Notebookcheck

HP Pavilion 15 (Core i5-8265U, GeForce MX250, 16 GB RAM) Laptop Review

Mike Wobker, 👁 Sebastian Jentsch, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Alex Alderson), 04/22/2019

Now with Whiskey Lake. The design remains unchanged, but inside there is a lot going on. HP has upgraded the Pavilion 15 series to Intel Whiskey Lake chips and Nvidia’s new generation of GeForce MX GPUs. Read on to find out whether this new model improves on its Kaby Lake and AMD siblings and how it fares in our tests.

HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng

HP continues to remain true to its shift towards releasing stylishly designed laptops whatever the screen size. The Pavilion 15-cs2019ng embodies this ethos and is the Whiskey Lake version of the Kaby Lake-powered Pavilion 15-cs0003ng and the Pavilion 15-cw0003ng with its AMD processor. HP also sells an identical version but with a 14-inch display rather than the 15.6-inch panel that the Pavilion 15 has. The company markets this smaller model as the Pavilion 14-ce0002ng, for reference. Our current review unit looks visually identical to its siblings, so please see our Pavilion 15-cs0003ngPavilion 15-cw0003ng and Pavilion 14-ce0002ng reviews for our detailed thoughts on the case, connectivity, and any other subjects we only cover briefly in this review.

HP equips our current test device with an Intel Core i5-8265U processor, 16 GB RAM, a 256 GB SSD and a 1 TB HDD, for which it currently charges approximately 1,100 Euros (~$1,240). The Pavilion 15 also packs an Nvidia GeForce MX250 GPU, which succeeds the popular GeForce MX150. The GeForce MX250 has slightly higher clock speeds than its predecessor so it should deliver better overall performance in our tests.

We have chosen to compare the Pavilion 15 against not only its siblings but also other comparably priced 15.6-inch laptops. Our comparison devices will include the Acer Aspire 5 A515, ASUS VivoBook S15 and the slightly more powerful MSI PS63 Modern 8RC.

HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng (Pavilion 15-cs Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 - 4096 MB, GDDR5 SDRAM, 1D13, Intel UHD Graphics 620
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4, dual-channel
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, BOE080D, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Cannon Lake-U PCH-LP Premium
Storage
Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G, 256 GB 
, , 1 TB WDC WD10SPZX-60Z10T0, 1220 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Cannon Lake-LP - cAVS
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Combined 3.5 mm headphone and microphone jack, Card Reader: SD
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18 x 361 x 245 ( = 0.71 x 14.21 x 9.65 in)
Battery
41 Wh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 2.1 MP, 16:9, Full HD (1,920 x 1,080)
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, HP Audio Switch, HP CoolSense, HP JumpStart, McAfee LiveSafe, Netflix, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.94 kg ( = 68.43 oz / 4.28 pounds), Power Supply: 340 g ( = 11.99 oz / 0.75 pounds)
Price
1100 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case

The cs2019ng's case looks identical to that of the Pavilion 15-cs0003ng. Both devices weigh the same and have matching dimensions. Please see our review of the latter for our full thoughts on the Pavilion 15's case.

HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng

Size Comparison

363.4 mm / 14.3 inch 243.5 mm / 9.59 inch 17.95 mm / 0.707 inch 1.8 kg3.97 lbs361 mm / 14.2 inch 245 mm / 9.65 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.9 kg4.28 lbs361 mm / 14.2 inch 243 mm / 9.57 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.8 kg3.97 lbs357 mm / 14.1 inch 234 mm / 9.21 inch 15.9 mm / 0.626 inch 1.7 kg3.66 lbs

Connectivity

The cs2019ng has a decent selection of ports that should be enough for most people. The inclusion of a USB Type-C port is handy too and allows you to connect missing ports with appropriate adapters should you need to do so.

Left-hand side: HDMI, LAN, 1x USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-C, 3.5 mm jack
Left-hand side: HDMI, LAN, 1x USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-C, 3.5 mm jack
Right-hand side: SD card reader, cable lock, 2x USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-A, power connector
Right-hand side: SD card reader, cable lock, 2x USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-A, power connector

SD Card Reader

HP has equipped our review unit with the same SD card reader as its siblings, which achieves lower than average transfer speeds with our Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64GB UHS-II reference card. The Pavilion 15 is slightly faster than the VivoBook S15 and the MSI PS63 Modern 8RC here too, for reference.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
69.1 MB/s ∼100% +89%
Average of class Multimedia
  (11.2 - 190, n=179)
58.2 MB/s ∼84% +59%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
39 MB/s ∼56% +7%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36.6 MB/s ∼53%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
33.5 MB/s ∼48% -8%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
32.6 MB/s ∼47% -11%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23.6 MB/s ∼34% -36%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
81.8 MB/s ∼100% +130%
Average of class Multimedia
  (10.2 - 253, n=176)
74.4 MB/s ∼91% +109%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36 MB/s ∼44% +1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36 MB/s ∼44% +1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
35.6 MB/s ∼44%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
34.6 MB/s ∼42% -3%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
28.3 MB/s ∼35% -21%

Communication

The cs2019ng supports all modern Wi-Fi standards up to IEEE 802.11ac and can connect to 2.4 or 5 GHz networks. The device also has a 2x2 MIMO antenna to help maximise the transfer speeds of its Intel Wireless-AC 9560 Wi-Fi module. Our review unit averaged an impressive 676 Mb/s in our iperf3 Client download test and 562 Mb/s in the corresponding upload test. The cs2019ng wipes the floor with its siblings here and finished top of the download test with the PS63 Modern 8RC 4% slower in second place. Our review unit’s fourth-place finish in the upload test is still respectable too.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
676 (min: 636, max: 689) MBit/s ∼100%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
648 (min: 578, max: 676) MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
522 (min: 371, max: 601) MBit/s ∼77% -23%
Average of class Multimedia
  (44 - 1291, n=142)
507 MBit/s ∼75% -25%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
294 (min: 161, max: 330) MBit/s ∼43% -57%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
RealTek Semiconductor, Device ID: C821
280 MBit/s ∼41% -59%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
RealTek Semiconductor, Device ID: C821
265 (min: 239, max: 288) MBit/s ∼39% -61%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
648 (min: 626, max: 667) MBit/s ∼100% +15%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
634 (min: 613, max: 649) MBit/s ∼98% +13%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
606 (min: 306, max: 655) MBit/s ∼94% +8%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
562 (min: 507, max: 591) MBit/s ∼87%
Average of class Multimedia
  (46.1 - 1374, n=141)
490 MBit/s ∼76% -13%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
RealTek Semiconductor, Device ID: C821
289 (min: 232, max: 343) MBit/s ∼45% -49%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
RealTek Semiconductor, Device ID: C821
269 MBit/s ∼42% -52%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø676 (636-689)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø562 (507-591)

Accessories

HP only includes a 65 W power supply in the box and some literature including warranty information and a quick-start guide. The company does not sell any Pavilion 15 specific accessories, but you can purchase external keyboards, mice, speakers and much more in the company's online store.

Maintenance

The cs2019ng has limited maintenance options. The SSD and HDD are replaceable, but you must remove the bottom plate to access them, which is a pain to remove. You must loosen all the screws securing the bottom plate to the case, including those hidden beneath the device’s long and fragile rubber feet, before carefully prying up numerous plastic clips that are easily breakable. In short, we would recommend against removing the bottom case unless you are an experienced user.

Warranty

The Pavilion 15 comes with 12 months manufacturer’s warranty, but this could be extended with an HP Care Pack should you need longer warranty coverage.

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices

HP also equips the cs2019ng with the same keyboard and trackpad as its predecessors. Hence, please see our other Pavilion 15 reviews for our thoughts on those components.

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The cs2019ng has a 15.6-inch IPS panel like its siblings that also operates natively at 1920x1080. HP has equipped our review unit with a BOE080D panel, which is different to the ones that we have seen in our Pavilion 15 test devices.

Our review unit gets brighter than its siblings and achieved an average maximum brightness of 293 cd/m², which is brighter than our other comparison devices too. The display is only 86% evenly lit though, which is worse than most of our comparison devices.

Disappointingly, the cs2019ng uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate display brightness, which can cause eye strain and headaches for some people. The display in our review unit flickers at 208 Hz with it set to 90% brightness and below, for reference. This frequency is low enough to cause those who have sensitive eyes some issues, especially those who are PWM sensitive.

290
cd/m²
278
cd/m²
279
cd/m²
300
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
277
cd/m²
287
cd/m²
321
cd/m²
285
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
BOE080D
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 321 cd/m² Average: 293 cd/m² Minimum: 19.5 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 273 cd/m²
Contrast: 1231:1 (Black: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 4.71 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
88% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 58% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.45
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
BOE080D, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
BOE NV156FHM-N48, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
LP156WFC-SPD1, , 1920x1080, 15.6
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Chi Mei CMN15E8 N156HCE/EN1, , 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AU Optronics AUO23ED, , 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
1920x1080, 15.6
Response Times
0%
9%
3970%
9%
-1%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
43 (22, 21)
45 (23, 22)
-5%
38.8 (20.8, 18)
10%
42 (23, 19)
2%
40 (18, 22)
7%
45 (21, 24)
-5%
Response Time Black / White *
29 (16, 13)
33 (18, 15)
-14%
26.8 (16, 10.8)
8%
32 (20, 12)
-10%
26 (16, 10)
10%
28 (16, 12)
3%
PWM Frequency
208 (90)
250 (90)
20%
25000 (20)
11919%
Screen
-6%
-12%
9%
-16%
-37%
Brightness middle
320
278
-13%
262
-18%
289
-10%
186
-42%
240
-25%
Brightness
293
271
-8%
256
-13%
262
-11%
180
-39%
237
-19%
Brightness Distribution
86
89
3%
90
5%
75
-13%
88
2%
90
5%
Black Level *
0.26
0.26
-0%
0.21
19%
0.26
-0%
0.15
42%
0.42
-62%
Contrast
1231
1069
-13%
1248
1%
1112
-10%
1240
1%
571
-54%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.5
4.73
-5%
5.8
-29%
2.9
36%
5.94
-32%
7.43
-65%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.81
8.38
5%
14.3
-62%
5.71
35%
10.81
-23%
12.42
-41%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.71
2.59
45%
2.5
47%
1.42
70%
4.44
6%
6.26
-33%
Gamma
2.45 90%
2.38 92%
1.99 111%
2.39 92%
2.81 78%
2.96 74%
CCT
7085 92%
6160 106%
6528 100%
6705 97%
6272 104%
6661 98%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58
36
-38%
36.6
-37%
57
-2%
35
-40%
35
-40%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
88
58
-34%
57.6
-35%
87
-1%
55
-37%
54
-39%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
5.17
4.6
2.88
6.07
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-3% / -4%
-2% / -9%
1990% / 923%
-4% / -12%
-19% / -31%

* ... smaller is better

88% sRGB colour-space coverage
88% sRGB colour-space coverage
58% AdobeRGB colour-space coverage
58% AdobeRGB colour-space coverage

Our tests also confirm that the cs2019ng has a 1,231:1 contrast ratio and a 0.26 cd/m² black level. Both values ​​are on a par with comparable devices and are decent for a device at this price.

Our CalMAN analysis also shows that the screen has balanced colour reproduction. We noticed that the reproduction of red tones is comparatively low, but this is not overly concerning. Our review unit also has higher colour-space coverages than all our comparison devices, although it is only 1% or so ahead of the PS63 Modern 8RC.

CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation

The cs2019ng is usable outdoors thanks to its bright IPS panel. Its matte finish helps to diffuse most reflections, but the screen will still look washed-out in direct sunlight. Hence, we would recommend finding some shade where possible on a sunny day if you must use the device outside.

Using the HP Pavilion 15 outside in direct sunlight
Using the HP Pavilion 15 outside in direct sunlight
Using the HP Pavilion 15 outside in direct sunlight
Using the HP Pavilion 15 outside in direct sunlight

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
29 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16 ms rise
↘ 13 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 68 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
43 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22 ms rise
↘ 21 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. » 61 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.5 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 detected 208 Hz ≤ 90 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 208 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 90 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 208 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9268 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Our review unit also has stable viewing angles thanks to its IPS display. We noticed no brightness or colour distortions even at acute viewing angles.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

The Intel Core i5-8265U processor and 16 GB of RAM in the cs2019ng should ensure that the system always runs smoothly. Moreover, the inclusion of an Nvidia GeForce MX250 GPU means that the device can handle more GPU-intensive tasks like gaming that machines with just integrated graphics, like the Intel UHD Graphics 620, could not.

The 256 GB SSD and 1 TB HDD should provide enough storage for most people too. In short, the cs2019ng would be suitable as a business laptop but also has enough CPU and GPU power to handle some light gaming and even some video-editing.

 

Processor

The Core i5-8265U is from Intel’s Whiskey Lake generation and succeeds the popular Core i5-8250U, which we have seen in numerous laptops over the last 18 months. Intel manufacturers the Core i5-8265U on an improved 14nm FinFET process that allows it to achieve a maximum clock speed of 3.9 GHz with a 15 W thermal design power (TDP). The quad-core chip has a 1.6 GHz base clock speed and supports Intel Hyper-Threading along with Speed Shift and Turbo Boost. The Core i5-8265U also integrates the evergreen Intel UHD Graphics 620 GPU.

We subjected our test device to a looped Cinebench R15 Multi 64Bit benchmark that we left running for 30 minutes. The cs2019ng can only maintain its peak CPU clock speeds for a short time before exhausting its Turbo Boost. This is represented in CB R15 by around a 6% drop in scores after the first benchmark run-through, but the system then settles at around 488 points for the next few loops. Surprisingly, performance improved in the 10th loop to 497 points, with scores varying between 490 and around 500 points for the remainder of the benchmark loop.

The cs2019ng finished in third place by the end of the benchmark behind the PS63 Modern 8RC and the VivoBook S15. Impressively, our review unit consistently maintained better scores than the Aspire 5 A515 despite the latter device having a nominally more powerful Core i7-8565U processor. We suspect that HP has equipped the cs2019ng with a better cooling system than Acer has with the Aspire 5 A515.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730Tooltip
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel Core i5-8265U: Ø495 (482.45-528.56)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L Intel Core i7-8565U, Intel Core i7-8565U: Ø470 (467.49-492.88)
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T Intel Core i7-8550U, Intel Core i7-8550U: Ø570 (535-723)
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC Intel Core i7-8565U, Intel Core i7-8565U: Ø529 (524.25-571.63)
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng AMD Ryzen 5 2500U, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U: Ø431 (417.88-605.96)
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U: Ø484 (479.58-505.2)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Core i7-8565U
173 Points ∼100% +10%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U
172 Points ∼99% +10%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U
165 Points ∼95% +5%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U
157 Points ∼91%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U
  (111 - 164, n=30)
155 Points ∼90% -1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U
144 Points ∼83% -8%
Average of class Multimedia
  (36 - 201, n=371)
128 Points ∼74% -18%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
124 Points ∼72% -21%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U
729 Points ∼100% +38%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
606 (min: 417.88, max: 605.96) Points ∼83% +15%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U
  (457 - 750, n=33)
597 Points ∼82% +13%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Core i7-8565U
572 Points ∼78% +8%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U
528 Points ∼72%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U
505.2 Points ∼69% -4%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U
493 Points ∼68% -7%
Average of class Multimedia
  (73 - 1550, n=387)
489 Points ∼67% -7%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
157 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
528 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
103.84 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

The cs2019ng also performed well in PCMark benchmarks and scored higher than most of our comparison devices. Only the Aspire 5 A515 scored higher than the cs2019ng in the overall PCMark 10 benchmark. The difference is only 1% though despite the Acer being equipped with a more powerful CPU. Our review unit faltered in the PCMark 8 Home benchmark, but this is not overly concerning.

Our test device also operated smoothly in daily use. We experienced no micro-stutters or long loading times when starting programs either. Moreover, the cs2019ng achieved only 3% lower PCMark scores on battery power than when we tested it connected to the mains, which means that you can enjoy practically uninterrupted performance on the go. Please see our CPU benchmark page for more information about the Core i5-8265U and how it performs against other CPUs.

PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
3905 Points ∼100% +8%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1001 - 7161, n=102)
3761 Points ∼96% +4%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3604 - 3637, n=2)
3621 Points ∼93% 0%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
3604 Points ∼92%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
3475 Points ∼89% -4%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3315 Points ∼85% -8%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
3000 Points ∼77% -17%
Productivity
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
7212 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (6604 - 6654, n=2)
6629 Points ∼92% 0%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
6604 Points ∼92%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
6236 Points ∼86% -6%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1407 - 8020, n=103)
6191 Points ∼86% -6%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
6120 Points ∼85% -7%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
5014 Points ∼70% -24%
Essentials
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
8394 Points ∼100%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (8264 - 8394, n=2)
8329 Points ∼99% -1%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
8233 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2891 - 9829, n=103)
7549 Points ∼90% -10%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
7378 Points ∼88% -12%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
7110 Points ∼85% -15%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
6710 Points ∼80% -20%
Score
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4236 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (4190 - 4192, n=2)
4191 Points ∼99% 0%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
4190 Points ∼99%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4020 Points ∼95% -4%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1144 - 5469, n=103)
3977 Points ∼94% -5%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3711 Points ∼88% -11%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
3402 Points ∼80% -19%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
5272 Points ∼100% +1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
5223 Points ∼99%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (4965 - 5223, n=2)
5094 Points ∼97% -2%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
5025 Points ∼95% -4%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4905 Points ∼93% -6%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
4762 Points ∼90% -9%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
Vega 8, 2500U, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G7
4467 Points ∼85% -14%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2213 - 5651, n=285)
4307 Points ∼82% -18%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
GeForce MX250, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4220 Points ∼100% +17%
Average Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3603 - 4220, n=2)
3912 Points ∼93% +9%
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
3801 Points ∼90% +5%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
GeForce MX130, 8250U, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
3647 Points ∼86% +1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3620 Points ∼86% 0%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
GeForce MX250, 8265U, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
3603 Points ∼85%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
Vega 8, 2500U, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G7
3404 Points ∼81% -6%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1371 - 4693, n=306)
3384 Points ∼80% -6%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3603 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5223 points
Help

Storage Devices

HP has equipped the cs2019ng with a 256 GB SSD on which it installs the OS and a 1 TB HDD for storing data and programs that do not need to be loaded quickly. The SSD has comparatively good transfer speeds and is faster than the drives in our comparison devices. The nimble SSD helps programs open quickly and allows the OS to boot almost instantly.

Please see our HDD/SSD benchmark page for detailed comparisons between various drives and more information about the SSD in our review unit.

HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G7
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF
Average Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
20%
-48%
12%
-19%
-46%
-10%
Write 4K
149.3
130.1
-13%
51.55
-65%
121.3
-19%
105.8
-29%
66.93
-55%
115 (97.3 - 149, n=4)
-23%
Read 4K
52.73
27.64
-48%
28.53
-46%
44.07
-16%
29.22
-45%
30.33
-42%
47.4 (44.3 - 52.7, n=4)
-10%
Write Seq
666.9
1438
116%
444.2
-33%
1176
76%
580.5
-13%
447.6
-33%
749 (667 - 883, n=4)
12%
Read Seq
818.1
1319
61%
477.7
-42%
1139
39%
1065
30%
533.6
-35%
900 (665 - 1068, n=4)
10%
Write 4K Q32T1
332.1
323.3
-3%
208.7
-37%
257.8
-22%
201
-39%
197.5
-41%
241 (167 - 332, n=4)
-27%
Read 4K Q32T1
467.1
359.9
-23%
224.3
-52%
325.9
-30%
278.6
-40%
234.5
-50%
363 (307 - 467, n=4)
-22%
Write Seq Q32T1
984.8
1454
48%
514.9
-48%
1455
48%
584.4
-41%
495.6
-50%
816 (657 - 985, n=4)
-17%
Read Seq Q32T1
1454
1740
20%
558.6
-62%
1741
20%
1824
25%
559.1
-62%
1459 (1202 - 1606, n=4)
0%
Write 4K Q8T8
207.5
536
Read 4K Q8T8
223.6
560
AS SSD
69%
-57%
69%
-6%
-24%
-17%
Copy Game MB/s
684.39
556.84
359.31
435 (371 - 572, n=4)
Copy Program MB/s
334.61
332.51
203.85
245 (219 - 275, n=4)
Copy ISO MB/s
1312.95
810.24
491.29
799 (574 - 1065, n=4)
Score Total
1822
3291
81%
921
-49%
3249
78%
1451
-20%
967
-47%
1464 (623 - 1822, n=6)
-20%
Score Write
649
1437
121%
244
-62%
1398
115%
498
-23%
352
-46%
397 (63 - 649, n=6)
-39%
Score Read
780
1233
58%
452
-42%
1224
57%
660
-15%
402
-48%
719 (388 - 805, n=6)
-8%
Access Time Write *
0.233
0.028
88%
0.603
-159%
0.024
90%
0.078
67%
0.056
76%
0.3503 (0.163 - 1.049, n=6)
-50%
Access Time Read *
0.421
0.077
82%
0.365
13%
0.058
86%
0.138
67%
0.131
69%
0.3003 (0.085 - 0.92, n=6)
29%
4K-64 Write
461.38
1186.21
157%
173
-63%
1111.39
141%
390.34
-15%
239.75
-48%
254 (4.83 - 461, n=6)
-45%
4K-64 Read
618.48
1034.43
67%
373.64
-40%
1043.53
69%
491.44
-21%
319.2
-48%
549 (210 - 629, n=6)
-11%
4K Write
114.11
127.16
11%
51.11
-55%
162.17
42%
54.04
-53%
64.29
-44%
76.5 (4.18 - 114, n=6)
-33%
4K Read
46.51
42.56
-8%
27.67
-41%
43.34
-7%
20.36
-56%
30.14
-35%
41.4 (37.7 - 46.5, n=6)
-11%
Seq Write
735.84
1236.86
68%
202.69
-72%
1243.73
69%
540.29
-27%
476.06
-35%
655 (501 - 764, n=6)
-11%
Seq Read
1152.69
1557.17
35%
504.04
-56%
1371.56
19%
1480.36
28%
522.43
-55%
1285 (1153 - 1386, n=6)
11%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
45% / 48%
-53% / -53%
41% / 45%
-13% / -12%
-35% / -33%
-14% / -14%

* ... smaller is better

Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G
Sequential Read: 798.2 MB/s
Sequential Write: 685.1 MB/s
512K Read: 636.7 MB/s
512K Write: 592.2 MB/s
4K Read: 46.16 MB/s
4K Write: 106.8 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 337 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 186.8 MB/s

Graphics Card

The cs2019ng has two GPUs that it can split tasks between depending on their graphics requirements. The device uses the integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620 for simple tasks like streaming videos and the Nvidia GeForce MX250 for more resource-intensive tasks like playing games. The GeForce MX250 succeeds the GeForce MX150 and has slightly higher clock speeds than its predecessor. HP has also opted for the more powerful 1D13 variant that has a 25 W TDP. By contrast, the weakest GeForce MX150, which Nvidia calls the 1D12, has just a 10 W TDP. This 15 W difference helps the GeForce MX250 achieve up to 21% higher boost clock speeds than the 1D10 variant of the GeForce MX150.

Depending on the benchmark, the cs2019ng scores between 6 and 18% more than the average of GeForce MX150-powered devices that we have tested. Hence, the GeForce MX250 offers a modest boost in performance and is powerful enough even for some photo and video-editing.

Please see our GPU benchmark page for more information about the GeForce MX250 and how it compares against other GPUs.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-8565U
7385 Points ∼100% +55%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i5-8265U
4761 Points ∼64%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
4633 Points ∼63% -3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
4506 Points ∼61% -5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3593 - 4942, n=12)
4449 Points ∼60% -7%
Average of class Multimedia
  (352 - 20837, n=639)
3006 Points ∼41% -37%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX130, Intel Core i5-8250U
2895 Points ∼39% -39%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
2381 Points ∼32% -50%
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average of class Multimedia
  (142 - 4734, n=62)
1572 Points ∼100%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
1090 Points ∼69%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (899 - 1134, n=7)
1059 Points ∼67%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
1050 Points ∼67%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-8565U
5792 Points ∼100% +57%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i5-8265U
3690 Points ∼64%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
3616 Points ∼62% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (2977 - 3885, n=12)
3565 Points ∼62% -3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
3517 Points ∼61% -5%
Average of class Multimedia
  (337 - 16100, n=413)
2895 Points ∼50% -22%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX130, Intel Core i5-8250U
2347 Points ∼41% -36%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
1715 Points ∼30% -54%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-8565U
36630 Points ∼100% +65%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i5-8265U
22232 Points ∼61%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (20283 - 23863, n=12)
22141 Points ∼60% 0%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
21545 Points ∼59% -3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
18770 Points ∼51% -16%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2468 - 77755, n=418)
16980 Points ∼46% -24%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
NVIDIA GeForce MX130, Intel Core i5-8250U
13610 Points ∼37% -39%
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
11226 Points ∼31% -50%
3DMark 11 Performance
4994 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
13164 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
3318 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The cs2019ng is suitable for some light gaming, but its GeForce MX250 will struggle in modern triple-A titles. Our review unit can handle older games like BioShock Infinite without any issues even at high graphics settings, but we would recommend playing games like The Witcher 3 at medium or low graphics. Otherwise, games will look choppy.

The GeForce MX250 1D13 offers about 8% better frame rates in the games that we tested than the GeForce MX150. In real terms, that represents less than 10 FPS, so you may not notice the difference while playing most games.

Please see our GPU game list for more information about what games the GeForce MX250 can play smoothly and how it compares against other GPUs.

The Witcher 3
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Average of class Multimedia
  (2.9 - 80.8, n=99)
19.8 fps ∼100% +24%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
16 fps ∼81%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (10.6 - 16, n=9)
12 fps ∼61% -25%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
11.4 fps ∼58% -29%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
11 fps ∼56% -31%
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
Average of class Multimedia
  (3.8 - 117, n=110)
29.8 fps ∼100% +42%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
21 fps ∼70%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
20.4 fps ∼68% -3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (18 - 22.4, n=11)
20.2 fps ∼68% -4%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
19.8 fps ∼66% -6%
1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing
Average of class Multimedia
  (5.2 - 206, n=107)
46 fps ∼100% +24%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
37.9 fps ∼82% +2%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
37 fps ∼80%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (32.9 - 38.6, n=11)
35.8 fps ∼78% -3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
35.3 fps ∼77% -5%
1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing
Average of class Multimedia
  (8.9 - 296, n=113)
66.9 fps ∼100% +3%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
65 fps ∼97%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
63.5 fps ∼95% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (47.4 - 67.6, n=11)
60.7 fps ∼91% -7%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
59.7 fps ∼89% -8%
BioShock Infinite
1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
62.1 fps ∼100% +77%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (32.3 - 38.1, n=10)
35.4 fps ∼57% +1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
35 fps ∼56%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
34.8 fps ∼56% -1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
32 fps ∼52% -9%
Average of class Multimedia
  (3.62 - 149, n=224)
28.3 fps ∼46% -19%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX130
23.7 fps ∼38% -32%
1366x768 High Preset
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
147.7 fps ∼100% +59%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
94 fps ∼64% +1%
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
93 fps ∼63%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (84 - 99.7, n=10)
92.3 fps ∼62% -1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
80.9 fps ∼55% -13%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX130
64.8 (min: 23.7) fps ∼44% -30%
Average of class Multimedia
  (9.3 - 277, n=254)
64.6 fps ∼44% -31%
1366x768 Medium Preset
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
110 fps ∼100%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
107 fps ∼97% -3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (98.4 - 116, n=10)
107 fps ∼97% -3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
92.6 fps ∼84% -16%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX130
75.3 fps ∼68% -32%
Average of class Multimedia
  (10.7 - 292, n=244)
72.4 fps ∼66% -34%
1280x720 Very Low Preset
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
197 fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (134 - 208, n=10)
182 fps ∼92% -8%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
180.2 fps ∼91% -9%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
139.3 fps ∼71% -29%
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX130
135 fps ∼69% -31%
Average of class Multimedia
  (19.5 - 370, n=243)
110 fps ∼56% -44%
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 197 110 93 35 fps
Dota 2 (2013) 101 88 64 fps
Thief (2014) 66.8 47.5 44.3 21 fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 65 37 21 16 fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 71 39 24 20 fps

Emissions

Fan Noise

Fan noise characteristics
Fan noise characteristics

The fans in our review unit are generally off when the machine is idling, which makes the cs2019ng suitable for use in quiet environments. You can still hear the HDD though, but we did not find this overly intrusive during our tests. The fans reached a maximum of 42.5 dB(A) under sustained load, but you have to push the device hard to get the fans to reach their peak velocity. In general, the cs2019ng should remain quiet or silent when you are doing light tasks like responding to emails or browsing the web.

Noise Level

Idle
31.5 / 31.5 / 31.5 dB(A)
Load
42.5 / 42.5 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: 30.5 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.834.13632.432.82532.232.231.730.432.23132.434.333.33032.44031.729.531.131.131.75030.129.429.629.530.16328.329.128.12928.38030.129.427.426.830.110030.429.327.726.730.412526.925.725.424.826.916025.226.625.424.225.220023.52424.123.923.525023.522.923.322.523.531522.723.521.621.722.740023.923.920.720.923.950024.524.82019.824.563026.626.919.919.626.680026.626.520.418.626.6100029.429.620.518.529.4125029.729.419.717.929.7160029.93019.917.729.9200032.932.918.917.532.9250033.833.718.517.533.8315036.43618.617.736.4400028.628.418.517.828.6500027.127.218.617.927.1630027.527.518.71827.5800022.722.818.818.322.71000020.920.818.818.220.91250019.719.718.918.219.71600019.219.118.818.319.2SPL42.742.531.530.542.7N3.63.61.41.33.6median 26.6median 26.6median 19.9median 18.3median 26.6Delta3.232.22.13.2hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseHP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng

Temperature

System information during a stress test
System information during a stress test

Our measurements certify that the cs2019ng reaches a maximum of 27.4 °C at idle and up to 46 °C under load. Our review unit feels warm to the touch in certain places, but it never got uncomfortably hot during our tests even if we had the device on our lap.

We also subjected the cs2019ng to our usual FurMark and Prime95 stress test during which CPU core temperatures reached 77 °C. These high temperatures caused the CPU clock speeds to fall significantly below their 1.6 GHz base clock, although the system managed to stabilise the chip at around 1.7 GHz by the end of our one-hour test. You should not experience any thermal throttling with your device though as our stress test puts systems under extreme load conditions that are not representative of real-world use.

Max. Load
 40 °C
104 F
46 °C
115 F
25.6 °C
78 F
 
 29.3 °C
85 F
42.4 °C
108 F
30 °C
86 F
 
 30.8 °C
87 F
28.3 °C
83 F
27.6 °C
82 F
 
Maximum: 46 °C = 115 F
Average: 33.3 °C = 92 F
39.6 °C
103 F
44 °C
111 F
44.6 °C
112 F
27.2 °C
81 F
40 °C
104 F
43 °C
109 F
27.1 °C
81 F
29.1 °C
84 F
30.1 °C
86 F
Maximum: 44.6 °C = 112 F
Average: 36.1 °C = 97 F
Power Supply (max.)  47 °C = 117 F | Room Temperature 24.4 °C = 76 F | FIRT 550-Pocket
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 31 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 36.5 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44.6 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 38.9 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 31 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30.8 °C / 87.4 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 29.1 °C / 84.4 F (-1.7 °C / -3 F).
Heat map of the top of the device at idle
Heat map of the top of the device at idle
Heat map of the bottom of the device at idle
Heat map of the bottom of the device at idle
Heat map of the top of the device under load
Heat map of the top of the device under load
Heat map of the bottom of the device under load
Heat map of the bottom of the device under load

Speakers

Speaker characteristics
Speaker characteristics

The cs2019ng has relatively quiet speakers, but at least they deliver a fairly balanced sound. They are good enough for occasionally listening to music or watching videos in quiet environments, but we would recommend using external speakers or headphones for a better listening experience. We had no issues with listening to audio using the 3.5 mm jack or over Bluetooth during our tests.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.232.433.22533.530.433.53131.93031.94030.631.130.65029.429.529.46328.62928.68029.226.829.210028.826.728.812527.824.827.816031.924.231.920039.423.939.425049.222.549.23155721.75740068.220.968.250071.119.871.163070.319.670.380062.718.662.7100066.918.566.9125068.817.968.8160067.217.767.2200068.817.568.8250067.917.567.9315071.617.771.6400071.317.871.3500069.617.969.6630066.41866.4800061.618.361.61000063.418.263.41250061.818.261.81600060.818.360.8SPL80.530.580.5N47.21.347.2median 66.4median 18.3median 66.4Delta8.82.18.835.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Pavilion 15-cs2019ngApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.56 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 54% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

Our tests certify that the cs2019ng consumes a minimum of 4.9 W at idle and a maximum of 38 W under load. These values are in keeping with comparably equipped devices and are comparatively low for a device equipped with a dedicated GPU.

HP includes a 65 W power supply in the box, which is powerful enough to keep the cs2019ng charging even if you are pushing the device hard.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.3 / 0.8 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 4.9 / 7.9 / 10.1 Watt
Load midlight 60 / 38 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
8265U, GeForce MX250, Toshiba KBG30ZMV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
8565U, GeForce MX250, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
8550U, GeForce MX150, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
8565U, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
2500U, Vega 8, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
8250U, GeForce MX130, SK Hynix SC313 HFS256G39TNF, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
 
Average of class Multimedia
 
Power Consumption
-7%
3%
-50%
11%
1%
-14%
-87%
Idle Minimum *
4.9
4.4
10%
3.1
37%
6.8
-39%
4.5
8%
3.3
33%
4.25 (2.16 - 7.4, n=12)
13%
11.5 (2.1 - 101, n=937)
-135%
Idle Average *
7.9
6.9
13%
6.3
20%
9.8
-24%
7.3
8%
6.1
23%
8.46 (5.04 - 12.4, n=12)
-7%
16 (4.2 - 122, n=937)
-103%
Idle Maximum *
10.1
9.9
2%
8.6
15%
11.4
-13%
9.4
7%
8.3
18%
11.2 (8.4 - 16.2, n=12)
-11%
19.6 (4.7 - 181, n=937)
-94%
Load Average *
60
55
8%
56.4
6%
76
-27%
34
43%
56
7%
56.9 (29 - 69.1, n=12)
5%
59.9 (18.5 - 164, n=916)
-0%
Load Maximum *
38
63.4
-67%
62.7
-65%
93
-145%
41.9
-10%
67
-76%
64.4 (38 - 88, n=12)
-69%
78 (20.1 - 329, n=921)
-105%
Witcher 3 ultra *
45

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The cs2019ng has a 41 Wh battery that achieved comparatively poor runtimes in our tests. Our review unit lasted just under five hours in our practical Wi-Fi test, which puts it on par with the other Pavilion 15 laptops that we have recently tested. Our other comparison devices all have much better battery life though.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
8h 00min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 57min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 19min
HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng
8265U, GeForce MX250, 41 Wh
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-723L
8565U, GeForce MX250, 48 Wh
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
8550U, GeForce MX150, 42 Wh
MSI PS63 Modern 8RC
8565U, GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 82 Wh
HP Pavilion 15-cw0003ng
2500U, Vega 8, 41 Wh
HP Pavilion 15-cs0003ng
8250U, GeForce MX130, 41 Wh
Average of class Multimedia
 
Battery Runtime
49%
31%
106%
22%
17%
5%
Reader / Idle
480
773
61%
838
75%
504
5%
493
3%
409 (73 - 2085, n=892)
-15%
WiFi v1.3
297
414
39%
388
31%
683
130%
302
2%
284
-4%
362 (96 - 942, n=253)
22%
Load
79
117
48%
168
113%
126
59%
121
53%
85.6 (32 - 238, n=894)
8%

Pros

+ premium design
+ affordable
+ decent cooling
+ good system performance

Cons

- PWM used for brightness control
- limited maintenance options
- short battery life

Verdict

The HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng laptop review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.
The HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng laptop review. Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de.

The HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng is a moderate upgrade of its siblings and confirms our previous impressions about the series. The Pavilion 15 is a well-built device that looks expensive and packs in a solid selection of ports. The cs2019ng also has more than enough power for all daily tasks and can even handle some light gaming. The upgrade to a Whiskey Lake CPU and the GeForce MX250 offers a modest boost in performance too.

The HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng is a stylish 15.6-inch laptop that has a lot going for it. Its poor battery life and use of PWM take the shine off what is an otherwise competent multimedia laptop though.

Unfortunately, the cs2019ng shares the same shortcomings as its siblings. The device has comparatively short battery life, and it is a pain to access its internal components. The inclusion of PWM is disappointing too and will cause health issues for some people. Overall, the Pavilion 15-cs2019ng offers more power than its Kaby Lake and AMD-powered siblings while retaining their premium design and good cooling performance.

HP Pavilion 15-cs2019ng - 04/21/2019 v6(old)
Mike Wobker

Chassis
76 / 98 → 78%
Keyboard
72%
Pointing Device
88%
Connectivity
46 / 81 → 57%
Weight
64 / 20-67 → 93%
Battery
81%
Display
86%
Games Performance
78 / 85 → 91%
Application Performance
88 / 92 → 96%
Temperature
91%
Noise
84 / 95 → 89%
Audio
68%
Camera
48 / 85 → 56%
Average
75%
83%
Multimedia - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 2 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 Pavilion 15 (Core i5-8265U, GeForce MX250, 16 GB RAM) Laptop Review
Mike Wobker, 2019-04-22 (Update: 2019-04-23)
Alex Alderson
Alex Alderson - News Editor - @aldersonaj
Prior to writing and translating for Notebookcheck, I worked for various companies including Apple and Neowin. I have a BA in International History and Politics from the University of Leeds, which I have since converted to a Law Degree. Happy to chat on Twitter or Notebookchat.