP may equip the former with the same Chi Mei display and slow SanDisk SSD as they did in our second test device. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell what hardware each device has until it has been opened.

HP 250 G6 2UB93ES - 03/12/2018 v6(old)
Sascha Mölck

Chassis
63 / 98 → 64%
Keyboard
78%
Pointing Device
83%
Connectivity
43 / 80 → 54%
Weight
63 / 20-67 → 91%
Battery
89%
Display
74%
Games Performance
55 / 68 → 80%
Application Performance
69 / 92 → 75%
Temperature
97%
Noise
92%
Audio
63%
Camera
29 / 85 → 34%
Average
69%
78%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > HP 250 G6 (i3-6006U, SSD, FHD) Laptop Review
Sascha Mölck, 2018-03-19 (Update: 2018-11-16)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor - @aldersonaj
Prior to writing and translating for Notebookcheck, I worked for various companies including Apple and Neowin. I have a BA in International History and Politics from the University of Leeds, which I have since converted to a Law Degree. Happy to chat on Twitter or Notebookchat.