Notebookcheck

HP Pavilion 17t-ab200 Notebook Review

Pascal Pavilion… HP has updated their Pavilion 17 with Kaby Lake and Pascal, which should provide better performance, longer battery life, and more thermal headroom. Is the Pavilion 17t-ab200 a budget gaming machine worth considering?

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Six months ago, we reviewed HP’s Pavilion 17 V3A33AV (model 17t-ab000). Though unexciting in its design and appearance—sporting thin plastic casing, unremarkable ergonomics, and questionable input devices—it also succeeded where it matters most: fast CPU and GPU performance; great storage options; a bright, colorful display; and a relatively light weight for its class. Today, we turn our attention to the HP Pavilion 17t-ab200, which ups the ante further with the help of a Kaby Lake CPU and NVIDIA Pascal architecture GPU.

Our review unit features an Intel Core i7-7700HQ quad-core CPU paired with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU. We also received 16 GB of DDR4-2400 RAM and a dual-storage configuration comprised of a Samsung SSD and a 1 TB 7200 RPM hard drive. Finally, while 4K touchscreen configurations do exist, our machine was equipped with a standard 1080p anti-glare IPS display. How does this mid-range multimedia machine handle itself against the rest of the market? Let’s find out.

HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop) - 4096 MB, Core: 1354 - 1493 MHz, Memory: 7000 MHz, GDDR5, 21.21.13.7654 - nVIDIA ForceWare 376.54
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2400
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AUO109D, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Sunrise Point, Intel Kaby Lake-H
Storage
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, 128 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 headset, Card Reader: SD full-sized
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265 (a/b/g/h/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Optical drive
HP DVDRW GUD1N
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 32 x 419 x 288 ( = 1.26 x 16.5 x 11.34 in)
Battery
62 Wh Lithium-Ion, removeable
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
2.954 kg ( = 104.2 oz / 6.51 pounds), Power Supply: 428 g ( = 15.1 oz / 0.94 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The Pavilion 17t-ab200 case has not changed since we reviewed the 17t-ab000 back in August. It’s still fully constructed from plastic, and a rather (unfortunately) thin plastic at that. Appearances are acceptable, but ordinary: both the gray display lid and the patterned top cover exude a metallic look from a reasonable distance, with the top cover’s faux brushed metal granting the Pavilion a thinly-vieled façade of higher-grade construction. In reality, although the base unit is sturdy enough on a flat surface, flex is very much detectable, and the display lid twists far too easily for comfort. At least workmanship is positive, with gaps between parts consistent and small—at least, until the user first attempts to disassemble for maintenance (which we’ll cover more exhaustively in a later section).

The machine is at least relatively portable for its class, carrying a total weight of just 2.954 kg (6.51 lbs) and a footprint which is right in line with that of the competition. Thanks to tight, well-tuned hinges, the display handles movement and vibrations well, though it is not possible to open it single-handedly (the base lifts off the surface).

Connectivity

Port selection and placement also have not changed since our previous review. That means that, regrettably, our same criticisms still apply—perhaps even to a greater degree thanks to the competition growing ever-better equipped in this department. A mere three USB ports (one of which is USB 2.0, and none of which are USB 3.1/Type-C) and the lack of a secondary display output option such as mini-DisplayPort are unfortunate oversights which probably can be overlooked given the price and mid-range target audience of the Pavilion, but which still pale in comparison to the myriad other inclusions of higher-end gaming notebooks.

For photos of the notebook’s port layout, check out our previous Pavilion 17 review.

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

SD Card Reader

Transfer rates from the SD card reader averaged 91.24 MB/s in our AS SSD sequential read test, which is very fast and curiously improved over that of the Pavilion 17-ab000. Real-world testing using an average of three runs copying consistently-sized JPG images was more sobering however, producing results nearly identical with that of our previous tests on the Skylake predecessor.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Gigabyte P57X v7
 
78.2 MB/s ∼100% +32%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
 
76.3 MB/s ∼98% +29%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
 
73 MB/s ∼93% +24%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
 
66.1 MB/s ∼85% +12%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
 
59.09 MB/s ∼76%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
 
26 MB/s ∼33% -56%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
 
91.24 MB/s ∼100%
Gigabyte P57X v7
 
90.4 MB/s ∼99% -1%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
 
87 MB/s ∼95% -5%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
 
85.8 MB/s ∼94% -6%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
 
74.3 MB/s ∼81% -19%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
 
28 MB/s ∼31% -69%

Communication

The internal network adapter
The internal network adapter

Yet again, the networking hardware remains the same as that of the Pavilion 17-ab000. For wireless communication, we have an Intel Dual-Band Wireless-AC 7265 adapter (2x2), and for physical Ethernet connectivity there is an onboard Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller. Performance from both adapters was good in our testing. The Intel adapter also includes Bluetooth functionality.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
674 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
Intel Wireless-AC 7265
666 MBit/s ∼99% +1%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
657 MBit/s ∼97%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
345 MBit/s ∼51% -47%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
Intel Wireless-AC 7265
543 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
541 MBit/s ∼100%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
524 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
294 MBit/s ∼54% -46%

Accessories

Included with the Pavilion 17t is a relatively compact 150 W AC adapter weighing in at just 428 g. Apart from that, no other accessories are provided.

Maintenance

Maintenance on the Pavilion 17t-ab200 is a bit of a sore subject. Our previous review of the 17-ab000 referred to it as “user-unfriendly”, and that’s unfortunately precisely the case here as well. Disassembly to provide access to even the most fundamental components requires the removal of no less than fourteen Phillips-head screws (including five from the battery bay), and that’s only the beginning.

From here, the entire top cover must be removed, but this part proved particularly tricky during our review of the 17t-ab200. Firm plastic clips surround the entire perimeter (as is often the case), but great care must be taken to disengage those at the top without damaging the cover, and an especially precarious strip of plastic lining the optical drive bay is extremely vulnerable. During our careful disassembly, even in spite of our expertise and cautious approach, this section of the top cover developed a hairline fracture—which is luckily invisible while assembled and not a threat to the stability of the casing, but nevertheless which could have been avoided with a more thoughtful design.

Once opened, users can easily access both drive bays (2.5-inch SATA and M.2), both RAM slots, the WLAN adapter, and the system fan.

Most components are accessible after the back cover is (very carefully) removed.
Most components are accessible after the back cover is (very carefully) removed.
The hairline fracture in the plastic which resulted from disassembly
The hairline fracture in the plastic which resulted from disassembly

Warranty

The Pavilion 17 is covered by a 1-year depot warranty. As always, warranty upgrades are available for purchase directly from the manufacturer.

Keyboard and Touchpad

The Pavilion 17t-ab200 keyboard is less akin to that of a 17-inch notebook and much more in line with what we’ve come to expect from an Ultrabook. To wit, we experienced light actuation force and shallow travel, supplemented by a reasonable level of feedback. It’s far from even the best Ultrabook-grade keyboard we’ve used, but after a bit of adjustment, it ought to suffice for most users. Naturally, given the size of the machine, a numeric keypad easily fits along the right side of the full-sized keyboard. By the same token, however, the one true gripe we have in this department remains the sizing of the up/down arrow keys and the suboptimal usage of the plentiful space provided on either side of the keyboard for more dedicated keys. The keys are backlit by a somewhat uneven lighting distribution controllable to only two states: ON and OFF.

The touchpad also remains poor. While the surface is comfortable and large, the dedicated keys elicit a spongy response and provide insufficient feedback to supply the user with certainty in their clicks. Furthermore, we struggled to differentiate left and right clicks throughout our time with the machine. Gestures at least work as intended, thanks to a capable Synaptics brand controller.

The keyboard is acceptable...
The keyboard is acceptable...
...though key travel is short and actuation force and feedback are light.
...though key travel is short and actuation force and feedback are light.
The touchpad, meanwhile, remains poor.
The touchpad, meanwhile, remains poor.

Display

Subpixel array, HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Subpixel array, HP Pavilion 17t-ab200

Our Pavilion 17t-ab200 review unit features a 17.3-inch 1920x1080 resolution anti-glare IPS display, which calculates to 127 PPI. The machine is also configurable with a touchscreen version of the 1080p panel, or with up to a 4K touchscreen for those who prefer it—for an additional $180 at the time of this writing. While it’s true that 1080p resolution at 17.3 inches isn’t exactly luxuriously sharp, it is nevertheless a practical selection for the mid-range GTX 1050 GPU included in the machine… but we’ll cover that in greater detail in a bit.

Subjectively, the panel appears to feature good brightness and contrast, and colors come off as relatively vivid.

262.2
cd/m²
268.8
cd/m²
257.5
cd/m²
262.8
cd/m²
278.8
cd/m²
252.7
cd/m²
271
cd/m²
267.4
cd/m²
263.5
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Maximum: 278.8 cd/m² Average: 265 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 278.8 cd/m²
Contrast: 996:1 (Black: 0.28 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.8 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 8.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
87% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.1
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
AUO109D, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Gigabyte P57X v7
SHP145E, IPS, 17.3, 3840x2160
HP Omen 17-w100ng
LG Philips LGD046E, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
MSI GE72 7RE-046
N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN LED, 17.3, 1920x1080
Response Times
6%
-59%
8%
48%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
36.8
31.2 (15.2, 16)
15%
55.6 (18.4, 37.2)
-51%
35 (14, 21)
5%
27 (13, 14)
27%
Response Time Black / White *
28
29.2 (6, 23.2)
-4%
46.8 (10.4, 36.4)
-67%
25 (4, 21)
11%
9 (6, 3)
68%
PWM Frequency
1000 (29)
Screen
20%
19%
13%
7%
Brightness middle
278.8
327.2
17%
441.3
58%
342
23%
253
-9%
Brightness
265
297
12%
408
54%
331
25%
230
-13%
Brightness Distribution
91
86
-5%
86
-5%
84
-8%
86
-5%
Black Level *
0.28
0.29
-4%
0.44
-57%
0.32
-14%
0.24
14%
Contrast
996
1128
13%
1003
1%
1069
7%
1054
6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.8
3.03
48%
5.1
12%
4.35
25%
5.01
14%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.6
6.87
35%
9.8
8%
9.24
13%
10.4
2%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
8.3
1.8
78%
4.3
48%
3.73
55%
7.26
13%
Gamma
2.1 105%
2.17 101%
2.08 106%
2.23 99%
2.09 105%
CCT
5723 114%
6633 98%
7345 88%
6801 96%
6329 103%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
57
57.2
0%
87
53%
57
0%
76
33%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
87
87.6
1%
100
15%
86
-1%
100
15%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
13% / 17%
-20% / 6%
11% / 12%
28% / 14%

* ... smaller is better

Although the display panel found in the Pavilion 17t-ab200 is identical in model to the one in its predecessor, our measurements have changed somewhat regardless. Items such as response time and black level are nearly identical, but total brightness has decreased somewhat to 265 cd/m², which in turn leads to a slightly lower contrast ratio of 996:1. Brightness distribution remains excellent at 91%, ensuring a uniform picture across the breadth of the panel.

Color space and coverage again is nearly identical to that of its predecessor. We measured 87% of sRGB and 57% of AdobeRGB, which—while hardly ideal for graphic designers and other professional trades—is nevertheless a good result overall. Some competitors fare better, such as the Gigabyte P57X (87% AdobeRGB) and the MSI GE72 (76% AdobeRGB), but the Pavilion still manages a good picture quality.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. HP Pavilion 17-ab000
vs. HP Pavilion 17-ab000
vs. Gigabyte P57X v7
vs. Gigabyte P57X v7

Professional color measurements with CalMAN 5 reveal somewhat wayward accuracy out of the box, with a Greyscale DeltaE2000 of 8.3 and a ColorChecker DeltaE2000 of 5.8, respectively. The CCT Average value of 5723 is a little bit warmer than we’d like (ideal: 6500K), but total gamma is at least nearly perfect at 2.1 (ideal: 2.2).

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)

Measured response times of the display panel are neither good nor bad. PWM was not detected, which visually sensitive users will appreciate. See below for more details.

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
28 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ ms rise
↘ 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. » 59 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
36.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ ms rise
↘ 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. » 31 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoors, the panel does a fairly good job thanks to a good contrast and decent brightness—and, of course, the anti-glare display finish. Viewing angles are excellent thanks to the IPS panel.

In the sun
In the sun
In the shade
In the shade

Performance

Thanks to its powerful quad-core Intel Core i7-7700HQ CPU, 16 GB of RAM, capable NVIDIA GPU, and SSD primary storage, we should expect very good performance from the Pavilion 17t-ab200. These specifications have been marginally upgraded over those of the model we reviewed six months ago (which featured a Skylake CPU, Maxwell chipset NVIDIA GPU, and a different SSD) and are in line with those in competing notebooks of this class.

Before we delve further into our performance benchmarks and measurements, we should mention that, as expected, full system performance requires the machine to be plugged into AC power; while running on battery, we measured a much lower 3DMark Ice Storm score of just 10876 (versus 82555 while plugged in). Meanwhile, DPC latencies are in check, with LatencyMon reporting no concerns over performance while streaming real-time audio and video.

CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z RAM SPD
CPU-Z RAM SPD
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
SPEC Viewperf 12
SPEC Viewperf 12
LatencyMon
LatencyMon

Processor

The Intel Core i7-7700HQ is a popular choice for modern multimedia and gaming notebooks. It’s a quad-core Kaby Lake architecture CPU featuring a base clock rate of 2.8 GHz and a max Turbo frequency of 3.8 GHz (single-core)/3.6 GHz (dual-core)/3.4 GHz (quad-core). For much more information on this CPU, check out our dedicated page here.

The Pavilion 17t turns in excellent performance in our CPU tests. It tops the charts in nearly every instance, even when pitted against other notebooks featuring the same CPU (such as the Acer Aspire V17 Nitro and MSI GE72 7RE-046). Only the Gigabyte P57X v7 manages better performance overall, and it’s such a miniscule difference that it never even tops 1% in our measurements. As compared to the HP Pavilion 17 V3A33AV (17-ab000), meanwhile, the Pavilion 17t-ab200 bests it by modest margins ranging between 3 and 8%, depending on the test. See our graphs below for a full breakdown.

Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.71 Points ∼70% 0%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.71 Points ∼70%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.65 Points ∼68% -4%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
1.61 Points ∼66% -6%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
1.49 Points ∼61% -13%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.15 Points ∼30%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.1 Points ∼30% -1%
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.04 Points ∼30% -1%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
7.48 Points ∼28% -8%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
5.32 Points ∼20% -35%
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
152 Points ∼70% +1%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
151 Points ∼69%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
149 Points ∼68% -1%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
149 Points ∼68% -1%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
145 Points ∼67% -4%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
132 Points ∼61% -13%
CPU Multi 64Bit
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
740 Points ∼17%
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
736 Points ∼17% -1%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
732 Points ∼17% -1%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
686 Points ∼16% -7%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
679 Points ∼16% -8%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
464 Points ∼11% -37%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
340.3 s * ∼4% -3%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
329 s * ∼4%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
563.053 Seconds * ∼3% -3%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
547 Seconds * ∼2%
Gigabyte P57X v7
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
546 Seconds * ∼2% -0%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.71 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.15 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
0.96 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
151 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
740 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

The Pavilion 17t-ab200 manages admirable synthetic performance results, with PCMark scores nearing the tops of the charts (only the HP Omen 17, with its quicker GPU, fares better). The scores here are also as much as 30% better than the HP Pavilion 17-ab000, thanks partially to far better storage scores. The Omen, of course, also features a much better GPU in the GTX 1060.

However, our experience with the machine was not quite so smooth. During our testing period, we experienced periodic hiccups where the machine would stop responding—video, mouse cursor, and all—for a split second before resuming as though nothing had happened a moment later. These moments seemed most frequent during heavy disk access, but that doesn’t seem to explain them, as no evidence within the Windows Event Log or anywhere else provided clues as to their origins. Both storage drives also passed diagnostics, so it also doesn’t seem to be a problem with a particular storage device.

We’ll update this article later if we find a root cause of this behavior, but for now, we’re fairly certain it is merely a problem with our particular unit and not likely indicative of any sort of widespread issue.

PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
5252 Points ∼81% +1%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
5214 Points ∼80%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
4604 Points ∼71% -12%
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
4218 Points ∼65% -19%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
6858 Points ∼72% +29%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
5310 Points ∼56%
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
5161 Points ∼54% -3%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
3658 Points ∼38% -31%
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
4711 Points ∼77% +12%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
4212 Points ∼69%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
4088 Points ∼67% -3%
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
3569 Points ∼59% -15%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
3133 Points ∼51% -26%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4212 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5310 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5214 points
Help

Storage Devices

There are two total storage bays inside the Pavilion 17t, and both of them are in use in our review unit. Primary storage is handled by a Samsung CM871A 128 GB M.2 SSD, which, while not a PCIe model, still manages respectable sequential read/write speeds of 511.62 MB/s and 466.43 MB/s, as well as 4K-64 speeds of 365.96 MB/s and 98.54 MB/s, respectively. These results certainly indicate a quick enough drive so as not to bottleneck performance, though the Gigabyte P57X and MSI GE72 7RE fare even better here.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CrystalDiskMark
CrystalDiskMark
HD Tune (SSD)
HD Tune (SSD)
HD Tune (HDD)
HD Tune (HDD)
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 Storage
The internal Samsung SSD
The internal Samsung SSD
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
Gigabyte P57X v7
Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
HP Omen 17-w100ng
SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
MSI GE72 7RE-046
Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-13%
25%
-14%
53%
Write 4k QD32
132.5
169.8
28%
296
123%
170.8
29%
212.9
61%
Read 4k QD32
399
144.6
-64%
281.3
-29%
141.6
-65%
372.5
-7%
Write 4k
85.32
68.33
-20%
82.25
-4%
76.14
-11%
112.9
32%
Read 4k
32.7
20.99
-36%
26.04
-20%
20.25
-38%
22.7
-31%
Write 512
118.5
179.5
51%
306.1
158%
172.4
45%
481.4
306%
Read 512
376.2
319.3
-15%
315
-16%
315.5
-16%
455.1
21%
Write Seq
353.6
185.1
-48%
305.7
-14%
180.2
-49%
495.7
40%
Read Seq
520
516.8
-1%
516.8
-1%
495
-5%
539.6
4%
Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
Transfer Rate Minimum: 312.4 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum: 421.8 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average: 406.8 MB/s
Access Time: 0.1 ms
Burst Rate: 107.3 MB/s
CPU Usage: 2.8 %

GPU Performance

Our Pavilion 17t review unit packs an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU, which is a lower-end Pascal chipset adapter that nevertheless can put to shame some previously mid-range Maxwell options (such as the GTX 960M). With a 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics score of 5961 (27% above the Pavilion 17t-ab000’s 4361, though nearly half that of the HP Omen 17’s 11326), it’s clear why this GPU has helped to redefine entry-level mobile gaming. 3DMark 11 Performance GPU provides a score of 7649, which is also impressive when compared to the GTX 960M-equipped Pavilion’s 5289.

3DMark
3DMark
3DMark Fire Strike Ultra
3DMark Fire Strike Ultra
3DMark 11
3DMark 11
3DMark 06
3DMark 06
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Gigabyte P57X v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
9116 Points ∼50% +23%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7440 Points ∼41%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
7216 Points ∼40% -3%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7059 Points ∼39% -5%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
6319 Points ∼35% -15%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
6017 Points ∼33% -19%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5515 Points ∼30% -26%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Gigabyte P57X v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
23243 Points ∼46% +204%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
15256 Points ∼30% +99%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
14642 Points ∼29% +91%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
10186 Points ∼20% +33%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7649 Points ∼15%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7360 Points ∼14% -4%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
5289 Points ∼10% -31%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Gigabyte P57X v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
17170 Points ∼42% +188%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
11326 Points ∼28% +90%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11160 Points ∼27% +87%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
8086 Points ∼20% +36%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5961 Points ∼15%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5784 Points ∼14% -3%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5421 Points ∼13% -9%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
4361 Points ∼11% -27%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Gigabyte P57X v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
75190 Points ∼41% +100%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
74982 Points ∼41% +100%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
49223 Points ∼27% +31%
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
37573 Points ∼20%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ
35884 Points ∼19% -4%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
31060 Points ∼17% -17%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
26770 Points ∼15% -29%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
185637 Points ∼25%
Gigabyte P57X v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
116033 Points ∼16%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ
110806 Points ∼15%
3DMark 06 Standard
27027 points
3DMark 11 Performance
7794 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
82555 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
19749 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5415 points
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
2675 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The Pavilion 17t’s 1080p panel resolution begins to make a little more sense when you take into account gaming benchmarks. That’s not to say that the performance isn’t good; to the contrary, it’s actually quite a lot better than the previous Pavilion 17 could muster with its GTX 960M. However, gaming at higher resolutions than 1080p would not be practical.

The full details of our benchmark results can be found below. They come together just as we’d expect: with the GTX 1070-equipped Gigabyte P57X v7 taking top honors (with at least double the performance), and GTX 1060-equipped machines coming in quite a bit below that. The GTX 1050 Ti once again splits the difference roughly between the GTX 1050 and GTX 1060.

With frame rates near or above 30 fps in all benchmarks, the Pavilion 17t can clearly handle modern games on high settings most of the time. It’s hardly future-proofed, but provided users don’t mind dialing back settings somewhat down the road, it should prove sufficient for casual mobile gamers for some time to come.

BioShock Infinite
1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
59 fps ∼22%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
45 fps ∼17% -24%
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
130 fps ∼49% +120%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
99.1 fps ∼37% +68%
1366x768 High Preset (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
143 fps ∼41%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
117.9 fps ∼34% -18%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
164.8 fps ∼48% +15%
1366x768 Medium Preset (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
155 fps ∼41%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
176.2 fps ∼47% +14%
1280x720 Very Low Preset (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
207 fps ∼48%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
197.8 fps ∼45% -4%
Mafia 2 - 1920x1080 high AA:0x AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
66.1 fps ∼30%
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
156.3 fps ∼71% +136%
Batman: Arkham Knight
1920x1080 High / On AA:SM AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
42 fps ∼30%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
23 fps ∼16% -45%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
41 fps ∼29% -2%
1920x1080 High / On (Interactive Smoke & Paper Debris Off) AA:SM AF:8x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
45 fps ∼30%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
34 fps ∼23% -24%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
60 fps ∼40% +33%
Fallout 4
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
31 fps ∼18%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
24.5 fps ∼15% -21%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
46.2 fps ∼28% +49%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
33.9 fps ∼20% +9%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
66.8 fps ∼40% +115%
1920x1080 High Preset AA:T AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
38 fps ∼22%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
30.6 fps ∼18% -19%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
56 fps ∼32% +47%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
41.2 fps ∼24% +8%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
77.4 fps ∼44% +104%
1366x768 Medium Preset AA:T AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
70 fps ∼30%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
74.6 fps ∼32% +7%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
100 fps ∼42% +43%
1280x720 Low Preset AA:FX (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
108 fps ∼45%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
116.6 fps ∼48% +8%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
102 fps ∼42% -6%
Rise of the Tomb Raider
1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
27 fps ∼17%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
24.2 fps ∼15% -10%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
39.7 fps ∼25% +47%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
31.2 fps ∼19% +16%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
62.8 fps ∼39% +133%
1920x1080 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
34 fps ∼18%
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
30.2 fps ∼16% -11%
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
47.4 fps ∼26% +39%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
37.1 fps ∼20% +9%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
73.7 fps ∼40% +117%
1366x768 Medium Preset AF:2x (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
62 fps ∼28%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
63.2 fps ∼28% +2%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
105.4 fps ∼47% +70%
1024x768 Lowest Preset (sort by value)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
105 fps ∼34%
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
110.1 fps ∼36% +5%
Acer Aspire V17 Nitro BE VN7-793G-706L
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
105.7 fps ∼35% +1%
low med. high ultra
Mafia 2 (2010) 15215266.1fps
BioShock Infinite (2013) 20715514359fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 90784542fps
Fallout 4 (2015) 108703831fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 105623427fps

Stress Test

Our stress testing of the Pavilion 17t yielded some interesting results. That’s because our first CPU stress test seemed to indicate permanent throttling of the clock rates, without any sign of budging—regardless of temperature or power consumption. We witnessed frequencies first starting at the 2.8 GHz mark before eventually dropping to 2.58 GHz with dips to 2.41 GHz. All the while, temperatures were stable at 55 °C, which proves that this misbehavior had nothing to do with temperature. Oddly enough, however, we noticed during our combined stress test below that the clock rates had spontaneously budged beyond this point. It was at this moment that we decided to perform a subsequent CPU stress test, which then saw stable frequencies of 3.4 GHz across all four cores and a temperature of 72 °C—still perfectly acceptable.

The most likely explanation for this behavior must be some sort of firmware or driver-level meddling, as there was no good reason for the throttling to begin with. Fan speeds even remained low during the initial tests, indicating the system was aware of its reasonable temperatures.

Moving on, GPU stress produced a stable 1050 MHz with a temperature of 57 °C—again, no concern and a great result. Combined stress was still surprisingly well-handled considering both CPU and GPU share the same heat pipe and cooling fan. GPU frequencies were a little less stable, but still averaged around 1050 MHz with temperatures of 68 °C, while the CPU occasionally dipped down to its base frequency on a per-core basis while maintaining 80 °C.

A full secondary run of 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme following a lengthy period of combined stress produced a slightly lower score of 2196 (down from 2675), so temperature constraints may in fact affect sustained performance to some degree. However, in light of our benchmarks and experience with the machine during the testing period, it isn’t likely for this to occur often during real-world usage.

CPU stress, first run
CPU stress, first run
CPU stress after corrected frequencies
CPU stress after corrected frequencies
GPU stress
GPU stress
Combined stress
Combined stress
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 3.4 - 72 -
FurMark Stress - 1050 - 57
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 3.2 1050 80 68

Emissions

System Noise

Fan noise profile
Fan noise profile

This most recent run of discrete GPU-equipped Pavilion laptops has been consistently louder than we’d expect to see for the mid-range adapters they leverage. While we hoped to see improvement coming into the Kaby Lake/Pascal era, since the internal components and thermal subsystem haven’t visibly changed, we weren’t optimistic.

Unsurprisingly, our lack of enthusiasm was justified. The Pavilion 17t remains a relatively noisy machine, especially considering its somewhat tame GTX 1050 in comparison to many gaming PCs. Even while idling, we measured an average of 35.4 db(A), which is nearly 5 db(A) above ambient background noise measurements. Under load, it’s close to the loudest machine in our mix (and if you go by average readings, it is the loudest). Hopefully this noise is justified by lower surface temperatures.

Noise Level

Idle
35.3 / 35.4 / 35.4 dB(A)
Load
48.6 / 49.8 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: 30.8 dB(A)
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
GeForce GTX 960M, 6700HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
Gigabyte P57X v7
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800)
HP Omen 17-w100ng
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G
MSI GE72 7RE-046
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
Noise
2%
7%
-1%
4%
off / environment *
30.8
29
6%
29
6%
31
-1%
30
3%
Idle Minimum *
35.3
34.6
2%
30.4
14%
35
1%
34
4%
Idle Average *
35.4
34.8
2%
32.1
9%
36
-2%
35
1%
Idle Maximum *
35.4
35.5
-0%
32.1
9%
37
-5%
36
-2%
Load Average *
48.6
45.4
7%
45.6
6%
44
9%
41
16%
Load Maximum *
49.8
52.3
-5%
51.5
-3%
54
-8%
49
2%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

The shared cooling system
The shared cooling system

Fortunately, temperatures are indeed lower than those of competitors. Average temperatures of 30.2 °C and 27.8 °C on top and bottom respectively are a full 4 °C and nearly 3 °C lower than those same readings on the Pavilion 17-ab000 from six months ago after adjusting for slight room temperature differences during the readings. Many other notebooks in our field feature temperatures in the mid-30s (HP Omen 17) or even as high as the 40s (MSI GE72), but even the others are at least a couple of degrees warmer on average. This is a great thermal performance without a doubt.

It should be mentioned, however, that some of this success may in fact also be due to the CPU’s puzzling inability to ever achieve full Turbo frequencies—or even stable base frequencies for long after the start of testing (as detailed above in our Stress Test section).

Max. Load
 22 °C
72 F
45.8 °C
114 F
32 °C
90 F
 
 23.4 °C
74 F
42 °C
108 F
30.8 °C
87 F
 
 22 °C
72 F
30 °C
86 F
23.8 °C
75 F
 
Maximum: 45.8 °C = 114 F
Average: 30.2 °C = 86 F
37 °C
99 F
27.8 °C
82 F
22 °C
72 F
28.8 °C
84 F
33 °C
91 F
23 °C
73 F
24.2 °C
76 F
30 °C
86 F
24 °C
75 F
Maximum: 37 °C = 99 F
Average: 27.8 °C = 82 F
Power Supply (max.)  48.2 °C = 119 F | Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.2 °C / 86 F, compared to the average of 30.9 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.8 °C / 114 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 37 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 38.8 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 21.8 °C / 71 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30 °C / 86 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 (-0.9 °C / -1.6 F).
Thermal profile, top of base unit
Thermal profile, top of base unit
Thermal profile, underside
Thermal profile, underside

Speakers

The Pavilion 17t’s speakers produce merely average quality audio, with weak bass and average highs supplemented by more balanced mids. Overall, the shape of the sound is average, with most devices in this class doing better. At least the volume is relatively good at 73.9 db(A), and there is hardly any distortion at higher volume levels to boot.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.238.539.22535.634.835.63133.234.933.24033.53433.55031.232.131.26331.430.931.48033.13333.110032.431.232.412532.833.432.816035.631.335.62004829.34825055.328.855.331555.427.555.440056.726.756.750061.326.961.363063.728.563.780060.626.560.6100062.42662.4125063.925.763.9160061.824.661.8200062.92462.9250059.224.359.2315059.823.259.8400062.723.662.7500065.523.165.5630062.922.962.9800054.622.954.61000054.322.954.31250047.623.147.616000332333SPL73.93773.9N33.82.933.8median 59.2median 25.7median 59.2Delta7.82.87.833.937.839.544.633.238.428.830.725.227.126.126.925.328.724.829.22430.225.140.921.655.122.26421.167.519.968.119.567.61971.720.474.118.770.919.468.819.674.218.172.917.87117.87517.976.317.975.517.977.41876.117.981.417.87917.769.630.8871.572.4median 19median 712.17.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP Pavilion 17t-ab200HP Omen 17-w100ng
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 82% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

HP Omen 17-w100ng audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 48% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 69% 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

Speaker analysis
Speaker analysis

Energy Management

Power Consumption

The Pavilion 17t’s power consumption hovers around the 8.2 Watts mark while idling, which is definitely quite a bit higher than its predecessor (5.3 W). Idle averages, on the other hand, are nearly equivalent at 11 W (versus 10.6 W previously for the GTX 960M-equipped Pavilion). The rest of the competitors we chose for today’s comparisons are around twice as high, though all of them also feature considerably more powerful GPUs, so it’s a bit of a trade-off.

Under load, the Pavilion 17t demands around 117 W, which is still a ways below the maximum of the provided AC adapter (150 W).

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.3 / 0.6 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 8.2 / 11 / 11.1 Watt
Load midlight 77 / 116.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
6700HQ, GeForce GTX 960M, SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Gigabyte P57X v7
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), Transcend MTS800 256GB M.2 (TS256GMTS800), IPS, 3840x2160, 17.3
HP Omen 17-w100ng
6300HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), SanDisk Z400s SD8SNAT-128G, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
MSI GE72 7RE-046
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY, TN LED, 1920x1080, 17.3
Power Consumption
8%
-111%
-77%
-60%
Idle Minimum *
8.2
5.3
35%
15.7
-91%
17
-107%
14
-71%
Idle Average *
11
10.6
4%
23.4
-113%
22
-100%
20
-82%
Idle Maximum *
11.1
11.8
-6%
23.5
-112%
29
-161%
25
-125%
Load Average *
77
70.9
8%
184.6
-140%
72
6%
82
-6%
Load Maximum *
116.9
119.8
-2%
233.1
-99%
141
-21%
135
-15%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Battery life is actually quite good for a multimedia/gaming notebook; we recorded 6 hours and 49 minutes of WLAN surfing during our standard scripted test. This is well ahead of all other competitors, sometimes by as much as double or more (such as in the case of the Gigabyte P57X and the MSI GE72). The machine also sees longer-than-average runtimes in our other two tests. Take a look at our full results below.

Battery Eater Classic Test
Battery Eater Classic Test
Battery Eater Readers Test
Battery Eater Readers Test
Surfing with Wi-Fi
Surfing with Wi-Fi
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
11h 31min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 49min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 42min
HP Pavilion 17t-ab200
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 62 Wh
HP Pavilion 17 FHD V3A33AV
6700HQ, GeForce GTX 960M, 62 Wh
Gigabyte P57X v7
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 75.81 Wh
HP Omen 17-w100ng
6300HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 95.8 Wh
MSI GE72 7RE-046
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 51.4 Wh
Asus Strix GL753VD-GC045T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 48 Wh
Battery Runtime
-2%
-43%
3%
-55%
-39%
Reader / Idle
691
751
9%
256
-63%
543
-21%
515
-25%
WiFi v1.3
409
356
-13%
155
-62%
363
-11%
184
-55%
261
-36%
Load
102
99
-3%
98
-4%
145
42%
45
-56%

Pros

+ bright and colorful matte IPS display
+ great CPU and GPU performance
+ fast overall system performance
+ relatively portable for its size
+ reasonable temperatures
+ good battery life

Cons

- plastic casing feels rather cheap
- poor touchpad and merely acceptable keyboard
- unnecessarily difficult maintenance
- thin port selection
- relatively loud operation
- odd performance hiccups on our test unit at periodic intervals

Verdict

In review: HP Pavilion 17t-ab200. $100 off at CUKUSA.com with code Pav100NBC
In review: HP Pavilion 17t-ab200. $100 off at CUKUSA.com with code Pav100NBC

The Pavilion 17t is very close to the same machine we reviewed six months ago, and as such, it preserves most of the pros and cons of its predecessor. It’s still a capable low- to mid-range gaming machine, and it can now handle most modern games at native resolution (1080p) on higher settings, thanks to its upgraded GPU (the respectable yet modest GTX 1050). It also remains considerably more portable than many other competitors sharing its screen size… and that screen, speaking of which, is really quite nice. Performance is quick and rather impressive overall, especially when the machine is heavily stressed; it barely even flinches even in spite of its simple cooling system.

If price and performance are paramount—and durability, ergonomics, and maintenance/upgrades are not of serious concern—then the Pavilion 17t-ab200 is at least a fast performer.

Apart from that, however, it doesn’t really have much to offer. The plastic casing is one reason for the relative lack of weight, but by the same token, it also leads to a flimsier display lid than we’d like, as well as an overall cheaper look and feel. The input devices range from average to poor. Meanwhile, maintenance is unnecessarily challenging, with a serious risk to the thinner portions of the plastic casing coming into play during the delicate process of disassembly. Port selection also remains thin (with merely HDMI for video output, no USB Type-C, and a lack of NVMe for higher-end SSDs), likely disqualifying the machine as a viable choice for serious business professionals. Finally, it’s still quite loud even in light operation, though temperatures have improved quite a bit over the previous model thanks to a more efficient CPU and GPU.

In light of these drawbacks, there is truly only one type of user for which this machine might make a lot of sense, and that’s the shoestring-budget mobile gamer. If price and performance are paramount—and durability, ergonomics, and maintenance/upgrades are not of serious concern—then the Pavilion 17t-ab200 is at least a fast performer. Otherwise, if the budget can be expanded, it would be difficult to recommend.

HP Pavilion 17t-ab200 - 02/21/2017 v6
Steve Schardein

Chassis
56 / 98 → 57%
Keyboard
71%
Pointing Device
61%
Connectivity
50 / 81 → 62%
Weight
57 / 20-67 → 79%
Battery
89%
Display
85%
Games Performance
85 / 85 → 100%
Application Performance
92 / 92 → 100%
Temperature
91%
Noise
64 / 95 → 67%
Audio
50%
Camera
50 / 85 → 59%
Average
68%
79%
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 17t-ab200 Notebook Review
Steve Schardein, 2017-02-26 (Update: 2017-03-10)
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.