Notebookcheck

HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV (7700HQ, UHD, GTX 1050) Laptop Review

A sharper image… The latest Pavilion 15t to make the trip through our labs features all the same amenities of the previous configuration, but accompanied now instead by a higher-resolution display. Could this be what the Pavilion needed to earn top marks?

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

It was just last month when we evaluated the Pavilion 15t, a head-turner in the midrange entertainment notebook sector when judging by the spec sheet alone. Our review unit was (well) equipped with an Intel Core i7-7700 HQ, 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4 memory, an NVIDIA GTX 1050 GPU, and an M.2 solid-state drive. It also featured a FHD (1080p) IPS anti-glare display, but in spite of the great viewing angles and anti-glare finish, we lamented its weak brightness and poor color reproduction.

Today, we have largely the same model in front of us, except now, the SSD has been upgraded to an NVMe model, and the display panel is a much nicer UHD display. Although HP refers to it as UHD/4K, however, it should be noted that the subpixel geometry is RGBW, which does reduce image quality in spite of technically still achieving a 3840 x 2160 resolution. We’ll get into slightly more detail on this in our display section, but until then, the question becomes: is this enough to propel the Pavilion 15t into our subset of recommended machines?

As of today, this exact configuration is available for purchase from Computer Upgrade King (the supplier who provided us with today’s review unit) for around $1141.

Please note: We have reviewed numerous machines from this series already, with the previous Pavilion 15t literally qualifying as identical otherwise in terms of everything from construction to connections and input devices. As such, we will be skipping most of those sections entirely in today’s review. For much more detailed information on those aspects of the machine, please see our most recent reviews of related machines here and here.

Also please note: As we’ve covered numerous times in our previous reviews, these machines are afflicted by unfortunate and unpredictable firmware-level issues which, as of yet, have not seen a complete resolution by the manufacturer. These issues include inconsistent benchmark performance (especially CPU) and random hangs/hiccups, even with the most recent BIOS version (F.35 REV A)—and before the BIOS upgrade, we also experienced regular machine crashes. This review attempts to take those issues into account during our testing of the machine, however, please keep in mind that benchmarks have been necessarily affected by these limitations. We do not feel it’s fair to provide the machine with additional opportunities to produce a higher score after all firmware-level upgrades have already been performed, so we have not re-run benchmarks in pursuit of higher scores even if they seem artificially low. This will be evident during our Cinebench R15 section, where the sustained performance graph records higher numbers than our actual initial benchmark in the database.

HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 4096 MB, Memory: 1752 MHz, GDDR5, 21.21.13.7682
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2400 Dual-Channel
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, LGD04D4, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Sunrise Point, Intel Kaby Lake-H
Storage
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7, 256 GB 
Soundcard
Realtek ALC295 @ Intel Sunrise Point-LP PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo audio, Card Reader: SDXC
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265 (a/b/g/h/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 25 x 383 x 252 ( = 0.98 x 15.08 x 9.92 in)
Battery
63.3 Wh, 4112 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p HD
Primary Camera: 1 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.26 kg ( = 79.72 oz / 4.98 pounds), Power Supply: 428 g ( = 15.1 oz / 0.94 pounds)

 

Preliminary Notes

To quickly reiterate/summarize the most pertinent of our previous findings from recent reviews of similar models, the Pavilion 15t’s case is constructed from a flimsy plastic which is quite easy to damage while disassembling.  It is a lightweight computer for its size and class, but this is entirely thanks to the use of this plastic rather than the metal employed in higher-quality machines like the HP Spectre x360 15 and Dell XPS 15 9560.  Maintenance is also unfortunately challenging, requiring the removal of the entire palmrest/top cover—which is a perilous undertaking given the fragility of the construction materials.  We also are not impressed by the touchpad, and the keyboard is average at best.  When compared with many other machines in this price range, the Pavilion 15t seems overpriced.

SD Card Reader

Our benchmarks of the card reader reveal average transfer rates comparable to those of the Pavilion 15t we evaluated last month. See our graphs below for more detail.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
 
120.5 MB/s ∼100% +81%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
 
71.2 MB/s ∼59% +7%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
 
66.49 MB/s ∼55%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
 
62.5 MB/s ∼52% -6%
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
 
22.7 MB/s ∼19% -66%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
 
252.6 MB/s ∼100% +176%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
 
91.36 MB/s ∼36%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
 
90.4 MB/s ∼36% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
 
81.71 MB/s ∼32% -11%
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
 
27.2 MB/s ∼11% -70%

Communication

The Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
The Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265

Again, the same networking hardware—an Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265, specifically—is present in this month’s review model as we saw in the FHD configuration. Speeds were quite good overall in our tests.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
659 MBit/s ∼100%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
648 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
635 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
541 MBit/s ∼82% -18%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
495 MBit/s ∼75% -25%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
618 MBit/s ∼100% +18%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
532 MBit/s ∼86% +2%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
529 MBit/s ∼86% +1%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
524 MBit/s ∼85%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
434 MBit/s ∼70% -17%

Display

Subpixel array, HP Pavilion 15t UHD
Subpixel array, HP Pavilion 15t UHD

Let’s jump right into it. The most significant differentiating factor between last month’s Pavilion 15t and today’s is the much nicer UHD anti-glare display panel. Even at first glance, it quite obviously provides much more vivid color reproduction and a considerably higher brightness. However, before we move further, we should clarify that it’s not all positive unfortunately. The particular LG panel in use in the Pavilion 15t carries a subpixel arrangement of RGBW, which results in a markedly lower image quality as compared to authentic RGB 4K/UHD displays. In short, although the full UHD resolution of 3840x2160 is achieved, the methods used to reach that value are disingenuous and carry negative results for the user’s experience. On the bright side, these limitations are less noticeable, fortunately, on a 15.6 inch display panel than they are on, say, a 55-inch television. For a much more detailed explanation of this technical conundrum, please see this excellent explanatory page from 4k.com.

257.9
cd/m²
253.8
cd/m²
266.1
cd/m²
236.8
cd/m²
259
cd/m²
254.5
cd/m²
245.4
cd/m²
248.7
cd/m²
271
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Maximum: 271 cd/m² Average: 254.8 cd/m² Minimum: 11.01 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 259 cd/m²
Contrast: 508:1 (Black: 0.51 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.9 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 4.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
94.1% sRGB (Calman 2D) 59.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.43
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
LGD04D4, , 15.6, 3840x2160
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
IGZO IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
AU Optronics AUO41ED, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
LG Display LP156WF6-SPP1, AH-IPS, Normally Black, Transmissive, 15.6, 1920x1080
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
AUO B156HAN04.4, IPS LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-73%
-28%
-36%
-25%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
30.4 (12.4, 18)
57.2 (27.2, 30)
-88%
44.4 (15.2, 29.2)
-46%
41 (21, 20)
-35%
44.8 (16.4, 28.4)
-47%
Response Time Black / White *
24.8 (10, 14.8)
39.2 (23.6, 15.6)
-58%
27.2 (6.8, 20.4)
-10%
34 (21, 13)
-37%
25.6 (6.8, 18.8)
-3%
PWM Frequency
961.5
Screen
19%
-36%
12%
6%
Brightness middle
259
370.1
43%
209.7
-19%
322
24%
242
-7%
Brightness
255
356
40%
193
-24%
297
16%
243
-5%
Brightness Distribution
87
87
0%
75
-14%
86
-1%
75
-14%
Black Level *
0.51
0.37
27%
0.19
63%
0.31
39%
0.24
53%
Contrast
508
1000
97%
1104
117%
1039
105%
1008
98%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.9
5.3
-36%
7.8
-100%
4.73
-21%
4.65
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.9
9.9
-43%
24.1
-249%
12.37
-79%
9.64
-40%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.5
4.6
-2%
7.3
-62%
2.99
34%
3.39
25%
Gamma
2.43 99%
2.31 104%
2.39 100%
2.32 103%
2.7 89%
CCT
7257 90%
6284 103%
5771 113%
6905 94%
6246 104%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
59.5
88.3
48%
39.3
-34%
56
-6%
36.69
-38%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
100
56.5
85
57.66
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-27% / 3%
-32% / -34%
-12% / 4%
-10% / 0%

* ... smaller is better

There are a few other disappointing findings as well: although the brightness is well above that of its predecessor, the Pavilion 15t still achieves a pedestrian 255 cd/m²—a long way from the 300+ we like to see for sufficient luminosity in outdoor and brighter environments. Contrast is also a ho-hum 508:1, which is actually far below that of the previous configuration (1104:1).

But the rest of the story is much more positive. Sharply higher than our previous configuration are the color space coverage numbers, with 94 percent of sRGB and 59 percent of AdobeRGB addressed. These aren’t competitive with the best screens we’ve reviewed (such as the Dell XPS 15 in our comparison field), but they’re still overall quite good.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. Dell XPS 15 9560
vs. Dell XPS 15 9560

CalMAN 5 also reports positive results, with DeltaE averages of 3.9 and 4.5 (ideal: 0) for Colorchecker and Greyscale, respectively—well below those of the previous panel. The Total Gamma value of 2.43 (ideal: 2.2) and CCT average of 7257 (ideal: 6500K) are also not far off the mark.

Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)

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
24.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10 ms rise
↘ 14.8 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. » 38 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
30.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 12.4 ms rise
↘ 18 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. » 15 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.4 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: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8882 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoors, the machine holds its own in all but bright sunlight, wherein the middling luminosity and relatively weak contrast can’t keep up. Thanks to the IPS panel, however, viewing angles are excellent.

In the sun
In the sun
In the shade
In the shade
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

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.

Performance

LatencyMon
LatencyMon

Our machine retains the same Kaby Lake Core i7-7700HQ as the previous configuration we reviewed, along with the same 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4 memory, a solid-state drive, and an NVIDIA GTX 1050. Aftermarket upgrades and modifications are not ideal on the Pavilion 15t, however, thanks to an unnecessarily inconvenient maintenance design (which will very likely see you damaging your case, however subtly, during the process). Again, for much more detail about this shortcoming, please reference our previous reviews of machines in this series.

We performed a second run of 3DMark 11 while unplugged and noted that performance is lower (as expected) while running on battery power (we received a lower score of 5365 as compared to our original score of 7735). Finally, LatencyMon reported some issues with streaming real-time audio and video; disabling the WLAN adapter did not resolve this.

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 RAM SPD
CPU-Z RAM SPD
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
ComputeMark
ComputeMark
SPECviewperf 12
SPECviewperf 12

Processor

The Core i7-7700HQ remains a top performer, but unfortunately, as with all Pavilion 15t and 17t models we’ve seen recently, inconsistency is the name of the game here. Our benchmarks were literally all over the place during our time with the machine—especially those dependent upon CPU performance, and without any good explanation to boot. As we have covered in our previous reviews of these notebooks, this appears to be a firmware-level issue; hopefully HP will resolve it soon.

Take a look at our benchmarks below (all performed on the latest BIOS, F.35 REV A), and you’ll likely find yourself equally puzzled.

Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
162 Points ∼78% +3%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
157 Points ∼76% 0%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
157 Points ∼76%
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
152 Points ∼73% -3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
Intel Core i5-7200U
129 Points ∼62% -18%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
741 Points ∼25% +23%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
735 Points ∼25% +22%
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
673 (min: 660, max: 673) Points ∼23% +11%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
604 Points ∼21%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
Intel Core i5-7200U
330 Points ∼11% -45%
Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.14 Points ∼34% 0%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.1 Points ∼34%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
6.81 Points ∼29% -16%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
379 s * ∼4%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
337.5 s * ∼4% +11%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
214.927 s * ∼3% +43%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
522.024 Seconds * ∼2% -2%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
520.2 Seconds * ∼2% -1%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
513 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.1 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
63.93 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.79 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
157 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
604 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
96.03 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

Regardless, the Pavilion 15t does feel speedy—at least, when it isn’t hiccupping randomly as it often does during usage. These hiccups were common across all of our recently-reviewed HP Pavilion notebooks, and they have not been resolved by the latest BIOS update.

PCMark 8 posts scores which are predictably below those of lower-resolution display configurations (always a point worth repeating), but even still, we continue to receive bafflingly low scores in the PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated benchmark (the same problem we have experienced with the other recent Pavilion machines). Either way, the higher scores of the bunch (Creative and Home) are directly competitive with the far more expensive Dell XPS 15 9560—so that’s a definitive positive.

PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
4666 Points ∼72% +98%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
4422 Points ∼68% +88%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
2880 Points ∼44% +23%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
2351 Points ∼36%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
5275 Points ∼55% +5%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
5114 Points ∼54% +2%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
5007 Points ∼53%
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
4182 Points ∼69% +19%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
3588 Points ∼59% +2%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
3550 Points ∼58% +1%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
3502 Points ∼57%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3502 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5007 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
2351 points
Help

Storage Devices

Whereas the previous Pavilion 15t model we reviewed included a Samsung CM871a 128 GB SSD, today’s unit has been upgraded to a 256 GB Intel 600p NVMe SSD. The performance does partially reflect this—however, it doesn’t make as much of a difference as do many other NVMe SSDs we’ve benchmarked. With AS SSD read/write scores of 447 and 579 (vs. 448 and 226 previously) and a total score of 1224 (previously 912), performance is somewhat quicker overall, but it’s nothing show-stopping. Regardless, the solid-state drive is never likely to a noticeable bottleneck in any of these machines. For much more information, check out our full storage benchmarks below.

Our system also included a supplemental 2.5-inch 1 TB HGST Travelstar 7K1000 conventional hard drive for storage. Performance is quite good for a mechanical drive; with a Transfer Rate Average of 109.4 MB/s (as measured by HD Tune), it’s amongst the faster hard drives available in this form factor.

AS SSD (SSD)
AS SSD (SSD)
CrystalDiskMark (SSD)
CrystalDiskMark (SSD)
PCMark 8 Storage Accelerated
PCMark 8 Storage Accelerated
HD Tune (HDD)
HD Tune (HDD)
The NVMe SSD
The NVMe SSD
The SATA hard drive
The SATA hard drive
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
75%
-20%
-92%
14%
Write 4k QD32
405.5
398.1
-2%
140.2
-65%
0.274
-100%
319.2
-21%
Read 4k QD32
288.3
509.1
77%
400.9
39%
1.133
-100%
529.5
84%
Write 4k
135.1
134.1
-1%
89.84
-34%
0.313
-100%
123.4
-9%
Read 4k
31.97
45.14
41%
33.12
4%
0.473
-99%
34.3
7%
Write 512
472.3
1119
137%
185.4
-61%
84.36
-82%
414
-12%
Read 512
705.5
977.4
39%
399.7
-43%
37.83
-95%
759
8%
Write Seq
311
1106
256%
476.6
53%
101.8
-67%
468.1
51%
Read Seq
1115
1684
51%
522.1
-53%
120.9
-89%
1140
2%
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Transfer Rate Minimum: 152.3 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum: 695.6 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average: 411.5 MB/s
Access Time: 0.1 ms
Burst Rate: 288.6 MB/s
CPU Usage: 3.4 %

GPU Performance

With GPU performance, we finally reach a category for which we can confidently proclaim that the Pavilion 15t does as well as we can reasonably expect given its configuration. Here, we recorded scores which were mostly consistent, as well as roughly equivalent with those of the Dell XPS 15 9560, which is respected company (although that’s a much more compact machine as well). Scores of 5901 in 3DMark Fire Strike and 7649 in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU are not at all bad results. 

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
3DMark
3DMark
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7957 Points ∼45% +10%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7270 Points ∼41% 0%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7266 Points ∼41%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
4250 Points ∼24% -42%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14942 Points ∼29% +95%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7649 Points ∼15%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7564 Points ∼15% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
4243 Points ∼8% -45%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11494 Points ∼28% +95%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6100 Points ∼15% +3%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6074 Points ∼15% +3%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
5901 Points ∼15%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
3545 Points ∼9% -40%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
66973 Points ∼36% +109%
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
38748 Points ∼21% +21%
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
31987 Points ∼17%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
31274 Points ∼17% -2%
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
21835 Points ∼12% -32%
3DMark 06 Standard
27237 points
3DMark 11 Performance
7735 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
35025 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
15911 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5373 points
Help

Gaming Performance

During gaming, although UHD resolution is (predictably) out of the question, the 15t does well enough with more reasonable settings. Since we’ve already extensively tested this precise model on all lower resolutions in gaming, the only benchmarks we performed on the UHD model were in 4K resolution.

We also performed a benchmark of Bioshock Infinite at 4K resolution and received a result of 106.5 fps, as well as Metro: Last Light in 4K (very high) which yielded 42.69 fps.

Doom - 3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
18 fps ∼18%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
17.5 fps ∼18% -3%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
14 fps ∼16%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
13.1 fps ∼15% -6%
Batman: Arkham Knight - 3840x2160 High / On (Interactive Smoke & Paper Debris Off) AA:SM AF:8x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
16 fps ∼28%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
15 fps ∼26% -6%
low med. high ultra4K
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 16fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 14fps
Doom (2016) 18fps

Stress Test

Combined CPU + GPU stress
Combined CPU + GPU stress

The Pavilion 15t UHD handled our routine stress tests without too much trouble, though maximum frequencies were never sustained for any lengthy period of time. Combined CPU and GPU stress, meanwhile, resulted in high temperatures of 86 °C / 76 °C for CPU / GPU respectively, and the CPU reduced its clock rate back to 2.6 GHz, which is just below the base frequency of 2.8 GHz.

One of the newest additions to our test repertoire is the Cinebench R15 Multi-CPU continuous test, where we perform the benchmark numerous times consecutively and record the results. We then chart these results to reveal any trends in performance degradation or inconsistencies which might be encountered by the user during actual real-world sustained performance demands. It should come as no surprise that, in this test, the Pavilion 15t’s performance fluctuates rather wildly. We recorded results ranging between 675 and 725, with the highest two scores achieved during the first two benchmarks. This suggests thermal or firmware-level limitations during real-world sustained usage which could result in lower CPU performance by up to around 7 percent.

CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 3.4 - 82 -
FurMark Stress - 1468 - 68
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 2.6 1670 86 76
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit

Emissions

System Noise

Not much has changed on the subject of system noise with this revised configuration of the Pavilion 15t. We still measured values of above 40 dB(A) under load, though the noise wasn’t exactly bothersome and was devoid of any sort of detectable whine. The Dell XPS 15 is only slightly louder in spite of its thinner profile. While idle, at least, the machine is nearly silent at just 32.3 dB(A).

Noise Level

Idle
32.3 / 32.3 / 32.3 dB(A)
Load
43.2 / 45.2 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: 28.9 dB(A)
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
Noise
2%
-2%
2%
10%
off / environment *
28.9
28.4
2%
29.3
-1%
30.4
-5%
29
-0%
Idle Minimum *
32.3
29
10%
32.3
-0%
30.9
4%
29
10%
Idle Average *
32.3
29
10%
32.3
-0%
30.9
4%
29
10%
Idle Maximum *
32.3
32.2
-0%
32.4
-0%
31.5
2%
29
10%
Load Average *
43.2
47.1
-9%
44.4
-3%
40.7
6%
34.3
21%
Load Maximum *
45.2
47.1
-4%
49.2
-9%
43.9
3%
40.1
11%
Witcher 3 ultra *
52
45.5

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Yet again, surface temperatures remain nearly identical to those of last month’s configuration. With average temperatures of just 28.6 °C and 26.3 °C on top and bottom, respectively, the machine still remains notably cool under load. Also like its predecessor, however, the right palm rest heats up conspicuously more than the left—37.2 °C vs. 21 °C, which is a huge margin. That makes operation under load rather irritating—unless, of course, you don’t rest your hands on the palm rest or keyboard, where the maximum load temperature of 42 °C is encountered. Just to put that in perspective, that’s 21 degrees higher than the 21 °C we recorded on the left side of the keyboard.

Although lap-based use is probably less likely under heavy load, the same situation, of course, applies to the bottom of the machine. The left side is nearly 10 °C warmer than the right, a situation which is not exactly comfortable for the user’s legs.

Max. Load
 21.2 °C
70 F
27.4 °C
81 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
 21 °C
70 F
27.8 °C
82 F
42 °C
108 F
 
 21 °C
70 F
21.2 °C
70 F
37.2 °C
99 F
 
Maximum: 42 °C = 108 F
Average: 28.6 °C = 83 F
34.8 °C
95 F
31.4 °C
89 F
21.2 °C
70 F
29.8 °C
86 F
23.2 °C
74 F
21 °C
70 F
33.2 °C
92 F
21.2 °C
70 F
21 °C
70 F
Maximum: 34.8 °C = 95 F
Average: 26.3 °C = 79 F
Power Supply (max.)  50.2 °C = 122 F | Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
Thermal profile, top of base unit
Thermal profile, top of base unit
Thermal profile, underside
Thermal profile, underside

Speakers

The speakers are fairly weak for an entertainment device.
The speakers are fairly weak for an entertainment device.

Although the speakers reach reasonable volume levels (74.05 dB), there is very little low-frequency reproduction to speak of, and midrange frequencies aren’t as consistent as we’d like. Most devices in the entertainment category fare better, including the Dell XPS 15, which (again) is a much slimmer device.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2034.432.534.42534.534.234.53134.633.834.6403332.133503133.5316332.431.232.48030.731.430.710030.130.330.112532.832.732.816032.628.932.620039.228.439.225044.227.744.231546.226.846.240052.326.752.35005426.25463058.325.758.380063.325.663.3100064.12564.1125067.225.167.2160066.424.266.420006023.860250063.123.963.1315059.623.459.6400058.723.558.7500058.523.158.5630058.52358.580005723.1571000046.523.146.51250043.723.143.71600042.423.242.4SPL74.136.574.1N30.82.730.8median 57HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AVmedian 25median 57Delta82.4840.938.634.735.83434.833.632.833.331.73534.831.83531.742.53049.628.657.127.152.626.949.426.65425.857.525.456.624.466.12469.224.162.223.861.523.565.123.265.323.463.823.270.923.370.723.263.123.263.823.265.423.163.823.165.523.26735.978.62.643.3median 23.8Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)median 63.81.84.5hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.05 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 91% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 84% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD) audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (70.93 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 75% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 12% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency Comparison (Checkbox selectable!)
Graph 1: Pink Noise 100% Vol.; Graph 2: Audio off

Energy Management

Power Consumption

It’s hardly a surprise that power consumption is up over the previous Pavilion 15t, thanks most assuredly to the higher-resolution, brighter display panel (and, to a much lesser extent, the NVMe storage). The idle average has jumped all the way to 14.3 W in our measurements, which leaves only the Dell XPS 15 (the only other device in our comparison field with a UHD panel) at the top. The previous 15t recorded 8.9 W average idle use, which is 38 percent lower. Load average is now 82.7 W, up over 77.1 W previously on the FHD Pavilion 15t. By comparison, the Dell XPS 15, with its power hungry and bright IGZO IPS panel, tops off our measurements with a high 94.7 W.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.3 / 0.7 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 11.4 / 14.3 / 14.3 Watt
Load midlight 82.7 / 131.1 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW256G7, , 3840x2160, 15.6
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD, IGZO IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, AH-IPS, Normally Black, Transmissive, 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
7200U, GeForce GTX 950M, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Power Consumption
-11%
19%
7%
54%
Idle Minimum *
11.4
11.9
-4%
8.29
27%
7.2
37%
2.8
75%
Idle Average *
14.3
17.1
-20%
8.9
38%
10.5
27%
6.3
56%
Idle Maximum *
14.3
17.3
-21%
10.2
29%
16
-12%
6.9
52%
Load Average *
82.7
94.7
-15%
77.1
7%
82
1%
51.6
38%
Load Maximum *
131.1
122
7%
136.6
-4%
155
-18%
69.7
47%
Witcher 3 ultra *
104.8
124

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Unsurprisingly, with higher average power consumptions also comes lower average battery runtimes. With the Pavilion 15t’s 63.3 Wh internal battery, we measured a somewhat disappointing 4 hours and 30 minutes of runtime during our web-surfing battery test, some 61 percent below the Dell XPS 15—which, in spite of weighing less than the Pavilion 15t, manages to include a 97 Wh battery to explain most of the difference here. This is also 44 percent below the result we received from the FHD Pavilion 15t configuration, which is perhaps a greater difference than we would have expected.

Our other measurements carry similar trends when compared to the rest of the field. Whereas the previous Pavilion 15t might have sufficed as a palatable work or school laptop (thanks to its 6:29 runtime while web surfing), the UHD configuration does not appear well-suited to the task.

Battery Eater Classic Test
Battery Eater Classic Test
Battery Eater Readers Test
Battery Eater Readers Test
Battery Eater Surfing with Wi-Fi
Battery Eater Surfing with Wi-Fi
The internal 63.3 Wh battery
The internal 63.3 Wh battery
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
9h 12min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 30min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 28min
HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 63.3 Wh
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 97 Wh
HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 63.3 Wh
Acer Aspire VN7-593G-73HP V15 Nitro BE
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 69 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad E570-20H6S00000
7200U, GeForce GTX 950M, 41 Wh
Battery Runtime
43%
50%
29%
59%
Reader / Idle
552
831
51%
961
74%
501
-9%
883
60%
WiFi v1.3
270
434
61%
389
44%
357
32%
462
71%
Load
88
103
17%
115
31%
144
64%
129
47%

Pros

+ good, though inconsistent, CPU performance
+ solid GPU performance
+ colorful and high-resolution anti-glare display panel
+ low overall operating temperatures
+ dual-storage configuration is uncommon for this size of notebook

Cons

- inconsistent CPU performance and random system hiccups/hangs during usage
- lopsided temperature development resulting in a very warm right palm rest
- thin, unsatisfying plastic construction materials are fragile
- display still lacks brightness and features a weak contrast ratio
- mediocre port selection
- unimpressive battery life
- poor touchpad
- difficult maintenance

Verdict

In review: HP Pavilion 15t X7P44AV UHD. Test model provided by CUKUSA.com. $100 USD off with coupon code Pav100NBC.
In review: HP Pavilion 15t X7P44AV UHD. Test model provided by CUKUSA.com. $100 USD off with coupon code Pav100NBC.

In spite of its respectable GPU performance (thanks to the GTX 1050) and good overall CPU performance, the HP Pavilion 15t we reviewed last month definitely had its share of issues—specifically, puzzling firmware limitations resulting in inconsistent CPU performance, random hiccups/hangs during operation, and a flimsy plastic construction. It also packed a mediocre display with washed-out color and a weak brightness. However, to an extent, some of these problems could be overlooked in light of the relatively affordable price and acceptable battery life.

Today’s Pavilion 15t (mostly) addresses our complaints about the display with a (faux-)UHD panel featuring great color saturation and reproduction (with relatively good accuracy) and better brightness. It’s much nicer to look at, though the brightness is still below average and the contrast ratio is nothing special. Still, it’s a much better screen overall—a definite upgrade. Unfortunately, its inclusion introduces two new negatives: reduced battery life and a much higher price. According to our tests, battery life has been slashed by 2 whole hours to 4:30 (from 6:29 before on the FHD model), and the previously palatable $800 price tag has ballooned to a much less enticing $1141. The higher cost places the Pavilion 15t in direct competition with the likes of machines such as the Dell XPS 15 9560 (and even the HP Spectre x360 15-bl002xx if the user does not require a dedicated GPU)—which are fundamentally and inarguably superior devices by comparison.

The Pavilion 15t UHD’s strengths are relatively few in comparison to other devices of its class and price range, and its shortcomings are comparably numerous.

Moreover, the rest of the drawbacks we listed previously still apply to this latest configuration. The flimsy construction, lopsided temperatures, uninspiring input devices, and difficult maintenance are substantial concerns—but perhaps the most significant of them all, the inconsistent CPU performance and random hangs/hiccups during operation, has still yet to be resolved by HP via a BIOS update.

Therefore, it’s tough to say for precisely whom the Pavilion 15t UHD is intended. Its strengths are relatively few in comparison to other devices of its class and price range, and its shortcomings are comparably numerous. We’d recommend looking elsewhere; at this price, perhaps a Dell XPS 15, HP Spectre, or Lenovo Yoga 720 would fit the bill instead.

HP Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV - 04/15/2017 v6
Steve Schardein

Chassis
59 / 98 → 60%
Keyboard
71%
Pointing Device
56%
Connectivity
43 / 81 → 53%
Weight
61 / 20-67 → 87%
Battery
78%
Display
84%
Games Performance
87 / 85 → 100%
Application Performance
83 / 92 → 90%
Temperature
92%
Noise
80 / 95 → 84%
Audio
63%
Camera
48 / 85 → 56%
Average
69%
79%
Multimedia - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 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 Pavilion 15t-bc200 X7P44AV (7700HQ, UHD, GTX 1050) Laptop Review
Steve Schardein, 2017-04-17 (Update: 2017-04-17)
Steve Schardein
Steve Schardein - Review Editor - @othersteve
In grade school, my first computer—an Apple IIGS—started it all for me. Later, in the nineties, if I wasn’t repairing computers for family and friends, I was busy cooking up nifty Visual Basic projects and playing PC games like Command & Conquer and Heroes of Might and Magic. Soon, much of my free time was spent moderating popular gaming forums and covering the industry for various websites. All the while, I never stopped repairing computers, and in 2006, I started a technology consulting company in Louisville, KY—Triple-S Computers—which I have been fortunate to nurture to great success by specializing in not only repairs, but also new machine consultations and purchasing, data recovery, and malware/security. And since 2012, I have proudly contributed many dozens of reviews to Notebookcheck, a site which I have long considered to be the ultimate authority on laptops and related technology. Today, I am truly living my dream: still a child at heart, ever-curious, constantly learning, and thankful to you, our readers.