Notebookcheck

HP Omen 15 (7700HQ, GTX 1060 Max-Q, Full-HD) Laptop Review

Florian Glaser (translated by Mark Riege), 07/22/2017

Changeling. The Omen series from HP is not only known for its relatively good price-performance ratio, but also for its unique appearance. Thanks to a redesign in mid-2017, the gaming notebooks appear in a completely new light. In our test, you can find out what else has changed.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

For the original German review, see here.

While HP leaves the absolute high-end segment to other manufacturers (Alienware, Acer, Asus, Clevo, etc.), in the price range between 1000 and 2000 Euros ($1150 - $2300), the Omen laptops belong to the most important and successful gaming representatives. To cover a target market as large as possible and attract as many customers as possible, the 15 and 17-inch models are available in various feature variants.

The Omen 15 is equipped with 8 to 16 GB of DDR4 RAM and a CPU from Intel's Kaby-Lake generation that can either process four (Core i5-7300HQ) or via Hyperthreading eight threads (Core i7-7700HQ) at the same time. The graphics accelerator comes from Nvidia, and here the offerings range from the GeForce GTX 1050 (2 GB of VRAM) and GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4 GB of VRAM) mid-range chips up to the GeForce GTX 1060 high-end GPU which features an impressive 6 GB of GDDR5 VRAM. Depending on the model, the data is stored on a smaller 256 GB SSD and/or a large 1 TB HDD. A non-reflective Full HD screen, which supports 120 Hz in some configurations, is responsible for the image display.

Our test unit, which is the Omen 15 ce002ng model and costs 1665 Euros (~$1900; note that while we could not find the exact same configuration in the US, various configurations are available, such as an HP Omen with 15.6" FHD, i7-7700HQ, NVIDIA GTX 1050, 8GB, and 1TB HDD for $1070), is really the top configuration. The competitors of the Omen naturally include primarily the 15-inch notebooks from the multimedia and gaming segment. To keep things from becoming too chaotic, we have limited ourselves to four comparison devices in this article. With a maximum case height of 3 cm (~1.2 in), the MSI GS63VR 7RF, the Schenker XMG P507, the Gigabyte Aero 15, and the Acer Aspire VX5-591G are also quite slim.

HP Omen 15-ce002ng (Omen Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q - 6144 MB, Core: 1063 MHz, Memory: 8000 MHz, GDDR5, ForceWare 381.89
Memory
16384 MB 
, 2x 8 GB DDR4-2400 SO-DIMM, dual-channel, both slots occupied, max. 32 GB
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, AUO42ED, IPS, Full HD, 120 Hz, G-Sync, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM175
Storage
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, 256 GB 
, NVMe-SSD + HGST HTS721010A9E630, 1 TB HDD @ 7200 rpm. Slots: 1x M.2 Type 2280 PCIe 3.0 x4 & 1x 2,5-inch
Soundcard
Realtek ALC295 @ Intel Sunrise Point-LP PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: headphones, microphone, Card Reader: SD,SDHC,SDXC, Sensors: acceleration sensor
Networking
Realtek Gaming GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265 (a/b/g/h/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 25 x 389 x 276 ( = 0.98 x 15.31 x 10.87 in)
Battery
70 Wh, 4550 mAh Lithium-Ion, 4 cells
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0 (Bang & Olufsen), Keyboard: chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 200 W power supply, Quick Start Guide, various manufacturer tools, McAfee LiveSafe trial, MS Office 365 trial , 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.62 kg ( = 92.42 oz / 5.78 pounds), Power Supply: 818 g ( = 28.85 oz / 1.8 pounds)
Price
1665 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Even though the Omen has already been offering a winning design in the past, HP could not keep from completely redesigning the series. Instead of mouse-gray surfaces and rounded corners, the customers now receive a considerably darker and more edgy case that stands out from the mass of gaming notebooks in many respects.

Although the center-mounted display hinge and the (fake) fan vents to the right and left of it are reminiscent of the Lenovo Y520, elsewhere HP goes its own very peculiar way in the design. For one, we have the cover that is split into four sections that have different textures and besides the red Omen logo, some sort of cross hairs. Then there is the bottom that draws attention to itself with the interestingly formed rubber feet and the triangular pattern typical for the series.

In terms of quality, a lot has changed also. While the lid and bottom of the case continue to be made of plastic, the keyboard in the new Omen is surrounded by brushed aluminum (fingerprint magnet), which makes the case appear of higher quality and provides better stability. Appropriate: the base unit scores in all respects with a good solidity. As with most notebooks, the lid could have been a little more stable, particularly since it also makes some unattractive noises when opening or twisting it.

Overall, we would give a good verdict on the case. HP has made changes at exactly the right places and delivers a mostly cleanly designed case. Anyone looking for a gaming device that stands out is well-served here.

Size and weight have turned out considerably less spectacular than the design. 2.6 kg (~5.7 lb) is neither particularly heavy nor light for a 15-inch game companion. The same goes for a case thickness of 2.5 cm (~1 in), which puts the Omen 15 between the MSI GS63VR or Gigabyte Aero 15 (<2 cm/< 0.8 in) and the Acer Aspire VX5-591G or Schenker XMG P507 (~3 cm/1.2 in).

Size Comparison

Features

Connections

Compared to the predecessor, the number of connections has increased considerably. Where the old Omen was very stingy with the connections, the new model has all the ports you would expect from a modern gaming notebook, whether it be the display ports (HDMI & Mini-DisplayPort) or the USB-connections. Not only does the test unit offer three traditional USB-3.0 Type-A ports, but also a Type-C port that masters USB 3.1 Gen2, DisplayPort, and even Thunderbolt 3 (but this is not always the case for the more affordable models with GTX 1050 [Ti]). The package is rounded by two audio ports (headphones + microphone), a foldout RJ45 port, and an opening for Kensington Locks.

From a right-handed point of view, the positioning of the connections succeeds. Since all the ports except for the card reader are towards the back, movements are not restricted when using a mouse. This looks different for left-handed people who might be confronted with lots of cables. 

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!

Left side: Kensington Lock, Mini-DisplayPort, HDMI, RJ45-LAN, USB 3.0, Thunderbolt 3, head phones, microphone
Left side: Kensington Lock, Mini-DisplayPort, HDMI, RJ45-LAN, USB 3.0, Thunderbolt 3, head phones, microphone
Right side: card reader, 2x USB 3.0, power
Right side: card reader, 2x USB 3.0, power

SD-Card Reader

At 87 MB/s for sequential reads and 77 MB/s for transferring images, the performance of the SD-card reader settles in the middle of the field. The two leaders of the field, the Schenker XMG P507 and the Gigabyte Aero 15, have almost the same speed. Our Toshiba reference card can theoretically transfer up to 260 MB/s, which some notebooks are able to achieve at least partially. At least the HP Omen 15 does clearly better than the Acer Aspire VX5-591G and the MSI GS63R, which crawl at USB-2.0 levels (<30 MB/s).

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78 MB/s ∼100% +1%
Gigabyte Aero 15
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78 MB/s ∼100% +1%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
77 MB/s ∼99%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23.59 MB/s ∼30% -69%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
 
23.2 MB/s ∼30% -70%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
89 MB/s ∼100% +2%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
88 MB/s ∼99% +1%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
87 MB/s ∼98%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
 
27.6 MB/s ∼31% -68%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
20.96 MB/s ∼24% -76%

Communication

The transmission speed leaves a mixed impression. While the 15-inch notebook sets the top value for receiving with 701 Mbit/s (100 cm/3 ft distance from the reference router), during sending it only achieves one of the last places. Its 426 Mbit/s positions it between the Schenker XMG P507 (513 Mbit/s) and the Gigabyte Aero 15 (346 Mbit/s), which have the slightly newer Wireless AC 8265 instead of the Intel Wireless-AC 7265. At an average of 653 Mbit/s during sending, the Acer Aspire VX5-591G proves that more would really be possible with the integrated Wi-Fi chip.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
701 MBit/s ∼100%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
678 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
674 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
662 MBit/s ∼94% -6%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
533 MBit/s ∼76% -24%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
653 MBit/s ∼100% +53%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
594 MBit/s ∼91% +39%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
513 MBit/s ∼79% +20%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
426 MBit/s ∼65%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
346 MBit/s ∼53% -19%

Accessories

The accessories are extremely stingy. Besides the large 17 x 9.5 x 2.5 cm (~6.7 x 3.7 x 1 in) and heavy 0.8 kg (~1.8 lb) 200-watt power supply, HP adds only a Quick Start Guide and a small information booklet into the box. The more affordable GTX-1050-(Ti) model would have a more compact power supply.

Maintenance

The possibilities of upgrading and cleaning are on a level typical for gaming notebooks of 2017. The lack of a maintenance flap is alleviated by a bottom that is completely removable. After having unscrewed 10 Philips screws, you can leverage the bottom out of its seat, which is not as easy in some places as it looks.

Under the hood are two SO-DIMM slots for DDR4 RAM, one M.2 slot for SATA-III or PCIe/NVMe SSDs, and one 2.5-inch slot for conventional hard drives. This is accompanied by the Wi-Fi adapter and the screwed-in battery. The cooling system consists of three heat pipes, which run above the CPU and the GPU (soldered-in and thus not removable). Two fans in the back take care of discharging the heat outside.

Warranty

As with most notebooks, the warranty extends for 24 months. The notebooksbilliger.de internet shop, where we received our test unit, also speaks about a six-month Express-Service warranty.

Software

We have to criticize HP a little for the software installation. Even though the manufacturer does without too much third-party bloatware, their in-house programs are hardly beneficial in parts and smell like data collection and tying you to their accounts. The tool most interesting for gamers, the Omen Command Center, clearly falls behind the solutions from other manufacturers in terms of functions (compare, for example the Gaming Center of the Asus ROG GX501). A manual fan control as well as an OC feature or some such control is lacking. The Command Center merely serves as system monitoring (keyword: load) and net traffic regulation.

Command Center
Command Center
Command Center
Command Center
Command Center
Command Center

Input Devices

Keyboard

The input devices have also improved since the last generation. Thanks to the better case stability, the chiclet keyboard now appears sturdier, which enhances the typing characteristics (stroke, etc.). The better layout is also an added benefit. Although HP is still convinced that a single-row Enter key is sufficient for the German keyboard (greetings from MSI), there is a multitude of optimizations, beginning with the larger F row, through the regular-sized arrow keys, and up to the separate number pad.

As usual, it is a matter of the individual taste whether you can appreciate the illumination selected by HP. While the WASD keys are illuminated in white, the rest of the keyboard shines in bright red. Unfortunately, tuning fans will be disappointed. We could not find any software for adjustment on the test unit. The illumination can only be partially or completely turned off. Other manufacturers try to win over gamers with several zones, modes, or RGB support, regardless of whether such features make sense or not. Yet we had a lot of fun with the keyboard. The typing feel is great for a gaming notebook. But the red lettering on the keys is not quite as good. You can sometimes hardly recognize the keys even during the day.

Red keyboard illumination
Red keyboard illumination
White WASD area
White WASD area

Touchpad

Besides the keyboard, the touchpad also leaps ahead. Instead of a very unstable ClickPad without dedicated keys, the customers are now getting spoiled with a traditional touchpad that acts much more reliably in practice. The 10.2 x 5.7 cm (~4.1 x 2.2 in) surface is slightly roughed and lowered minimally. In the test, the precision was inconspicuous, that is to say, decent. 

We are not quite so enthusiastic about the gesture support. While scrolling with two fingers works well, the zoom function turns out to be quite obstinate (delays, no smooth transitions). HP could also improve on the rather small and slightly undefined mouse keys.

Display

To keep pace with the times, the Omen 15 in the version with the top features offers a 120-Hz display with G-Sync support. The Full HD panel AUO42ED is based on IPS technology and compels not only with a quite good black value (0.26 cd/m²), but also with ample contrast. At 1169:1, the 15-inch notebook outdoes all competitors (714 to 889:1). However, the brightness is just mediocre, and 289 cd/m² are surpassed slightly by the Gigabyte Aero 15 and clearly by the Schenker XMG P507.

286
cd/m²
286
cd/m²
272
cd/m²
314
cd/m²
304
cd/m²
300
cd/m²
275
cd/m²
292
cd/m²
271
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 314 cd/m² Average: 288.9 cd/m² Minimum: 14 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 304 cd/m²
Contrast: 1169:1 (Black: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.46 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 2.46 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
91% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 59% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.38
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
AUO42ED, 1920x1080
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
LG Philips LGD0550 / LP156WF6-SPK4, 1920x1080
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
3840x2160
Gigabyte Aero 15
N156HCA-EA1 (CMN15D7), 1920x1080
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
AUO B156HTN05.2 (AUO52ED), 1920x1080
Response Times
38%
30%
-1%
53%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
43.2 (21.2, 22)
22 (10, 12)
49%
28 (15.6, 12.4)
35%
42.8 (23.6, 19.2)
1%
24 (12, 12)
44%
Response Time Black / White *
31.2 (16.4, 14.8)
23 (13, 10)
26%
23.6 (15.2, 8.4)
24%
32 (18.8, 13.2)
-3%
12 (4, 8)
62%
PWM Frequency
1351 (39)
26000 (20)
Screen
-29%
-66%
-24%
-69%
Brightness middle
304
281
-8%
274.2
-10%
320
5%
357
17%
Brightness
289
257
-11%
263
-9%
316
9%
365
26%
Brightness Distribution
86
85
-1%
92
7%
90
5%
85
-1%
Black Level *
0.26
0.32
-23%
0.44
-69%
0.36
-38%
0.5
-92%
Contrast
1169
878
-25%
623
-47%
889
-24%
714
-39%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.46
5.16
-49%
8
-131%
4.62
-34%
9.93
-187%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.72
9.09
-18%
14.6
-89%
9.75
-26%
14.87
-93%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.46
4.57
-86%
9.1
-270%
6
-144%
10.32
-320%
Gamma
2.38 92%
2.59 85%
2.24 98%
2.46 89%
2.11 104%
CCT
6915 94%
6931 94%
5020 129%
6761 96%
10096 64%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
59
37
-37%
45.7
-23%
60
2%
58
-2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
91
58
-36%
72.1
-21%
92
1%
89
-2%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
5% / -18%
-18% / -50%
-13% / -21%
-8% / -49%

* ... smaller is better

The matte panel presents itself with relatively good color accuracy. Neither the Grayscale nor the ColorChecker test gives much reason for complaint. Through calibration, we were able to push the DeltaE-2000 deviations even below 1 and 3 respectively. The color space coverage is not bad either. 91% sRGB is more than enough for gamers and multimedia fans (videos, movies, etc.). The same goes for the viewing angle stability, which, as typical for IPS panels is still quite good even from steep angles.

CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: saturation
CalMAN: saturation
CalMAN: saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
HP Omen 15 vs. sRGB (91%)
HP Omen 15 vs. sRGB (91%)
HP Omen 15 vs. AdobeRGB (59%)
HP Omen 15 vs. AdobeRGB (59%)

At most, we see problems with the reaction time. 31.2 ms (black-to-white) and 43.2 ms (gray-to-gray) are weak, particularly in view of the 120-Hz feature. However, this goes for most IPS displays. A panel with TN technology would have better reaction times, but then the image quality would suffer in other respects (viewing angles, color saturation).

Outdoor usage
Outdoor usage
Subpixels
Subpixels
Viewing angle
Viewing angle

Our test unit is spared massive screen bleeding. There is merely some minimal light bleeding at the bottom edge, which in no way is interfering, even with dark backgrounds.

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
31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16.4 ms rise
↘ 14.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 80 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
43.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21.2 ms rise
↘ 22 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. » 62 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8781 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance

Depending on the graphics card, the Omen 15 trends towards either the mid-range (GTX 1050GTX 1050 Ti) or the high-end (GTX 1060). In most games, the CPU selection hardly makes much difference, since even the Core i5-7300HQ brings enough power, at least for now. However, anyone wanting to future-proof their device should choose the Core i7-7700HQ with Hyperthreading.

 

Processor

Currently, Intel's Kaby-Lake generation runs in almost every new gaming notebook. HP has also opted for the 14-nm models. The Core i7-7700HQ built into the test device is rated at 45 watts TDP and clocks at 2.8 to 3.8 GHz under load.

Single-core rendering
Single-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
GPU load
GPU load

We can confirm these values. A maximum of 3.8 GHz during singlecore tasks and 3.4 GHz during multi-core tasks correspond to the usual 7700HQ level. In our 30-minute loop with Cinebench R15, the Turbo definitely comes into use. The Omen 15 delivers constantly high results which do not drop even after prolonged periods.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
5945
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
22228
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
10298
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.83 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.18 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
68 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
160 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
740 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
112 fps
Help

Fitting with this, the 15-inch notebook finds its place in the benchmark table. Except for the Acer Aspire VX5-591 which falls back a little, all the competitors are on equal footing.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
162 Points ∼100% +1%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼99% +1%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼99% +1%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
160 Points ∼99%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
151 Points ∼93% -6%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% 0%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% 0%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% 0%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
740 Points ∼100%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
719 Points ∼97% -3%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.84 Points ∼100% +1%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼99%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.82 Points ∼99% -1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.77 Points ∼96% -3%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.23 Points ∼100% +1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.18 Points ∼99% 0%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.18 Points ∼99%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.16 Points ∼99% 0%

System Performance

The system performance is also compelling. Thanks to the fact that Windows 10 is installed on a solid-state drive, the computer boots up in no time and also reacts exceptionally fast elsewhere (program starts, loading procedures, etc.). 16 GB of DDR4 RAM should offer enough reserves for the next 2 to 3 years. With 8 GB configurations, it might become a little tight for the coming game hits.

PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5348 Points ∼100%
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
5290 Points ∼99% -1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5268 Points ∼99% -1%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
5180 Points ∼97% -3%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
4442 Points ∼83% -17%
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4858 Points ∼100%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
4320 Points ∼89% -11%
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
4248 Points ∼87% -13%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
4141 Points ∼85% -15%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
3565 Points ∼73% -27%
PCMark 10 - Score
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4861 Points ∼100%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4858 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5348 points
Help

Storage Solutions

Solid-state drives on PCIe basis are currently one of the strongest trends in gaming notebooks and are almost required in better circles. In the tested Omen 15-ce002ng, HP uses a 256 GB M.2 drive from Samsung (PM961), which breaks the 3000-MB barrier during sequential reads and plays well in front of the field accordingly. 

CrystalDiskMark SSD
CrystalDiskMark SSD
HDTune HDD
HDTune HDD
CrystalDiskMark HDD
CrystalDiskMark HDD

However, with a maximum of 1200 to 1300 MB/s during sequential writes, it is just enough for a place in the middle of the field. Samsung's 960 EVO in-house competitor, which runs in the Schenker XMG A517, achieves higher scores in almost all the tests. On the other hand, the SSD performance of the Omen 15 is better than the Gigabyte P56XT, whose LiteOn drive performs slower.

HP Omen 15-ce002ng
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Schenker XMG A517
Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
Gigabyte P56XT
LiteOn CX2-8B256
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
20%
-11%
-3%
Write 4K
156
196
26%
142.5
-9%
149
-4%
Read 4K
47.14
49
4%
46.69
-1%
45
-5%
Write Seq
1266
1652
30%
796.6
-37%
1049
-17%
Read Seq
1419
1856
31%
1881
33%
954
-33%
Write 4K Q32T1
486
591
22%
455.5
-6%
463
-5%
Read 4K Q32T1
586.4
627
7%
587.5
0%
547
-7%
Write Seq Q32T1
1246
1706
37%
789.6
-37%
1848
48%
Read Seq Q32T1
3431
3389
-1%
2445
-29%
3445
0%
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3431 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1246 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 586.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 486 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1419 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1266 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 47.14 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 156 MB/s

Graphics Card

Things become very interesting with the graphics card. After setting up the 15-inch notebook we were quite surprised, when the Nvidia driver displayed the GeForce GTX 1060 as Max-Q. In short, Max-Q stands for Pascal models tuned for efficiency, which cost the same as their "standard" brothers although they deliver a lower performance (see also our special and our opinion articles). While the size of the video memory (6 GB GDDR5 @192-Bit) and the amount of the shader units (1280) are identical to those of the regular GTX 1060, the clock speeds are considerably lower. The GPU-Z tool, for example, speaks about a core clock speed of 1063 to 1342 instead of 1405 to 1671 MHz.

GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q ...
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q ...
... with 120-Hz display ...
... with 120-Hz display ...
... and G-Sync
... and G-Sync

Unlike the GTX 1080 Max-Q, whose performance is more similar to the GTX 1070 than the GTX 1080, the weaker clock speeds of the GTX 1060 Max-Q do not quite have such a negative effect, since other elements of the GPU are limiting in many programs. In the benchmarks, the Omen 15 comes in just slightly behind the classical GTX-1060 notebooks such as the MSI GS63VR 7RF and the Gigabyte Aero 15, though the difference is measurable at about 10%. However, the Omen 15 runs miles ahead of the GTX-1050-Ti laptops, which leads us to consider the labeling of the GTX 1060 Max-Q less controversial than that of the GTX 1080 Max-Q, which only conditionally deserves its name. Perhaps calling it GTX 1075 would have been more appropriate.

3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
16873 Points ∼100% +63%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
11261 Points ∼67% +9%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
11173 Points ∼66% +8%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
10349 Points ∼61%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
7791 Points ∼46% -25%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
21922 Points ∼100% +65%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14450 Points ∼66% +9%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14265 Points ∼65% +7%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
13279 Points ∼61%
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
9768 Points ∼45% -26%
Unigine Heaven 4.0 - Extreme Preset DX11
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
109.1 fps ∼100% +66%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
73.8 fps ∼68% +12%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
65.9 fps ∼60%

But back to our current notebook: since the 15-inch notebook supports Nvidia's G-Sync technology, the customers have to make do without graphics switching. The HD Graphics 630 integrated in the processor always remains inactive, which can diminish the battery life considerably.

3DMark 11 Performance
11902 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
138488 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
25573 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
8949 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
3271 points
Help

At least in 3D operation, the power of the GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q is well retrieved. After 60 minutes of “The Witcher 3”, the core settled at about 1440 MHz (CPU @ 3.4 to 3.6 GHz) with a moderate GPU temperature of 70 °C (~158 °F). We did not notice any performance drops or other problems. The throttling of the Omen 15 could only be forced in the practically less relevant stress test with the FurMark and Prime95 tools.

01234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra

Gaming Performance

During the gaming benchmarks, the trend of the synthetic graphics tests continues. If you exclude an outlier above (“FIFA 17”) and one below (“Rocket League”), the GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q is mostly just a few percentage points slower than its non-Max-Q version. From time to time, it can also fall behind by more than 10%. Taking all the tested games together results in the following ranking:

Grafikkarte Performance Full-HD/Ultra
GeForce GTX 1070 +55%
GeForce GTX 1060 +11%
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q Basis
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti -29%

In general, anyone calling themselves just an occasional gamer would only be happy in the Full HD area with the GeForce GTX 1060 or better. The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti often demands some larger or smaller compromises in the image quality. However, for 3K displays it should be at least a GTX 1070, and 4K monitors demand a GTX 1080.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
58 fps ∼100% +68%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
37.7 fps ∼65% +9%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
34.6 fps ∼60%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
26.9 fps ∼46% -22%
Batman: Arkham Knight - 1920x1080 High / On AA:SM AF:16x
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
77 fps ∼100% +43%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
57 fps ∼74% +6%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
54 fps ∼70%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
41 fps ∼53% -24%
Star Wars Battlefront - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:FX
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
128 fps ∼100% +58%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
88.4 fps ∼69% +9%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
80.9 fps ∼63%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
62.7 fps ∼49% -22%
Assassin's Creed Syndicate - 1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:4x MSAA + FX
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
45 fps ∼100% +53%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
30.8 fps ∼68% +5%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
29.4 fps ∼65%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
23.5 fps ∼52% -20%
Rainbow Six Siege - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
163 fps ∼100% +60%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
115 fps ∼71% +13%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
102 fps ∼63%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
74.4 fps ∼46% -27%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
84.6 fps ∼100% +66%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
59.1 fps ∼70% +16%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
51.1 fps ∼60%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
39.7 fps ∼47% -22%
Far Cry Primal - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:SM
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
78 fps ∼100% +47%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
56 fps ∼72% +6%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
53 fps ∼68%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
40 fps ∼51% -25%
The Division - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AF:16x
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
75.7 fps ∼100% +55%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
50.4 fps ∼67% +3%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
48.8 fps ∼64%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
34.9 fps ∼46% -28%
Doom - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:SM
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
117 fps ∼100% +36%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
91.5 fps ∼78% +6%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
86.2 fps ∼74%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
63.8 fps ∼55% -26%
Mirror's Edge Catalyst - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AF:16x
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
92.4 fps ∼100% +55%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
67.1 fps ∼73% +13%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
59.6 fps ∼65%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
45.1 fps ∼49% -24%
Deus Ex Mankind Divided - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:2xMS AF:8x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
41.2 (min: 32) fps ∼100% +54%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
26.7 fps ∼65%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
19.7 fps ∼48% -26%
Battlefield 1 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
118 (min: 102) fps ∼100% +74%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
67.8 fps ∼57%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
50.8 fps ∼43% -25%
Titanfall 2 - 1920x1080 Very High (Insane Texture Quality) / Enabled AA:TS AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
107 (min: 87) fps ∼100% +59%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
67.3 fps ∼63%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
56.2 fps ∼53% -16%
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare - 1920x1080 Ultra / On AA:T2X SM
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
113 (min: 95) fps ∼100% +38%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
90.8 (min: 68) fps ∼80% +11%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
81.7 fps ∼72%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
58.8 fps ∼52% -28%
Dishonored 2 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:TX
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
65 (min: 45) fps ∼100% +19%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
58.6 (min: 47) fps ∼90% +7%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
54.8 fps ∼84%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
39.6 fps ∼61% -28%
Watch Dogs 2 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
61.4 (min: 50) fps ∼100% +56%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
42.3 (min: 32) fps ∼69% +7%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
39.4 fps ∼64%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
26.6 fps ∼43% -32%
Resident Evil 7 - 1920x1080 Very High / On AA:FXAA+T
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
131 (min: 113) fps ∼100% +72%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
85.8 (min: 73) fps ∼65% +13%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
76.1 fps ∼58%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
24.3 (min: 13, max: 36) fps ∼19% -68%
For Honor - 1920x1080 Extreme Preset AA:T AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
108 (min: 78) fps ∼100% +69%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
72.4 (min: 41) fps ∼67% +13%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
63.9 fps ∼59%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
45.8 (min: 33, max: 64) fps ∼42% -28%
Ghost Recon Wildlands - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
50.7 (min: 44) fps ∼100% +53%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
38.1 (min: 32) fps ∼75% +15%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
33.2 fps ∼65%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
9.8 (min: 8, max: 12) fps ∼19% -70%
Prey - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:2TX SM AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
133 (min: 94) fps ∼100% +57%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
100 (min: 75) fps ∼75% +18%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
84.7 fps ∼64%
Dirt 4 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:4xMS AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
79.5 (min: 67) fps ∼100% +59%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
59.2 (min: 51) fps ∼74% +19%
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
49.9 fps ∼63%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
39.2 (min: 34, max: 49) fps ∼49% -21%

As you can see from our table below, the GTX 1060 Max-Q handles almost all the games, even with full detail settings. However, you have to be aware that then the 120-Hz-technology is hardly used. Often you can only reach above 60 FPS in settings that are "only" high.

low med. high ultra4K
The Witcher 3 (2015) 11963.234.622.9fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 129815426fps
Star Wars Battlefront (2015) 1889380.929.3fps
Assassin's Creed Syndicate (2015) 82.665.829.422.2fps
Rainbow Six Siege (2015) 22412610237.3fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 12465.651.123.5fps
Far Cry Primal (2016) 81715322fps
The Division (2016) 12761.948.822.1fps
Doom (2016) 12791.186.228.4fps
Mirror's Edge Catalyst (2016) 13066.459.620.5fps
Deus Ex Mankind Divided (2016) 93.850.226.715.8fps
FIFA 17 (2016) 33025024895.2fps
Battlefield 1 (2016) 1547667.825.3fps
Titanfall 2 (2016) 1447967.324.8fps
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare (2016) 12491.681.734.6fps
Dishonored 2 (2016) 85.464.754.823.7fps
Watch Dogs 2 (2016) 10156.839.418.9fps
Resident Evil 7 (2017) 1699376.125.1fps
For Honor (2017) 92.387.863.925.7fps
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) 6558.733.219.4fps
Prey (2017) 12610184.727.7fps
Rocket League (2017) 19413456.5fps
Dirt 4 (2017) 12993.649.9fps

Emissions

Noise Emissions

Even though the GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q promises higher efficiency and with hence easier cooling, the Omen 15 becomes quite warm and loud under load. Although an average of 41 dB(A) in the 3DMark 06 is okay, the 15-inch notebook does not necessarily have the most agreeable noise characteristics, particularly since the two fans reach up to 50 dB(A) in extreme situations, which is very annoying. However, it should also be said that most of the competitors become similarly loud. 

Noise level, idle
Noise level, idle
Noise level, load
Noise level, load
Volume, speaker
Volume, speaker

The Omen 15 delivers only a mediocre performance in idle mode as well. On the one hand, the basic noise level is not particularly low at a base level of 33 to 34 dB(A) (HDD + discrete fan noise), while on the other hand the fans like to rev up unnecessarily. Depending on the power saving settings, they stop completely from time to time, which makes the Omen silent (only right next to it, you can hear a minimal hum).

Noise Level

Idle
30 / 33 / 37 dB(A)
HDD
34 dB(A)
Load
41 / 50 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 dB(A)
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Noise
7%
1%
0%
-9%
off / environment *
30
30.4
-1%
28.8
4%
31
-3%
31
-3%
Idle Minimum *
30
31.4
-5%
33.1
-10%
32
-7%
33
-10%
Idle Average *
33
31.4
5%
33.1
-0%
33
-0%
34
-3%
Idle Maximum *
37
31.4
15%
34
8%
34
8%
44
-19%
Load Average *
41
36.8
10%
37.2
9%
39
5%
46
-12%
Witcher 3 ultra *
42
46.1
-10%
43
-2%
Load Maximum *
50
41.3
17%
47.1
6%
50
-0%
52
-4%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

As expected, under load the case warms up mainly towards the back. A maximum of 54 °C (~129 °F, stress test) and 52 °C (126 °F, “The Witcher 3”) argue against gaming sessions on your lap. At a maximum of 47 and 44 °C (~117 and ~111 °F), the top remains slightly cooler. Fortunately, the palm rest never becomes particularly warm. Although a maximum of 34 °C (~93 °F) is not the best value, it is bearable. The missing graphics switching is not only noticeable in the power consumption, but also the temperature measurements. In idle operation, most of the case reaches above 30 °C (~86 °F), which hardly happens in the competition.

Stress test
Stress test
Full load, top (Optris PI 640)
Full load, top (Optris PI 640)
Full load, bottom (Optris PI 640)
Full load, bottom (Optris PI 640)

If we take a quick look inside the case, under load neither the CPU nor the GPU reaches ranges that are too critical. As soon as the Core i7-7700HQ reaches above 90 °C (~194 °F), the Turbo boost simply deactivates, so that it only reaches 2.6 GHz (minimal throttling) to 2.8 GHz (base clock speed). In the stress test, the GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q throttles considerably more to below 1000 MHz at a temperature of about 75 °C (~167 °F). As mentioned above, you do not need to fear any losses in normal 3D applications.

Max. Load
 46 °C
115 F
47 °C
117 F
44 °C
111 F
 
 45 °C
113 F
46 °C
115 F
42 °C
108 F
 
 33 °C
91 F
34 °C
93 F
34 °C
93 F
 
Maximum: 47 °C = 117 F
Average: 41.2 °C = 106 F
49 °C
120 F
48 °C
118 F
48 °C
118 F
54 °C
129 F
53 °C
127 F
52 °C
126 F
32 °C
90 F
34 °C
93 F
29 °C
84 F
Maximum: 54 °C = 129 F
Average: 44.3 °C = 112 F
Power Supply (max.)  45 °C = 113 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.2 °C / 106 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 47 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 54 °C / 129 F, compared to the average of 41.6 °C / 107 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.8 °C / 93 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 39.8 °C / 104 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34 °C / 93.2 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.7 °C / 83.7 F (-5.3 °C / -9.5 F).
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Heat
17%
24%
10%
2%
Maximum Upper Side *
47
47
-0%
56
-19%
49.2
-5%
Maximum Bottom *
54
47
13%
61
-13%
62
-15%
Idle Upper Side *
36
28.4
21%
28.4
21%
25
31%
32.4
10%
Idle Bottom *
40
27.1
32%
29.6
26%
24
40%
33
17%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

A 2.0 system hidden at the bottom in the frontal area and coming from (or certified by) Bang & Olufsen takes care of the sound reproduction. Compared to the current notebook standard, the offered sound quality ranges from decent (bass) to good (mids, highs). You can fine tune it with HP's audio software. Not only are there several sound modes (music, movie, voice) in the "Output" menu, but also an equalizer. At a maximum volume of 80 dB(A), the Omen 15 is suitable for small to mid-size rooms.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs203734.92531.629.13128.726.54029.330.85027.226.26325.3268025.32610025.436.412522.54916023.547.520022.457.325019.963.631520.566.240018.868.650018.266.863018.369.680017.671100017.770.7125017.171.1160016.971.6200017.268.4250017.365.7315017.264.7400017.365.2500017.462.5630017.359.6800017.559.91000018.166.91250017.572.71600017.268SPL29.780.2N1.349.2median 17.6median 66.2Delta1.74.43531.43534.332.534.335.936.335.930.628.930.631.53131.528.529.428.533.325.533.336.224.936.243.525.143.551.723.251.752.922.952.958.321.458.36421.16466.12066.163.919.263.965.918.665.971.318.371.365.218.165.264.817.664.868.417.668.469.217.869.268.617.968.667.717.867.770.718.170.772.618.372.672.218.472.272.418.572.472.718.672.767.818.467.858.518.458.581.730.481.754.41.454.4median 66.1median 18.4median 66.15.51.85.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Omen 15-ce002ngAcer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
HP Omen 15-ce002ng audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 7% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 11% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency comparison (Checkboxes selectable!)

Power Management

Power Consumption

Despite the Max-Q design, the Omen 15 is not very energy efficient while idling. 18 to 30 watts is even more than in many non-Max-Q notebooks. The GTX-1060 competitors such as the MSI GS63VR 7RF and the Gigabyte Aero 15 often offer graphics switching (Nvidia Optimus). However, under load you can notice an improvement in terms of efficiency due to the Max-Q. Instead of 111 to 129 watts, the Omen 15 consumes only about 96 watts in “The Witcher 3”. However, the values in the 3DMark 06 and the stress test are similar to the MSI and Gigabyte competition.

The maximum of 158 watts in full load with FurMark and Prime95 indicate that a more compact power supply with 150 to 170 watts would really have been sufficient. 200 watts make the Max-Q concept (more mobility through less cooling and power demands) a bit pointless.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.4 / 0.7 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 18 / 23 / 30 Watt
Load midlight 85 / 158 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Power Consumption
40%
9%
15%
7%
Idle Minimum *
18
7
61%
14.5
19%
12
33%
14
22%
Idle Average *
23
10.2
56%
17.3
25%
15
35%
18
22%
Idle Maximum *
30
14
53%
17.4
42%
20
33%
24
20%
Load Average *
85
78
8%
93
-9%
82
4%
87
-2%
Load Maximum *
158
127
20%
161
-2%
201
-27%
Witcher 3 ultra *
96
128.8
-34%
111
-16%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Omen 15 is hardly suitable for longer excursions beyond the power grid. 3:18 hours of Internet surfing via WLAN with a brightness of 150 cd/m² are as limited in the year 2017 as 3:44 hours of HD-movie enjoyment (also with reduced brightness). In the best case, i.e., with minimal brightness and no load present, the 70-Wh battery lasts a little over 4 hours. In 3D operation with maximum brightness, you can count on 1 to 1.5 hours. Anyone valuing mobility should buy a notebook with graphics switching and a particularly large battery. The 94-Wh model of the Gigabyte Aero 15 manages 7 to 8 hours in everyday scenarios (video, web) and more than 10 hours in idle.

By the way, to play games without a power supply is not a good idea. The frame rate dropped by about 60% in the “The Witcher 3” test.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
4h 16min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
3h 18min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
3h 44min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 20min
HP Omen 15-ce002ng
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 70 Wh
Acer Aspire VX5-591G-75C4 VX15
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, 52.5 Wh
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 65 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 94.24 Wh
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 60 Wh
Battery Runtime
27%
21%
102%
-4%
Reader / Idle
256
322
26%
386
51%
638
149%
H.264
224
464
107%
213
-5%
WiFi v1.3
198
302
53%
232
17%
422
113%
195
-2%
Load
80
81
1%
75
-6%
112
40%

Verdict

Pros

+ 120-Hz display with G-Sync
+ expressive design
+ good input devices
+ decent sound
+ high performance
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ PCIe SSD

Cons

- unnecessarily large power supply with very thick cable
- Max-Q design hardly brings any advantages
- low battery life
HP Omen 15, test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de
HP Omen 15, test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

While for years, many notebook manufacturers have been resting on their laurels, or to be exact, their cases and in addition to the new GPUs and CPUs only updated the innards, with the new Omen generation, HP dares a complete redesign that in our opinion appears to succeed in many respects.

Although the case has not become slimmer or lighter, it scores with a higher stability, better input devices, and more elegant materials. HP also deserves respect for the eccentric looks, whether you like them or not. Aside from the somewhat lame reaction times, the screen is also compelling. 

The 120-Hz panel built into the top model convinces with stable viewing angles, a high contrast, and decent color values.

We have hardly any complaints about the speakers either.

We are a little of two minds about the graphics card. In practice, the Max-Q design has only a minimal positive effect, if any, while on the other hand, losing almost 10% in performance and not making it any more affordable. Other manufacturers achieve the same or even lower emissions (temperature, noise) with a regular GTX 1060.

Nonetheless, the HP succeeds in taking a decisive step forward, so that this time it is sufficient for a good place in our Top-10 list (Slim & Light Gaming Notebook Charts).

HP Omen 15-ce002ng - 07/20/2017 v6
Florian Glaser

Chassis
78 / 98 → 79%
Keyboard
79%
Pointing Device
75%
Connectivity
69 / 81 → 85%
Weight
59 / 10-66 → 88%
Battery
71%
Display
89%
Games Performance
93%
Application Performance
96%
Temperature
76 / 95 → 80%
Noise
69 / 90 → 77%
Audio
75%
Average
77%
85%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 8 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 > HP Omen 15 (7700HQ, GTX 1060 Max-Q, Full-HD) Laptop Review
Florian Glaser, 2017-07-22 (Update: 2017-07-28)