Notebookcheck

HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070) Laptop Review

Quiet Giant. The Omen 17t is a well-balanced notebook. Its internals are consistently powerful, its 144 Hz G-Sync display is one of the best on the market, and it manages heat and noise with aplomb. With its competitive pricing, the Omen 17t is one of the best overall packages in the gaming laptop market.

When you think of powerful gaming laptops, what names come to mind? Brands like Asus, MSI, and Alienware dominate this space. While HP is a big player in other notebook markets, they've struggled to gain traction in the high-end gaming segment. That may change with the Omen 17t.

We've seen a few Omen machines in the past, and they usually compete well. However, the brand isn't known for bringing anything new to the table. Rather, HP's gaming line seems more reactive than proactive, choosing to pick up features introduced by other brands. The Omen 17t is no different in that regard, but instead of merely reflecting its competition, the laptop feels like more a refinement of trends we've seen in gaming laptops over the past year. The result is a machine that strikes a good balance in terms of performance, features, heat management, and noise output. To top it off, the Omen 17t is priced aggressively, starting at USD $1530 from Computer Upgrade King. Our review unit is configured with a 512 GB boot SSD and 16 GB of RAM, bringing the price to $1750.

The HP Omen 17t has the same chassis as the HP Omen 17 we reviewed last summer, save for one small difference. The newer Omen 17t has dropped the optical drive, leaving an empty cavity inside the machine's case. Everything else has been carried over from the older device. As such, we will include a few pictures of the restyled internals but will eschew discussion of the exterior case, including the ports, build quality, and input devices. For more details on these pieces of the Omen 17t, please refer to our original HP Omen 17 here.

The Omen 17t sits between behemoths like MSI's GT75 Titan and more affordable machines like the MSI GE73 Raider. As such, there is no shortage of comparable devices. We will see how the Omen 17t stacks up against the Alienware 17 R4, the Asus G752VS, the Acer Predator 17, the Eurocom Q8, and the EVGA SC17. Let's dive in.

HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 (Omen Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop) - 8192 MB, Core: 1443 MHz, Memory: 2002 MHz, GDDR5 @ 2003.4 MHz (8013.6 effective), 256-bit bus, 2048 CUDA cores, Nvidia GeForce Game Ready Driver 398.82
Memory
16384 MB 
, 2x 8 GB DDR4-2666 SODIMM
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics AUO309D, IPS, 144 Hz refresh rate, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7, 512 GB 
, 512 GB Samsung PCIe NVMe SSD + 1 TB 7200 RPM HGST HDD, 1406 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Dedicated Mic and Headset jacks, Card Reader: SD/SDHC/SDXC Card reader, full-sized, Brightness Sensor
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 33 x 423 x 304 ( = 1.3 x 16.65 x 11.97 in)
Battery
86 Wh, 8 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2x 2 Watt, Bang & Olufsen w/ HP Audio Boost, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, HP Audio, HP CoolSense, HP Omen Center, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
3.654 kg ( = 128.89 oz / 8.06 pounds), Power Supply: 727 g ( = 25.64 oz / 1.6 pounds)
Price
1750 USD

 

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X9 DT
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
202 MB/s ∼100% +148%
Eurocom Q8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
183 MB/s ∼91% +124%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.7 - 202, n=197)
90.6 MB/s ∼45% +11%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
81.59 MB/s ∼40%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
79 MB/s ∼39% -3%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78 MB/s ∼39% -4%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26 MB/s ∼13% -68%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Aorus X9 DT
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
241 MB/s ∼100% +181%
Eurocom Q8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
209 MB/s ∼87% +143%
Average of class Gaming
  (13.4 - 257, n=195)
110 MB/s ∼46% +28%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
89 MB/s ∼37% +4%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
88 MB/s ∼37% +3%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
85.84 MB/s ∼36%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
32 MB/s ∼13% -63%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
694 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
693 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
681 MBit/s ∼98% +6%
Eurocom Q8
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
648 MBit/s ∼93% +1%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
644 MBit/s ∼93%
Aorus X9 DT
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
639 MBit/s ∼92% -1%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
606 MBit/s ∼87% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=162)
591 MBit/s ∼85% -8%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Eurocom Q8
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
682 MBit/s ∼100% +8%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
662 MBit/s ∼97% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
630 MBit/s ∼92%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
624 MBit/s ∼91% -1%
Aorus X9 DT
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
601 MBit/s ∼88% -5%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
589 MBit/s ∼86% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (213 - 697, n=162)
526 MBit/s ∼77% -17%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
512 MBit/s ∼75% -19%

Display

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The Omen 17t's screen is one of its greatest strengths. The AU Optronics panel's best feature is undoubtedly its 144 Hz refresh rate with support for Nvidia's G-Sync. In addition, response times are lightning fast, and PWM is absent. Currently, this configuration (144 Hz, IPS, FHD) is the only one available for the Omen 17t. The screen is bright (~320 nits on average) and beats most competitors, which average between 250-300 nits. The backlight is also fairly even (87% distribution). Contrast levels are good; blacks are deep and images look crisp and detailed. All these details, combined with good color reproduction (more on that below), create a great all-around display.

304.4
cd/m²
342.3
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
319.3
cd/m²
343.6
cd/m²
322.6
cd/m²
298.7
cd/m²
317.8
cd/m²
308.4
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 343.6 cd/m² Average: 319.7 cd/m² Minimum: 16.19 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 343.6 cd/m²
Contrast: 1011:1 (Black: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.74 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 3.49
ΔE Greyscale 3.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
90% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 58% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.36
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
AU Optronics AUO309D, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Alienware 17 R4
TN LED, 17.3, 2560x1440
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
AU Optronics B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B), IPS, 17.3, 3840x2160
Asus G752VS-BA338T
AU Optronics B173HAN01.1 (AUO119D), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Eurocom Q8
AU Optronics B173QTN01.0, Dell P/N WJGD4, TN LED, 17.3, 2560x1440
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
IPS, 17.3, 3840x2160
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Chi Mei N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN WLED, 17.3, 1920x1080
Aorus X9 DT
AUO B173HAN03.0 (AUO309D), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
CMN N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN, 17.3, 1920x1080
Response Times
-49%
-170%
-133%
-7%
-206%
-48%
-13%
50%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
17.6 (10, 7.6)
30 (18.8, 11.2)
-70%
50 (24.4, 25.6)
-184%
36 (18, 18)
-105%
21.6 (12.4, 9.2)
-23%
45.6 (22.8, 22.8)
-159%
28 (16.4, 11.6)
-59%
18.4 (9.2, 9.2)
-5%
8 (4.4, 3.6)
55%
Response Time Black / White *
10 (4.8, 5.2)
12.8 (10.8, 2)
-28%
25.6 (11.2, 14.4)
-156%
26 (14.4, 11.6)
-160%
9 (6.8, 2.2)
10%
35.2 (9.2, 26)
-252%
13.6 (11.8, 1.8)
-36%
12 (6.8, 5.2)
-20%
5.6 (3.8, 1.8)
44%
PWM Frequency
1042 (29)
25000 (14)
26000 (19)
Screen
-26%
5%
-27%
-69%
-1%
7%
19%
17%
Brightness middle
343.6
402.3
17%
343
0%
307
-11%
367.9
7%
399.1
16%
273
-21%
280
-19%
240
-30%
Brightness
320
372
16%
328
3%
300
-6%
346
8%
360
13%
273
-15%
262
-18%
248
-22%
Brightness Distribution
87
86
-1%
84
-3%
88
1%
84
-3%
81
-7%
90
3%
86
-1%
83
-5%
Black Level *
0.34
0.62
-82%
0.29
15%
0.32
6%
0.55
-62%
0.4
-18%
0.26
24%
0.22
35%
0.22
35%
Contrast
1011
649
-36%
1183
17%
959
-5%
669
-34%
998
-1%
1050
4%
1273
26%
1091
8%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.74
5.6
-50%
4.01
-7%
5.53
-48%
9.86
-164%
4.78
-28%
3.52
6%
1.78
52%
2.14
43%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
5.33
9.8
-84%
6.03
-13%
11.54
-117%
17.56
-229%
7.65
-44%
6.34
-19%
3.91
27%
5.04
5%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.49
4.43
-27%
2.09
40%
1.54
56%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.7
4.7
-27%
4.7
-27%
7
-89%
12.4
-235%
3.8
-3%
3.11
16%
0.74
80%
1.62
56%
Gamma
2.36 102%
2.14 112%
2.4 100%
2.48 97%
2.09 115%
2.03 118%
2.43 99%
2.43 99%
2.28 105%
CCT
6388 102%
7519 86%
6451 101%
8103 80%
11064 59%
7288 89%
6999 93%
6494 100%
6846 95%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58
53.7
-7%
88
52%
58
0%
52.5
-9%
86.9
50%
76
31%
60
3%
77
33%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
90
82.2
-9%
100
11%
90
0%
80.5
-11%
100
11%
100
11%
92
2%
100
11%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-38% / -30%
-83% / -24%
-80% / -45%
-38% / -59%
-104% / -35%
-21% / -1%
3% / 14%
34% / 22%

* ... smaller is better

Color space coverage is fairly good. The Omen 17t's panel covers most of the sRGB color space (90%) and a little more than half the AdobeRGB color space (58%), putting it in line with most of its competitors. While professionals may want more colors, the color space is more than adequate for gaming. Those looking for wider color reproduction should look at EVGA's SC17.

vs sRGB: 90%
vs sRGB: 90%
vs AdobeRGB: 58%
vs AdobeRGB: 58%

As mentioned, color accuracy is excellent. Out of the box, the DeltaE2000 for colors averages about 3.74. This is on the better side of average for a gaming laptop. The Omen 17t could also be used for some colorwork, though it falls just short what is generally considered acceptable for professionals (DeltaE2000 of 3 or below). Calibration improves this score slightly, suggesting that the display may have been calibrated prior to being sent to us. The Aorus X9 DT, which uses the same AU Optronics panel, shows that there is some room for improvement. Some users may be able to improve the display's color accuracy.

ColorChecker
ColorChecker
ColorChecker (calibrated)
ColorChecker (calibrated)
Grayscale
Grayscale
Grayscale (calibrated)
Grayscale (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps
Saturation Sweeps
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4.8 ms rise
↘ 5.2 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. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
17.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10 ms rise
↘ 7.6 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.3 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8813 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The viewing angles of the display are excellent. Since the Omen 17t uses an IPS panel, this should be expected. There is a slight grain on the matte finish that becomes visible when the screen is viewed off-angle, particularly from above. You can see this in the third viewing angle photo below (down-left). Otherwise, this grain isn't distracting. There is a slight amount of backlight bleed in the upper-left and upper-right corners. This is minuscule and isn't readily noticeable.

Since the panel gets reasonably bright, outdoor use is possible. Under shade, the display remains visible. Pictures and text look clear and colors look vivid. In direct sunlight, the screen becomes much harder to see. Pictures can be made out, but most users' eyes will strain to see them under the sun.

Slight backlight bleed in the upper corners.
Slight backlight bleed in the upper corners.
Outdoors, direct sunlight
Outdoors, direct sunlight
Outdoors, shade
Outdoors, shade

Performance

The internals of the Omen 17t are well-balanced. The hexacore Intel Core i7-8750H compliments the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 GPU well, resulting in a finely-tuned gaming laptop that can often push enough pixels to take advantage of its high-refresh rate display without generating an exorbitant amount of heat or noise. There is room for improvement, but the overall experience is excellent.

CPU-Z: CPU
CPU-Z: CPU
CPU-Z: Caches
CPU-Z: Caches
CPU-Z: Mainboard
CPU-Z: Mainboard
CPU-Z: Memory
CPU-Z: Memory
CPU-Z: SPD
CPU-Z: SPD
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
HWiNFO64
HWiNFO64
 

Processor

We've seen the Intel Core i7-8750H in several gaming laptops since its release earlier this year, and the processor has proved itself to be a worthy upgrade over last year's Kaby Lake Core i7-7700HQ. The 2 additional cores often improve multithreaded benchmarks by close to 50%, and that is indeed what we see here. Compared to the Asus G752VS, which uses the 7700HQ, the Omen 17t scores 45% better in Cinebench R15's multi-core test. There are more powerful options available, however. Intel's Core i9-8950HK beats the Omen 17t by 28%. AMD's desktop Ryzen 7 1700, which continues to dominate our CPU benchmarks, bests the Omen 17t by 31%. Keep in mind that the Ryzen 7 1700 has a TDP of 65 W compared to the 8750H's 45 W.

Long-term CPU performance is consistent, if a bit subdued. In our Cinebench R15 loop, the Omen 17t settles in at about 980 cb, about 9% lower than its single-pass score. There are some small spikes and dips (+/- 2%), but these shouldn't adversely affect performance. When unplugged, the Omen 17t averages 1020-1035 cb, or about a 5% reduction in performance.

For more information on the Intel Core i7-8750H, please see our dedicated CPU page here.

Cinebench R10
Cinebench R10
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920930940950960970980990100010101020103010401050Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
205 Points ∼99% +24%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (163 - 177, n=30)
173 Points ∼84% +5%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
Intel Core i5-8300H
171 Points ∼83% +4%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
165 Points ∼80% 0%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
165 Points ∼80%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
162 Points ∼78% -2%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼78% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (79 - 207, n=400)
151 Points ∼73% -8%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
144 Points ∼70% -13%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
140 Points ∼68% -15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1408 Points ∼45% +31%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1378 Points ∼44% +28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1129 Points ∼36% +5%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (915 - 1251, n=31)
1099 Points ∼35% +2%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1074 Points ∼35%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
Intel Core i5-8300H
818 Points ∼26% -24%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
770 Points ∼25% -28%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼24% -31%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 1408, n=401)
732 Points ∼24% -32%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
707 Points ∼23% -34%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
2.33 Points ∼100% +17%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.99 Points ∼85%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1.92 - 2, n=22)
1.965 Points ∼84% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
1.89 Points ∼81% -5%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.84 Points ∼79% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼78% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.71 - 2.34, n=397)
1.671 Points ∼71% -16%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1.63 Points ∼70% -18%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
1.55 Points ∼66% -22%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
15.76 Points ∼58% +22%
MSI GT75 8RG-090 Titan
Intel Core i9-8950HK
15.05 Points ∼56% +17%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.88 Points ∼48%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
12.5 Points ∼46% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (10.5 - 13.4, n=22)
12.3 Points ∼45% -5%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
8.47 Points ∼31% -34%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.19 Points ∼30% -36%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
Intel Core i7-8705G
7.59 Points ∼28% -41%
Average of class Gaming
  (1.13 - 15.8, n=498)
7.16 Points ∼26% -44%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
6561 Points ∼61%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (6292 - 6591, n=9)
6466 Points ∼60% -1%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
6062 Points ∼56% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5923 Points ∼55% -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (8.85 - 8872, n=396)
4700 Points ∼43% -28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
4330 Points ∼40% -34%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
4286 Points ∼40% -35%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
34184 Points ∼69%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (29952 - 35307, n=9)
33612 Points ∼68% -2%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
29330 Points ∼59% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
25561 Points ∼51% -25%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
23052 Points ∼46% -33%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
22434 Points ∼45% -34%
Average of class Gaming
  (19.7 - 39382, n=396)
17233 Points ∼35% -50%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
353.153 s * ∼4% -136%
Average of class Gaming
  (117 - 2331, n=199)
328 s * ∼4% -119%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
215.4 s * ∼3% -44%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
149.85 s * ∼2%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (125 - 160, n=4)
147 s * ∼2% +2%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average of class Gaming
  (-1 - 207000, n=2858)
3172 Seconds * ∼14% -505%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1 - 10645, n=28)
2345 Seconds * ∼10% -348%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Ryzen 5 1600
693.994 Seconds * ∼3% -32%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
677.2 Seconds * ∼3% -29%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
545.92 Seconds * ∼2% -4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
524 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
13126
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
34184
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6561
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
79.53 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
12.88 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.99 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
119.22 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1074 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
165 Points
Help

Quality journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible. We intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers.

System Performance

As is to be expected, overall system performance is good. The Omen 17t sits a bit above most of its competitors in PCMark 8's benchmarks. This translates to a highly responsive system in everyday use. Most apps open nearly instantly, navigating Windows is smooth, and web browsing is a snap. The UI flies on the 144 Hz screen and animations are very fluid. The Omen 17t is able to power through most workloads with relative ease.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
6055 Points ∼93% +1%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
5968 Points ∼92%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (5210 - 5968, n=6)
5621 Points ∼86% -6%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5410 Points ∼83% -9%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
5342 Points ∼82% -10%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
5088 Points ∼78% -15%
Average of class Gaming
  (2484 - 6515, n=298)
4900 Points ∼75% -18%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
4623 Points ∼71% -23%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4541 Points ∼70% -24%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
8378 Points ∼88%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
 
8378 Points ∼88% 0%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
8272 Points ∼87% -1%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
8191 Points ∼86% -2%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
7780 Points ∼82% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (2303 - 9529, n=223)
5475 Points ∼57% -35%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
5859 Points ∼96% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
5557 Points ∼91%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
5111 Points ∼84% -8%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5103 Points ∼84% -8%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
5064 Points ∼83% -9%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (4271 - 5557, n=6)
4962 Points ∼81% -11%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
4498 Points ∼74% -19%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
4437 Points ∼73% -20%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4395 Points ∼72% -21%
Average of class Gaming
  (2554 - 6093, n=316)
4209 Points ∼69% -24%
PCMark 10 - Score
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
6387 Points ∼82% +8%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
6331 Points ∼82% +7%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
5939 Points ∼76%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
5465 Points ∼70% -8%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (4854 - 5939, n=5)
5408 Points ∼70% -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 6620, n=102)
4918 Points ∼63% -17%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5557 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
8378 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5968 points
Help

Storage Devices

The Omen 17t uses Samsung's PM981 as its boot drive, which is one of the fastest NVMe drives available today. Write speeds are consequently fast, but read speeds are on the slower side. Otherwise, the drive is snappy. Opening heavy apps shouldn't take long, and load times in most games are quick.

The 1 TB mechanical HDD used for mass storage is about average for a 7200 RPM drive. Both the boot drive and mass storage drive are easily accessible. Unfortunately, the empty space occupied by the optical drive in earlier models cannot be used to house a third drive.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CrystalDiskMark 5 (SSD)
CrystalDiskMark 5 (SSD)
HD Tune
HD Tune
CrystalDiskMark 5 (HDD)
CrystalDiskMark 5 (HDD)
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Alienware 17 R4
SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
Transcend TS1TMTE850
Average Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
 
AS SSD
-29%
-4%
-6%
17%
12%
-84%
-22%
-17%
Copy Game MB/s
874.69
573.6
-34%
1033.53
18%
1216.97
39%
958.2
10%
295.55
-66%
898 (607 - 1110, n=11)
3%
Copy Program MB/s
481.13
446.13
-7%
469.95
-2%
445.13
-7%
406.67
-15%
192.94
-60%
379 (233 - 481, n=11)
-21%
Copy ISO MB/s
1080.01
1227.03
14%
1336.93
24%
2144.61
99%
1596.18
48%
412.55
-62%
1246 (917 - 1770, n=11)
15%
Score Total
4142
2072
-50%
2328
-44%
2547
-39%
3056
-26%
3840
-7%
881
-79%
2145
-48%
3819 (2348 - 4771, n=17)
-8%
Score Write
2147
858
-60%
487
-77%
890
-59%
1480
-31%
1579
-26%
254
-88%
916
-57%
1609 (147 - 2147, n=17)
-25%
Score Read
1304
831
-36%
1238
-5%
1112
-15%
1077
-17%
1515
16%
417
-68%
828
-37%
1468 (896 - 2125, n=17)
13%
Access Time Write *
0.047
0.123
-162%
0.033
30%
0.033
30%
0.027
43%
0.035
26%
0.097
-106%
0.038
19%
0.1876 (0.027 - 2.52, n=17)
-299%
Access Time Read *
0.071
0.042
41%
0.049
31%
0.052
27%
0.058
18%
0.043
39%
0.235
-231%
0.042
41%
0.0488 (0.029 - 0.073, n=17)
31%
4K-64 Write
1866.02
671.01
-64%
260.86
-86%
646.46
-65%
1185.29
-36%
1284.54
-31%
172.7
-91%
715.2
-62%
1361 (96.2 - 1866, n=17)
-27%
4K-64 Read
1124.72
620.48
-45%
998.94
-11%
851.25
-24%
744.47
-34%
1231.67
10%
351.41
-69%
654.45
-42%
1235 (735 - 1823, n=17)
10%
4K Write
84.44
113.36
34%
112.06
33%
120.78
43%
138.94
65%
107.92
28%
38.34
-55%
98.92
17%
99.1 (1.76 - 134, n=17)
17%
4K Read
31.66
35.61
12%
45.64
44%
37.51
18%
49.71
57%
35.57
12%
14.07
-56%
22.23
-30%
49.8 (31.7 - 58, n=17)
57%
Seq Write
1962.09
734.8
-63%
1144.4
-42%
1230.12
-37%
1553.97
-21%
1869.29
-5%
425.71
-78%
1018.64
-48%
1491 (487 - 1991, n=17)
-24%
Seq Read
1472.55
1752.03
19%
1933.89
31%
2236.52
52%
2824.25
92%
2480.96
68%
511.18
-65%
1517.93
3%
1832 (1099 - 2469, n=17)
24%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2367 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2038 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 407.5 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 340.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1284 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1665 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 35.49 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 110.7 MB/s

GPU Performance

Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1070 is a solid choice for high-end gaming laptops aiming for affordability. While the GTX 1080 is about 35-40% faster (as measured by Fire Strike), it is also much more expensive and comes with the additional cost of increased energy consumption and heat output. Because of its GPU, the Omen 17t can (mostly) take advantage of its high-refresh rate display while keeping heat and fan noise at bay. HP can also price the device more competitively.

That said, the GTX 1070 in our machine is a bit below the average GTX 1070-powered gaming laptop. The GPU cannot be overclocked (at least through any stock software). Still, all but the most graphically intensive tasks should be well-handled by the Omen 17t. Nvidia's GTX 1070 Max-Q falls about 10-12% behind the Omen, and the GTX 1060 manages a little more than two-thirds the 1070's performance. The Aorus X9 DT, with its GTX 1080, is significantly more powerful for 3D rendering, but it is also much louder, hotter, and more expensive.

For more information about the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070, please see our dedicated GPU page here.

Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Unlimited
Fire Strike Unlimited
Time Spy
Time Spy
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Ice Storm Extreme
Ice Storm Extreme
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
13993 Points ∼80% +18%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
11842 Points ∼67%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
11101 Points ∼63% -6%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
10838 Points ∼62% -8%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (7137 - 12565, n=57)
9681 Points ∼55% -18%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
8405 Points ∼48% -29%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼45% -34%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8300H
7739 Points ∼44% -35%
Average of class Gaming
  (510 - 14228, n=504)
6784 Points ∼39% -43%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
27966 Points ∼55% +31%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (13760 - 25604, n=57)
22387 Points ∼44% +5%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
21380 Points ∼42%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
18349 Points ∼36% -14%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% -29%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
14367 Points ∼28% -33%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=503)
11784 Points ∼23% -45%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
9632 Points ∼19% -55%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8300H
9266 Points ∼18% -57%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
22240 Points ∼55% +38%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (15718 - 19059, n=55)
17218 Points ∼42% +7%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
16131 Points ∼40%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
14427 Points ∼36% -11%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
11558 Points ∼28% -28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% -29%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=430)
10223 Points ∼25% -37%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8300H
7576 Points ∼19% -53%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
7059 Points ∼17% -56%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Aorus X9 DT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK
141451 Points ∼77% +26%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
112332 Points ∼61%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (64973 - 125922, n=50)
98878 Points ∼54% -12%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
95034 Points ∼51% -15%
Schenker XMG Neo 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
81178 Points ∼44% -28%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
70020 Points ∼38% -38%
Average of class Gaming
  (5761 - 184578, n=421)
61660 Points ∼33% -45%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8300H
49254 Points ∼27% -56%
HP Spectre x360 15-ch000
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
37915 Points ∼21% -66%
3DMark 11 Performance
17921 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
37519 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
14335 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The Omen 17t fits in well with other Full HD gaming laptops, but its high-refresh rate display sweetens the package. Most modern titles will hit 60-75 FPS at Ultra settings, Full HD. To fully take advantage of the 144 Hz panel, users may want to dial settings back a bit. For example, Rise of the Tomb Raider averages about 100 FPS at FHD/High settings, and gameplay glides across the screen. Lighter and more competitive titles like Rocket League and CS:GO will easily shoot past 144 frames per second, even when settings are turned all the way up. This is good news, as the high refresh rate is best suited for games that require quick reactions.

012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra
The Witcher 3
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
78.1 fps ∼68% +37%
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
77.4 fps ∼67% +36%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
65 fps ∼57% +14%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
62.9 fps ∼55% +10%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
59.6 fps ∼52% +5%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
59.4 fps ∼52% +4%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (48.2 - 68.4, n=40)
59 fps ∼51% +4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
57 fps ∼50%
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
48.2 fps ∼42% -15%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=205)
45.1 fps ∼39% -21%
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
146 fps ∼79% +76%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
117 fps ∼63% +41%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
113.8 fps ∼62% +37%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (83 - 123, n=29)
105 fps ∼57% +27%
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
104 fps ∼56% +25%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
83 fps ∼45%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.1 - 184, n=170)
75.8 fps ∼41% -9%
Rise of the Tomb Raider
1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
118.3 fps ∼73% +36%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
109 fps ∼68% +25%
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
99 fps ∼61% +14%
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
96.4 fps ∼60% +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (79.1 - 103, n=25)
92.3 fps ∼57% +6%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
87 fps ∼54%
Average of class Gaming
  (8.9 - 126, n=135)
62.7 fps ∼39% -28%
1920x1080 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
117.7 fps ∼65% +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
  (83.2 - 119, n=18)
107 fps ∼59% +4%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
103 fps ∼57%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.6 - 154, n=101)
67.5 fps ∼38% -34%
low med. high ultra4K
The Witcher 3 (2015) 2681918357fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 25317410387fps
Rocket League (2017) 250250231173fps
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017) 1861279876fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 1408263fps

Stress Test

One area where the Omen 17t excels is stress management. When under full synthetic load via Prime95, the CPU remains consistent at 3.2 GHz and 72° C. The story is very similar for the GPU; after running FurMark for an hour, the GPU stayed steady at 1265 MHz and 66° C. Both tests showed impressive internal temperatures, which helped keep fan noise down as well. Loading both the CPU and GPU causes some oscillation in CPU performance; the Core i7-8750H bounces between 3.1-3.2 GHz in a regular pattern, as does its core temperature, which fluctuates between 80-90° C. The GPU pushes on, hitting 1300 MHz and 67° C.

Under a real-world load (e.g., an hour-long playthrough of The Witcher 3), the CPU and GPU show remarkable consistency. Both the processor and graphics card settle in at 3.9 GHz and 1635 MHz, respectively, and refuse to budge. GPU temperature holds steady at 67° C. The CPU's core temperature tends to fluctuate a bit; while the silicon averages about 75-80° C, it spikes to about 95-98° C intermittently before falling back down. Overall, the Omen 17t's consistency under stress is admirable.

Prime95
Prime95
FurMark
FurMark
Prime95 + FurMark
Prime95 + FurMark
The Witcher 3
The Witcher 3
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 3.2 - 72 -
FurMark Stress 4.0 1265 70 66
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 3.1 1300 88 67
Witcher 3 Stress 3.9 1635 80 67

Emissions

System Noise

Fan noise profile
Fan noise profile

One would think that such steady performance under load would generate quite a bit of fan noise, but that is not the case with the Omen 17t. The dual fans can get loud, peaking at about 46.5 dB(A), but average noise when gaming falls between 42-44 dB(A). The fans' level pitch helps them blend in under other noises, including the machine's speakers. The fans can be heard from a normal use distance, but those more than about four feet away from the device won't be able to hear them. Considering most high-end gaming laptops are infamous for their loud, high-pitched fans, this is a definite mark in the Omen 17t's favor. There is no noticeable coil whine or other system noise.

Noise Level

Idle
31.1 / 31.1 / 35 dB(A)
Load
42 / 46.5 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 27.8 dB(A)
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
Noise
-10%
-7%
-6%
-2%
-3%
-6%
-21%
off / environment *
27.8
28.2
-1%
29.2
-5%
31
-12%
30
-8%
28
-1%
30
-8%
30
-8%
Idle Minimum *
31.1
35.6
-14%
33.9
-9%
32
-3%
30
4%
28.2
9%
32
-3%
36
-16%
Idle Average *
31.1
35.6
-14%
33.9
-9%
35
-13%
32
-3%
31.8
-2%
33
-6%
37
-19%
Idle Maximum *
35
35.7
-2%
33.9
3%
38
-9%
36
-3%
36.3
-4%
34
3%
43
-23%
Load Average *
42
50.2
-20%
43.8
-4%
42
-0%
43
-2%
46.7
-11%
41
2%
50
-19%
Witcher 3 ultra *
44.5
50.2
-13%
44
1%
43
3%
46.9
-5%
50
-12%
57
-28%
Load Maximum *
46.5
50.2
-8%
53.4
-15%
50
-8%
49
-5%
49.7
-7%
54
-16%
61
-31%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Heat Exhaust
Heat Exhaust

Despite the CPU and GPU maintaining high levels of performance under load and the relatively quiet fans, the surfaces that come into contact with the user do not get hot. Under full load, the keyboard gets warm but never uncomfortable. There is a "hot spot" in the middle of the keyboard (between the H, J, and N keys) which is directly above the CPU and GPU. The back vents along the underside get toasty (~55° C), so lap use should be avoided when pushing the hardware. Under normal gameplay conditions, temperatures across the keyboard stay well-managed, averaging about 35-40° C along the top. The WASD keys, where most gamers' hands will rest, never feel too warm for comfort.

Max. Load
 40.2 °C
104 F
42.6 °C
109 F
39.2 °C
103 F
 
 33.6 °C
92 F
44.2 °C
112 F
34 °C
93 F
 
 28 °C
82 F
26.2 °C
79 F
28.2 °C
83 F
 
Maximum: 44.2 °C = 112 F
Average: 35.1 °C = 95 F
55.8 °C
132 F
45.8 °C
114 F
52 °C
126 F
36 °C
97 F
42.4 °C
108 F
36.4 °C
98 F
25.8 °C
78 F
27.4 °C
81 F
27 °C
81 F
Maximum: 55.8 °C = 132 F
Average: 38.7 °C = 102 F
Power Supply (max.)  57.6 °C = 136 F | Room Temperature 20.4 °C = 69 F | Fluke 62 Mini
Keyboard, idle
Keyboard, idle
Bottom panel, idle
Bottom panel, idle
Keyboard, load
Keyboard, load
Bottom panel, load
Bottom panel, load
Keyboard, The Witcher 3
Keyboard, The Witcher 3
Bottom Panel, The Witcher 3
Bottom Panel, The Witcher 3
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Asus G752VS-BA338T
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Eurocom Q8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Aorus X9 DT
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8950HK, Transcend TS1TMTE850
Heat
3%
7%
19%
17%
5%
2%
9%
Maximum Upper Side *
44.2
49.6
-12%
47.6
-8%
39.1
12%
41
7%
43.4
2%
47
-6%
43
3%
Maximum Bottom *
55.8
56
-0%
53.2
5%
42.1
25%
39.3
30%
44
21%
49
12%
55
1%
Idle Upper Side *
31.6
29.6
6%
28.2
11%
27.9
12%
28.8
9%
32.8
-4%
32
-1%
27
15%
Idle Bottom *
35
29.2
17%
28.6
18%
26.1
25%
27.3
22%
34.2
2%
34
3%
29
17%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

Speaker profile
Speaker profile

The Omen 17t does have some weak points, and the speakers are perhaps the most glaring. The dual drivers situated along the front of the machine get reasonably loud at 73 dB, but there is an unfortunate rattling present when volume goes past 65%. Music and sounds are affected at this level, leaving a bad overall impression. The lack of a subwoofer, something included with some other large gaming laptops, makes the overall sound profile thin and weak. Headphones are highly recommended, but to make a bad taste even worse, the only audio-out port is a headset jack; a dedicated headphone DAC or S/PDIF port would have been a welcome addition.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.440.82534.337.93133.336.34031.933.55033.633.56330.733.38029.730.810029.130.112528.33316027.848.220026.958.125026.665.931526.565.440025.665.350024.964.663025.568.280025.865100024.867.7125024.369.3160024.866.2200024.563.5250023.968.3315023.668.4400023.472.8500023.168.2630023.271.6800023.170.3100002371.11250022.972.61600022.967.9SPL36.481.1N2.753.1median 24.8HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1median 67.7Delta1.64.34542.741.441.632.237.839.245.230.540.629.343.930.154.928.461.426.457.72367.124.972.623.475.120.775.319.876.319.273.518.266.519.272.519.773.31973.917.383.617.18817.384.917.578.317.477.317.378.417.273.717.37317.271.81776.216.878.730.492.91.491.9median 18.2MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGBmedian 73.92.72.3hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.78 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 14% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (93 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Prime95
Prime95

Average power consumption under load is a bit higher than similarly-specced laptops (namely the Asus G752VS and MSI GE73 Raider). Interestingly, the Omen 17t draws less power than these machines when under full load. While gaming, users can expect the Omen 17t to pull about 165-170 Watts from the wall, well within the 220 Watt rating of the included power supply.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.44 / 0.69 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 17.8 / 24.7 / 29.6 Watt
Load midlight 110 / 178.6 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
6820HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.3
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.3
Asus G752VS-BA338T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Eurocom Q8
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Samsung SSD 960 Pro 512 GB m.2, TN LED, 2560x1440, 17.3
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY, TN WLED, 1920x1080, 17.3
Alienware 17 R4
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB, TN LED, 2560x1440, 17.3
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Power Consumption
-37%
-19%
-4%
-10%
2%
-44%
-8%
Idle Minimum *
17.8
27.3
-53%
23
-29%
21
-18%
26.3
-48%
15
16%
37.5
-111%
21.6
-21%
Idle Average *
24.7
34.9
-41%
33
-34%
27
-9%
29
-17%
20
19%
37.6
-52%
26.4
-7%
Idle Maximum *
29.6
37.6
-27%
40
-35%
32
-8%
32.3
-9%
26
12%
37.6
-27%
26.6
10%
Load Average *
110
164.4
-49%
94
15%
86
22%
82.4
25%
97
12%
122.4
-11%
95.6
13%
Load Maximum *
178.6
202.5
-13%
228
-28%
206
-15%
170.2
5%
239
-34%
277.4
-55%
199.6
-12%
Witcher 3 ultra *
167.8
177
-5%
165
2%
192
-14%
186
-11%
180.3
-7%
221.7
-32%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Due to the 144 Hz G-Sync display, Nvidia's Optimus is not available on the Omen 17t. As a result, battery life is a definite weak point of the machine. Under normal use, tested using our WiFi v1.3 battery test, the Omen 17t only manages to last about 4 hours 15 minutes. Even when idle, the Omen gives up the ghost after 4.5 hours. This isn't unexpected for this segment of the market, however; similar machines post similar run times. The 86 Wh battery is able to power through gaming sessions for about 1.5 hours, so the power adapter is a requirement when out and about.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
4h 28min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 13min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 37min
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 86 Wh
EVGA SC17 GTX 1070
6820HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 74.48 Wh
Acer Predator 17 G9-793-70PJ
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 88 Wh
Asus G752VS-BA338T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 90 Wh
Eurocom Q8
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 66 Wh
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 51 Wh
Alienware 17 R4
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 99 Wh
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
7820HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 99 Wh
Aorus X9 DT
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 94.24 Wh
Battery Runtime
-30%
0%
27%
-40%
-25%
-18%
28%
-17%
Reader / Idle
268
242
-10%
323
21%
445
66%
303
13%
276
3%
348
30%
252
-6%
WiFi v1.3
253
160
-37%
218
-14%
293
16%
153
-40%
186
-26%
181
-28%
333
32%
190
-25%
Load
97
55
-43%
91
-6%
96
-1%
38
-61%
69
-29%
117
21%
77
-21%

Pros

+ sturdy case
+ above-average input devices (keyboard and dedicated mouse buttons)
+ macro keys included
+ well-balanced hardware
+ good, consistent performance
+ relatively low fan noise
+ heat is well-managed
+ 144 Hz panel is buttery smooth
+ display is color accurate and beautiful
+ good amount of ports
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ variety of maintenance options

Cons

- no RGB keyboard
- heavy, bulky chassis
- empty space once occupied by optical drive is wasted potential
- outperformed by similarly-specced machines
- no Optimus
- mediocre battery life
- weak speakers that lack bass

Verdict

In review: HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070). Review unit courtesy of CUKUSA. Use coupon code NBC20 for $20 Off
In review: HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070). Review unit courtesy of CUKUSA. Use coupon code NBC20 for $20 Off

The story of the Omen 17t is one of balance. The machine's components compliment each other well, resulting in an overall excellent package with little room for complaint. The display is bright with good color reproduction. The powerful CPU and GPU are well-tuned for gaming at Full HD. The keyboard and build quality are excellent, and the selection of ports is ample. To top it off, heat management and fan noise are both above average for this category.

The standout feature here is the 144 Hz panel. High-refresh rate displays, which were commonly relegated to expensive notebooks in the past, are slowly creeping their way into lower-priced devices, and the Omen 17t is an excellent example of the quality that can be had at this price point. While the Omen 17t is by no means a "budget laptop," it is priced more aggressively than most of its competitors, especially those that boast a high-refresh rate display.

The Omen 17t does have some weaknesses. In particular, battery life is poor (due to the lack of Optimus) and the speakers are abhorrent (thanks to the unpleasant rattle at higher volumes). Also, the Samsung PM981 boot drive exhibits some odd behavior, but this may be specific to our unit. HP also misstepped by not using the additional space made available by the removal of the optical drive. All of these downfalls are not critical for a gaming laptop, however.

In sum, the HP Omen 17t is a well-built package that feels thoughtfully designed. The 144 Hz display is a nice feature at this price point, and the internals are (mostly) able to take advantage of the higher refresh rate and G-Sync. The Omen 17t is a good example of a "jack of all trades, master of some" gaming laptop, and its competitive pricing makes it worth considering.

HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1 - 08/21/2018 v6
Sam Medley

Chassis
83 / 98 → 85%
Keyboard
88%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
64 / 81 → 79%
Weight
52 / 10-66 → 74%
Battery
Display
90%
Games Performance
97%
Application Performance
95%
Temperature
86 / 95 → 90%
Noise
79 / 90 → 88%
Audio
69%
Camera
50 / 85 → 59%
Average
78%
87%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 4 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > HP Omen 17t (i7-8750H, GTX 1070) Laptop Review
Sam Medley, 2018-08-28 (Update: 2018-08-30)
Sam Medley
Sam Medley - Review Editor - @samuel_medley
I've been a "tech-head" my entire life. After graduating college with a degree in Mathematics, I worked in finance and banking a few years before taking a job as a Systems Analyst for my local school district. I started working with Notebookcheck in October of 2016 and have enjoyed writing news articles and notebook reviews. My areas of interest include the business side of technology, retro gaming, Linux, and innovative gadgets. When I'm not hunched over an electronic device or writing code for a new database, I'm either outside with my family, playing a decade-old video game, or sitting behind a drum set.