HP Envy 14 laptop review: Successful all-rounder
This isn't the first time that we review the HP Envy 14. We were able to take a look at the eb0010nr model last year, which was equipped with a GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and 16 GB of RAM. For a considerably lower price (starting at 700 Euros (~$696)), the eb0252ng model that we are reviewing here is also available; it does without the dedicated graphics card and only comes with 8 GB of RAM, but in return it inherits the 1920x1200-pixel IPS display in the 16:10 format (although it's matte instead of glossy and doesn't have touch support). The 1 TB SSD capacity isn't bad, either, considering the price. As is currently usual, Windows 11 Home serves as the operating system.
The Envy 14's competitors include other 14-inch devices that aren't too expensive, such as the recently reviewed Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U or the Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6. The latter laptops appear in the tables as comparison products.
Possible contenders in comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 85.6 % v7 (old) | 08 / 2022 | HP Envy 14-eb0252ng i5-1135G7, Iris Xe G7 80EUs | 1.5 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 86.5 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2021 | HP Envy 14-eb0010nr i5-1135G7, GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | 1.6 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 82.6 % v7 (old) | 08 / 2022 | Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U R7 5700U, Vega 8 | 1.2 kg | 15.3 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 85.5 % v7 (old) | 11 / 2021 | Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 R5 5600U, Vega 7 | 1.5 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" | 2240x1400 |
Since the case is identical to that of its more expensive sibling model, we won't reassess the case, connectivity and input devices in this article. You can find the corresponding information in the existing (older) review.
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (18.4 - 201, n=60, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 (AV PRO V60) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 32GB) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (25.8 - 266, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 32GB) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 (AV PRO V60) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
Communication
| Networking - iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average of class Multimedia (709 - 1789, n=78, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201 (390 - 1734, n=76) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
Webcam
Display
As mentioned initially, the display isn't a glossy touch model; it's a matte panel instead. Besides the lower susceptibility to reflections, it also offers other advantages in a direct comparison.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 451 cd/m²
Contrast: 1455:1 (Black: 0.31 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.46 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.32
ΔE Greyscale 3.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
70.4% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
98.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
69.3% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.24
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng BOE0929, IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | HP Envy 14-eb0010nr AU Optronics AUOF392, IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U CMN N140HCE-EN2, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 LEN140WUXGA+, IPS, 2240x1400, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 7% | -5% | 4% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 69.3 | 77.1 11% | 63.8 -8% | 72.2 4% |
| sRGB Coverage | 98.5 | 99.8 1% | 96.1 -2% | 99.5 1% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 70.4 | 76.7 9% | 65.9 -6% | 74.3 6% |
| Response Times | -90% | 23% | -44% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 44.9 ? | 61.2 ? -36% | 32.9 ? 27% | 45.2 ? -1% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 18.9 ? | 46 ? -143% | 15.4 ? 19% | 35.2 ? -86% |
| PWM Frequency | ||||
| Screen | -1% | -14% | -15% | |
| Brightness middle | 451 | 412 -9% | 466 3% | 310.6 -31% |
| Brightness | 439 | 392 -11% | 434 -1% | 302 -31% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 81 -12% | 86 -7% | 92 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.31 | 0.32 -3% | 0.39 -26% | 0.22 29% |
| Contrast | 1455 | 1288 -11% | 1195 -18% | 1412 -3% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.46 | 1.88 24% | 2.76 -12% | 2.67 -9% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.24 | 3.06 28% | 7.97 -88% | 4.54 -7% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.32 | 1.96 -48% | 0.56 58% | 2.33 -77% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.5 | 2.2 37% | 4.7 -34% | 3.7 -6% |
| Gamma | 2.24 98% | 2.1 105% | 2.128 103% | 2.12 104% |
| CCT | 7289 89% | 6650 98% | 7284 89% | 6398 102% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 68.7 | |||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.8 | |||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -28% /
-12% | 1% /
-7% | -18% /
-15% |
* ... smaller is better
Starting with the brightness: Thanks to an average of 439 instead of 392 cd/m², our review sample is considerably better suited for outdoor use. Due to the very similar black level (0.31 vs. 0.32 cd/m²), there's also a higher contrast. 1,455:1 instead of 1,288:1 is a very good rate for an IPS display.
The response times also favor the non-touch version. On the other hand, the touch version scores slightly better when it comes to color space and color accuracy, although the less expensive model still performs well here.
We didn't observe any flickering or noticeable screen bleeding. Viewing angles are at the typical IPS level, which means they're good.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 18.9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 10.9 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 38 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 44.9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 24.5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 74 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Performance
With 8 GB of RAM, a 1000 GB SSD and a quad-core processor, the Envy 14-eb0252ng is comfortably positioned between the entry-level and the mid-range in terms of performance. While the storage drive can be replaced if necessary, the soldered and non-expandable RAM can be criticized (keywords: long-term sustainability).
Test conditions
Users can adjust the system control, among other things, in HP's neatly arranged Command Center. As seen in the screenshot, there are 4 device modes, 3 of which are equipped with additional sliders. Our measurements are based on the factory settings, which means that the "Balanced" profile is used. Naturally, the determined results can differ when using the other modes.
Processor
Just like the touch version, the lower-priced model of the Envy 14 is equipped with a Core i5-1135G7 from Intel's Tiger Lake generation, which isn't quite as new anymore. The 10 nm chip, which is specified with a TDP of 12 to 28 watts, offers 8 MB of L3 cache, 4 cores, and it can handle up to 8 threads in parallel via Hyper-Threading. There were no surprises in our benchmark course. The CPU performance aligns itself with the 1135G7 average. The Tiger Lake model doesn't stand a chance against the competition's AMD chips. Both the Ryzen 5 5600U and the Ryzen 7 5700U sprint in parts clearly away, not least thanks to the higher core count (6 and 8, respectively). Still, the i5-1135G7 is completely sufficient for typical everyday applications like office, video, web, and light to medium multitasking.
Cinebench R15 Multi endurance test
| CPU Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average of class Multimedia | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 -2! | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 | |
* ... 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 | |
| Average of class Multimedia | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Average of class Multimedia (4906 - 36957, n=76, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (4313 - 7952, n=45) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Average of class Multimedia (14528 - 147248, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (19402 - 32283, n=45) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Average of class Multimedia (1529 - 6698, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (1316 - 2172, n=45) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| Average of class Multimedia (21547 - 141074, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (39000 - 46951, n=45) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Average of class Multimedia (1240 - 19021, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (3497 - 4445, n=45) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average of class Multimedia (9903 - 75780, n=76, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (12569 - 19635, n=45) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average of class Multimedia (31432 - 169946, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (28988 - 67977, n=45) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Average of class Multimedia (454 - 1973, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (265 - 373, n=51) | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Average of class Multimedia (2738 - 20608, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (2226 - 4291, n=45) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Average of class Multimedia (7419 - 53918, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (9004 - 45366, n=45) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
System performance
Although the laptop runs very smoothly and responsively in practice, it only manages the last place in the comparison field when it comes to the system tests. Nevertheless, 4,635 points in PCMark 10 is still respectable for a light and slim 14-inch device.
| PCMark 10 / Score | |
| Average of class Multimedia (4542 - 8670, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (4026 - 4952, n=53) | |
| PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
| Average of class Multimedia (8480 - 12420, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (8149 - 9917, n=53) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
| Average of class Multimedia (6089 - 10742, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (5040 - 6619, n=53) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Average of class Multimedia (3651 - 13548, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (3548 - 5255, n=53) | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4635 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Average of class Multimedia (20549 - 104459, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (17443 - 63889, n=45) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Average of class Multimedia (22917 - 125604, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (19716 - 63705, n=45) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Average of class Multimedia (20226 - 117933, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (18722 - 66778, n=45) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Average of class Multimedia (7 - 346, n=77, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Core i5-1135G7 (68.3 - 107, n=51) | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC latencies
As is unfortunately the case with many other laptops, the Envy 14 has some latency issues. According to the LatencyMon tool, the HP device isn't ideal for real-time audio and video editing.
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
* ... smaller is better
Storage
The built-in 1 TB SSD from Toshiba didn't show any problems in the test. The NVMe model delivers more than decent performance rates, without fully exploiting the technology's capabilities. The Envy 14's M.2 drive doesn't suffer from performance drops under prolonged load.
| Drive Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average of class Multimedia | |
| Average Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02 | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
* ... smaller is better
Continuous load read: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
Graphics card
Unlike the touch version, the less expensive sibling doesn't have a dedicated graphics card. The Iris Xe Graphics G7 that's integrated into the processor supports DirectX 12 and offers 80 EUs in the case of the 1135G7. The graphics benchmarks paint the same picture as the CPU tests: Performance is roughly on par with all the devices that have been reviewed so far with this GPU. The AMD competition's Radeon chips achieve slightly better results on average. The more expensive Envy 14 is over twice as fast thanks to its GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q.
| 3DMark Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average of class Multimedia | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 5354 points | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 73098 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 16080 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 2969 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 1275 points | |
Help | ||
Gaming performance
It's better to stay away from modern games. A couple of the 2022 titles that we tested either crashed or generated graphics errors (a typical Intel iGPU problem; the graphics drivers from AMD and Nvidia tend to be better). But when a game ran without problems, the frame rate was usually so poor even at minimum details that it wasn't possible to get a smooth image. At most, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 with 80 EUs is meant for older and less demanding games. You can even choose medium to high settings at times, as long as you're willing to reduce the resolution if necessary.
| The Witcher 3 | |
| 1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing | |
| Average of class Multimedia (36 - 428, n=46, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Average Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (30.2 - 97.4, n=101) | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| 1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing | |
| Average of class Multimedia (23 - 327, n=39, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Average Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (21.8 - 56.9, n=103) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
| 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
| Average of class Multimedia (11.2 - 290, n=73, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Lenovo IdeaPad 5 Pro 14ACN6 | |
| Average Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs (9.3 - 33.5, n=101) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0252ng | |
| Asus ZenBook 14 UM425U | |
At least the Envy 14 doesn't have to deal with performance fluctuations. Our 60-minute The Witcher 3 test was completed smoothly in terms of frame-rate stability.