Notebookcheck Logo

HP ZBook Studio G7 Laptop Review - The best mobile workstation thanks to vapor chamber and DreamColor?

Powerful components and a great display. Almost all manufacturers offer slim workstations, but you usually do not get very powerful GPUs. HP on the other hand equips its ZBook Studio G7 with powerful Quadro RTX GPUs from Nvidia and also puts a very good DreamColor display with the 4K resolution and HDR in the stylish chassis. Is the vapor chamber cooling powerful enough to utilize the full power of the components?

Slim mobile workstations are very popular and almost every major manufacturer offers corresponding models. HP's ZBook Studio G7 is a direct competitor for devices like the Dell Precision 5550 or Lenovo ThinkPad P1, but these models are limited to GPUs like the Quadro T2000 series. HP on the other hand also offers the Studio G7 with more powerful Quadro RTX Max-Q chips with ray tracing support. Similar to other ZBooks, the manufacturer uses a vapor chamber cooling solution to keep the components cool. In addition to the ZBook Studio G7, HP also offers the ZBook Create, which is equipped with consumer GeForce GPUs instead of the professional Quadro chips. 

Our test unit is an expensive spec for around 3500 Euros. Customers get an Intel Core i9 CPU, the Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q GPU from Nvidia, 32 GB RAM, and a 1 TB PCIe-SSD. You also get a new version of HP's DreamColor display with 4K resolution HDR400 support. While previous models targeted the AdobeRGB color gamut, the new version "only" covers the smaller P3 gamut. We want to find out whether the slim ZBook Studio can handle the powerful components or if you should get a thicker workstation like the ZBook Fury 15.

HP ZBook Studio G7 (ZBook Studio G7 Series)
Processor
Intel Core i9-10885H 8 x 2.4 - 5.3 GHz, 87 W PL2 / Short Burst, 70 W PL1 / Sustained, Comet Lake-H
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q - 6 GB VRAM, Core: 1530 MHz, Memory: 1500 MHz, 60 W TDP, 452.69, Optimus
Memory
32 GB 
, DDR4-2666, Dual-Channel, soldered
Display
15.60 inch 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, LGD0661, IPS, DreamColor, glossy: no, HDR, 60 Hz
Mainboard
Intel WM490 (Comet Lake PCH-H)
Storage
Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV, 1024 GB 
, 891 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Comet Lake PCH-H - cAVS
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 2 USB 3.1 Gen2, 2 Thunderbolt, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 3 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm Audio, Card Reader: SD 4.0, 1 Fingerprint Reader
Networking
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201 (a/b/g/h/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18 x 354 x 235 ( = 0.71 x 13.94 x 9.25 in)
Battery
83 Wh, 6880 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720
Primary Camera: 0.9 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 4x Speakers, Bang & Olufsen, 200W PSU, HP Tools, 36 Months Warranty
Weight
1.955 kg ( = 68.96 oz / 4.31 pounds), Power Supply: 636 g ( = 22.43 oz / 1.4 pounds)
Price
3550 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

mögliche Konkurrenten im Vergleich

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
90.6 %
03/2021
HP ZBook Studio G7
i9-10885H, Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
2 kg18 mm15.60"3840x2160
90.2 %
01/2021
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
W-10885M, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
2.4 kg25.9 mm15.60"3840x2160
86.3 %
08/2020
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
i7-10875H, Quadro T2000 Max-Q
2 kg18 mm15.60"3840x2400
87.8 %
08/2019
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop)
1.7 kg18.4 mm15.60"1920x1080
89.7 %
12/2019
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M
2 kg16.2 mm16.00"3072x1920
87 %
08/2020
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
i7-10875H, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
2.2 kg13.98 mm15.60"3840x2160

Case - ZBook with new aluminum chassis

HP completely redesigned the chassis, but still uses an aluminum shell. The gray color scheme did not change, either, so it is instantly recognizable as a ZBook. The polished sides add to the high overall quality impression and the haptic feedback is better compared to the rivals from Dell or Lenovo and comparable to Apple. Fingerprints are not a big problem, either, thanks to the matte surfaces.

The base unit tapers off towards the front, so the overall devices appears very compact. The stability of the base unit is excellent and we could neither dent the keyboard area, nor produce creaking sounds. HP also adjusted the hinges very well and you can open the lid with one hand. The maximum opening angle is limited to ~145 degrees. The hinges cannot completely prevent some bouncing when you adjust the opening angle.

The display is more flexible than the base unit, but it is no problem and we could not provoke picture distortions even with concentrated pressure. HP also reduced the size of the bezels, but there is still plenty of space underneath the panel and we expect future models to incorporate 16:10 screens.

All the comparison devices are pretty close in terms of footprint. The ZBook Studio is only beaten by the Dell Precision 5550, but the differences are small. The ThinkPad P1 is the biggest, but at the same time also the lightest device. Tipping the scale at ~2 kg, the ZBook is on par with the MacBook Pro 16 and the Precision 5550. HP's ZBook Fury 15 on the other hand is noticeably thicker and heavier.

Size Comparison

357 mm / 14.1 inch 242.5 mm / 9.55 inch 25.9 mm / 1.02 inch 2.4 kg5.37 lbs361.8 mm / 14.2 inch 245.7 mm / 9.67 inch 18.4 mm / 0.724 inch 1.7 kg3.79 lbs358 mm / 14.1 inch 246 mm / 9.69 inch 16.2 mm / 0.638 inch 2 kg4.41 lbs354 mm / 13.9 inch 235 mm / 9.25 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 2 kg4.31 lbs355 mm / 14 inch 235 mm / 9.25 inch 13.98 mm / 0.55 inch 2.2 kg4.87 lbs344.72 mm / 13.6 inch 230.14 mm / 9.06 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 2 kg4.4 lbs297 mm / 11.7 inch 210 mm / 8.27 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 5.7 g0.01257 lbs

Connectivity - HP Studio with DisplayPort

HP includes all important port including USB-C with Thunderbolt 3 as well as a regular USB-A port. The Studio also gets a Mini-DisplayPort, while the ZBook Create with GeForce GPUs is equipped with a full-size HDMI output. The ZBook has a proprietary power connector due to the high consumption figures, but you can also charge the battery via USB-C.

Right side: SD reader, Mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB-C w/ Thunderbolt 3 (3.2 Gen.2, DisplayPort), power
Right side: SD reader, Mini-DisplayPort, 2x USB-C w/ Thunderbolt 3 (3.2 Gen.2, DisplayPort), power
Left side: Slot for a security lock, USB-A (3.2 Gen.1), 3.5 mm stereo jack
Left side: Slot for a security lock, USB-A (3.2 Gen.1), 3.5 mm stereo jack

SDCardreader

The ZBook Studio offers a full-size SD-card reader, which is also pretty fast. We determine transfer rates of ~170-180 MB/s with our reference card (AV Pro V60). Inserted cards are not completely flush but protrude by 1 cm.

SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
193.1 MB/s +15%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
181 MB/s +8%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
170 MB/s +1%
HP ZBook Studio G7
  (AV Pro V60)
168 MB/s
Average of class Workstation
  (54.8 - 200, n=16, last 2 years)
95.8 MB/s -43%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
77.3 MB/s -54%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
206.5 MB/s +17%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
198.2 MB/s +12%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
196.7 MB/s +11%
HP ZBook Studio G7
  (AV Pro V60)
177 MB/s
Average of class Workstation
  (78.6 - 226, n=16, last 2 years)
125.6 MB/s -29%

Communication

There is no Ethernet port for wired networks, so you will have to use a Thunderbolt 3 adapter instead. HP also includes the familiar AX201 Wi-Fi module from Intel (Wi-Fi 6), which supports all common standards as well as Bluetooth 5.1.

Our standardized test with the router Netgear Nighthawk RAX 120 determines very good transfer rates between 1.3-1.5 Gbps for the ZBook Studio and we did not experience any issues with the signal quality, either.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1595 (1327min - 1824max) MBit/s +22%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1312 (682min - 1432max) MBit/s
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
  (49.8 - 1775, n=324)
1161 MBit/s -12%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1037 (976min - 1071max) MBit/s -21%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
843 (792min - 896max) MBit/s -36%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
706 MBit/s -46%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Broadcom 802.11ac
581 (533min - 616max) MBit/s -56%
iperf3 receive AX12
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1553 (1260min - 1648max) MBit/s
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1404 (717min - 1487max) MBit/s -10%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1368 (735min - 1454max) MBit/s -12%
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
  (136 - 1743, n=324)
1261 MBit/s -19%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
876 (448min - 896max) MBit/s -44%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Broadcom 802.11ac
817 (806min - 821max) MBit/s -47%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
625 MBit/s -60%
0501001502002503003504004505005506006507007508008509009501000105011001150120012501300135014001450150015501600Tooltip
HP ZBook Studio G7; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1553 (1260-1648)
HP ZBook Studio G7; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1290 (682-1432)

Webcam

The webcam offers the usual poor quality with 0.9 MP, but HP does not equip the ZBook Studio G7 with a camera shutter.

ColorChecker
11.5 ∆E
17.6 ∆E
18.5 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
20.3 ∆E
18.3 ∆E
14.3 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
17.1 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
19.3 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
14.1 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
ColorChecker HP ZBook Studio G7: 11.94 ∆E min: 2.33 - max: 20.27 ∆E

Maintenance

The bottom cover is secured by Torx screws (T5) and is easy to remove. However, there is not much to do on the inside; only the M.2-SSD can be replaced. Both the wireless module as well as the memory are soldered onto the mainboard.

Internal layout
Internal layout

Input Devices

Keyboard

The HP Premium Quiet Keyboard offers a great typing experience with precise key strokes and firm feedback. Besides ThinkPad keyboards, the ZBook keyboards are among the best inputs in the mobile segment and typing longer texts is no problem at all. Except for some larger keys (space bar, return), the typing noise is also very quiet.

The keyboard offers a two-stage white background illumination and there is a BIOS setting where you can adjust the duration when the illumination is automatically turned off or kept on indefinitely. Similar to other new HP laptops there is a new functionality for the F12 key, which can be configured by the user.

Input Devices
Input Devices
Keyboard illumination
Keyboard illumination

Touchpad

Similar to previous models of the ZBook Studio, HP does not include a Pointstick, so you can only use the smooth clickpad for cursor movements. The size (11.5 x 7.3 cm) is good and it offers excellent gliding capabilities. Contrary to the larger ZBook Fury 15, there are no dedicated mouse buttons. You can click the lower part of the pad, but this results in a pretty loud clicking noise. We preferred tap-to-click during our test period.

Display - DreamColor 4K

Subpixel array
Subpixel array
Minor backlight bleeding
Minor backlight bleeding

Our test unit is equipped with the optional 4K DreamColor display. HP's DreamColor displays are synonymous with high-quality panels, which offer accurate colors as well as wide color gamuts. However, there has been a change: While previous versions targeted AdobeRGB, it is now the smaller P3 color space. 

HP advertises a brightness of 600 nits, which is easily surpassed by our unit with a maximum brightness of 736 nits and still more than 700 nits on average. The black value is still okay at 0.35 cd/m² for such a bright panel, which results in an excellent contrast ratio of more than 2000:1. There is hardly any backlight bleeding; you can only notice it slightly at the edges when you use the maximum brightness in combination with a dark picture.

The display is still not perfect. The subjective picture impression is definitely very good, but bright areas still look a bit grainy due to the matte surface. The response times are also very slow, which results in visible ghosting. There is no PWM flickering.

678
cd/m²
701
cd/m²
686
cd/m²
736
cd/m²
723
cd/m²
721
cd/m²
717
cd/m²
711
cd/m²
691
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
LGD0661 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 736 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 707.1 cd/m² Minimum: 36 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 733 cd/m²
Contrast: 2066:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 0.5
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
99.9% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
77.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
86.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
98.2% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.14
HP ZBook Studio G7
LGD0661, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
LG Philips LGD0661, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Sharp LQ156R1, IPS, 3840x2400, 15.60
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
N156HCE-GN1, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.60
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
APPA044, IPS, 3072x1920, 16.00
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Samsung SDCA029, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.60
Display
-2%
2%
-24%
5%
Display P3 Coverage
98.2
95.6
-3%
89.9
-8%
62.4
-36%
99.9
2%
sRGB Coverage
99.9
99.8
0%
100
0%
91.5
-8%
100
0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
86.5
84.5
-2%
99.9
15%
63.4
-27%
97.3
12%
Response Times
3%
14%
51%
7%
91%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
56.4 ?(27.6, 28.8)
56 ?(27.6, 28.4)
1%
46 ?(24, 22)
18%
34.4 ?(17.2, 17.2)
39%
52.4 ?(23.9, 28.5)
7%
4 ?(2, 2)
93%
Response Time Black / White *
37.6 ?(19.6, 18)
36 ?(20.4, 15.6)
4%
34 ?(17.6, 16.4)
10%
14 ?(4.4, 9.6)
63%
34.9 ?(17.8, 17.1)
7%
4 ?(2, 2)
89%
PWM Frequency
26040 ?(70)
131700
Screen
-94%
-131%
-69%
-32%
-19%
Brightness middle
723
672.8
-7%
469.8
-35%
542
-25%
519
-28%
380
-47%
Brightness
707
674
-5%
464
-34%
528
-25%
477
-33%
388
-45%
Brightness Distribution
92
89
-3%
85
-8%
84
-9%
86
-7%
93
1%
Black Level *
0.35
0.5
-43%
0.42
-20%
0.41
-17%
0.39
-11%
0.018
95%
Contrast
2066
1346
-35%
1119
-46%
1322
-36%
1331
-36%
21111
922%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.4
3.48
-149%
5.16
-269%
3.5
-150%
2.28
-63%
5.47
-291%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
2.9
9.44
-226%
9.33
-222%
7.8
-169%
6.54
-126%
8.19
-182%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
0.5
3.03
-506%
3.75
-650%
1.3
-160%
0.86
-72%
3.04
-508%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2
3.1
-55%
5.5
-175%
4.8
-140%
0.9
55%
5.3
-165%
Gamma
2.14 103%
2.04 108%
2 110%
2.33 94%
2145 0%
2.15 102%
CCT
6484 100%
6380 102%
6198 105%
7690 85%
6572 99%
6128 106%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
77.3
75.2
-3%
89.2
15%
58.8
-24%
78
1%
86
11%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.9
100
0%
100
0%
91.1
-9%
100
0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-31% / -65%
-38% / -88%
-14% / -46%
-13% / -26%
26% / -1%

* ... smaller is better

The DreamColor software, which includes different color profiles, was not pre-installed on our test unit. The calibration out of the box is still very good and it is not really necessary to calibrate the panel. There is no color cast and all colors are already within the important deviation of 3.

CalMAN Grayscale (target color space P3)
CalMAN Grayscale (target color space P3)
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps (target color space P3)
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps (target color space P3)
CalMAN ColorChecker (target color space P3)
CalMAN ColorChecker (target color space P3)
CalMAN Grayscale calibrated (target color space P3)
CalMAN Grayscale calibrated (target color space P3)
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps calibrated (target color space P3)
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps calibrated (target color space P3)
CalMAN ColorChecker calibrated (target color space P3)
CalMAN ColorChecker calibrated (target color space P3)

We still tested the calibration and you can slightly improve the color accuracy; the according profile is can be downloaded for free in the box above. We can confirm the P3 color gamut, so HP follows the trend that was introduced by Apple a couple of years ago. From a quality standpoint, this is a step down from previous DreamColor panels, which targeted the wider AdobeRGB color gamut.

vs. sRGB: 99.5 % (Argyll, 3D comparison)
vs. sRGB: 99.5 % (Argyll, 3D comparison)
vs. AdobeRGB: 77.3 % (Argyll, 3D comparison)
vs. AdobeRGB: 77.3 % (Argyll, 3D comparison)
vs. P3: 98.6 % (CalMAN, 2D comparison)
vs. P3: 98.6 % (CalMAN, 2D comparison)

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
37.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19.6 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 95 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
56.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 27.6 ms rise
↘ 28.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 92 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 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 17915 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Once you deactivate the power-saving features in Intel's graphics control panel, you can use the maximum brightness on battery power. It is also possible to use the Studio G7 very comfortably in bright environments thanks to the matte surface. There is no criticism for the viewing angle stability of the display.

In the sun
In the sun
In the sun
In the sun
Viewing angle stability
Viewing angle stability

Performance - Core i9 and Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

Processor

HP offers a couple of 45W Intel processors, but they are still from the familiar Comet Lake generation. Our test unit is equipped with the Core i9-10885H, which can reach up to 5.3 GHz or up to 4.4 GHz, respectively, when you stress all 8 cores simultaneously. HP is very generous in terms of TDP settings at 125W and 70W for sustained workloads. We can hardly see the maximum 125W in the benchmarks, and the consumption quickly drops due to high core temperatures and levels off at 70W, which is sufficient for 8x 3.5 GHz.

01002003004005006007008009001000110012001300140015001600170018001900Tooltip
HP ZBook Studio G7 Intel Core i9-10885H: Ø1601 (1574.8-1726.44)
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7 Intel Xeon W-10885M: Ø1573 (1552.67-1628.27)
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7 Intel Xeon W-10885M: Ø1079 (1047.23-1088.67)
Dell Precision 5550 P91F Intel Core i7-10875H: Ø1295 (1188.78-1518.72)
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE Intel Core i7-9850H: Ø961 (896-1114)
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M Intel Core i9-9880H; macOS 10.15.1: Ø1407 (1386-1435)
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M Intel Core i9-9880H; Win 10: Ø1296 (1268.87-1362.31)
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere AMD Ryzen 7 4800H: Ø1889 (1855.2-1933.08)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020 Intel Core i7-10875H: Ø1016 (1009.67-1136.43)

The competition uses Intel CPUs as well and the performance of the ZBook Studio G7 is very good. A comparison with AMD CPUs like the Ryzen 7 4800H running at 60W in the XMG Core 15 on the other hand shows that the performance would be much better with Ryzen chips.

The CPU performance is significantly reduced on battery power. The power consumption for the CPU is limited to 35W (8x 2.5 GHz), so the performance drops by ~38% (10074 vs. 6387 points @ CB R23 Multi) when you use all cores.

Cinebench R20: CPU (Single Core) | CPU (Multi Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Single 64Bit | CPU Multi 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 -mmt1 | 7z b 4
Geekbench 5.5: Single-Core | Multi-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
Cinebench R23: Single Core | Multi Core
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core)
Average of class Workstation
  (528 - 816, n=29, last 2 years)
684 Points +33%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
513 Points
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
502 Points -2%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
499 Points -3%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
492 Points -4%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
490 Points -4%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (460 - 513, n=3)
487 Points -5%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
473 Points -8%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
453 Points -12%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
442 Points -14%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
425 Points -17%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core)
Average of class Workstation
  (1669 - 9329, n=29, last 2 years)
5824 Points +55%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4457 Points +18%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
3835 Points +2%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
2727 Points -28%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
3762 Points
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
3429 Points -9%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
3422 Points -9%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
3057 Points -19%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (2798 - 3762, n=3)
3400 Points -10%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
2800 Points -26%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
1800 Points -52%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit
Average of class Workstation
  (166.2 - 301, n=28, last 2 years)
255 Points +20%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
212 Points
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
211 Points 0%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
209 Points -1%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (197 - 212, n=3)
207 Points -2%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
203 Points -4%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
193 Points -9%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
193 Points -9%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
191 Points -10%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
184 Points -13%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
184 Points -13%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit
Average of class Workstation
  (706 - 3625, n=28, last 2 years)
2384 Points +38%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1933 Points +12%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
1726 (1574.8min - 1726.44max) Points
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
1628 (1552.67min - 1628.27max) Points -6%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
1089 (1047.23min - 1088.67max) Points -37%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
1519 (1188.78min - 1518.72max) Points -12%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (1264 - 1726, n=3)
1502 Points -13%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
1435 (1401min - 1435max) Points -17%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
1362 (1268.87min - 1362.31max) Points -21%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
1114 (896min - 1114max) Points -35%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
1111 Points -36%
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
552 Seconds * -95%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
412 Seconds * -46%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
386.2 Seconds * -36%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
351 Seconds * -24%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
343 Seconds * -21%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (283 - 348, n=3)
311 Seconds * -10%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
283 Seconds *
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
252 Seconds * +11%
Average of class Workstation
  (137 - 684, n=28, last 2 years)
249 Seconds * +12%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1
Average of class Workstation
  (4777 - 6670, n=28, last 2 years)
5910 MIPS +4%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
5703 MIPS +1%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
5668 MIPS
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (5397 - 5668, n=3)
5551 MIPS -2%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
5379 MIPS -5%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
5310 MIPS -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
5086 MIPS -10%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
4837 MIPS -15%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
4743 MIPS -16%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4
Average of class Workstation
  (20087 - 99351, n=28, last 2 years)
61552 MIPS +43%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
52459 MIPS +22%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
42993 MIPS
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (36740 - 42993, n=3)
40519 MIPS -6%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
39599 MIPS -8%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
39455 MIPS -8%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
38363 MIPS -11%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
36204 MIPS -16%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
25786 MIPS -40%
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
Average of class Workstation
  (1474 - 2095, n=28, last 2 years)
1827 Points +33%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
1376 Points
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
1340 Points -3%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
1323 Points -4%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (1216 - 1376, n=3)
1303 Points -5%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
1289 Points -6%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1204 Points -12%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
1115 Points -19%
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Average of class Workstation
  (5022 - 17487, n=28, last 2 years)
11750 Points +53%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
8393 Points +9%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
8103 Points +5%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
7693 Points
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
7189 Points -7%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
7109 Points -8%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (6529 - 7693, n=3)
7045 Points -8%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
6948 Points -10%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset
Average of class Workstation
  (5.09 - 26, n=28, last 2 years)
17 fps +36%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
13.7 fps +10%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
12.5 fps
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (10.6 - 12.5, n=3)
11.5 fps -8%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
10.6 fps -15%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
10.4 fps -17%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
10.1 fps -19%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
8.89 fps -29%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H
7 fps -44%
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
59.6 s *
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
58.9 s * +1%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
16.5 s * +72%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
58.1 s * +3%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
58 s * +3%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (45.9 - 59.6, n=3)
53.4 s * +10%
Average of class Workstation
  (36.5 - 95.2, n=28, last 2 years)
47.9 s * +20%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
47.15 s * +21%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
43 s * +28%
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
0.6904 sec * -22%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
0.661 sec * -17%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H
0.589 sec * -4%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H
0.586 sec * -4%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
0.571 sec * -1%
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (0.564 - 0.572, n=3)
0.569 sec * -1%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
0.564 sec *
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
0.551 sec * +2%
Average of class Workstation
  (0.3876 - 0.544, n=28, last 2 years)
0.4611 sec * +18%
Cinebench R23 / Single Core
Average of class Workstation
  (1144 - 2106, n=28, last 2 years)
1758 Points +36%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
1300 Points 0%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
1295 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (1284 - 1295, n=2)
1290 Points 0%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
1259 Points -3%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
1140 Points -12%
Cinebench R23 / Multi Core
Average of class Workstation
  (4332 - 24560, n=28, last 2 years)
15342 Points +52%
SCHENKER XMG Core 15 Ampere
AMD Ryzen 7 4800H
11642 Points +16%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H
10074 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H
  (8802 - 10074, n=2)
9438 Points -6%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
8758 Points -13%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H
8747 (8681.12min - 8746.74max) Points -13%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M
6893 (6336.38min - 6892.81max) Points -32%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1726 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
201 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
212 Points
Help

System Performance

The Studio G7 is a very responsive system thanks to the powerful components, and user inputs are usually executed without any noticeable delays. We did not experience any issues during our review period, either.

PCMark 10
Score
Average of class Workstation
  (5488 - 8587, n=27, last 2 years)
6898 Points +30%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
5733 Points +8%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Radeon Pro 5500M, i9-9880H, Apple SSD AP1024 7171
5500 Points +3%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
5442 Points +2%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
5324 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
5324 Points 0%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Quadro T1000 (Laptop), i7-9850H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
5046 Points -5%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
4884 Points -8%
Essentials
Average of class Workstation
  (9151 - 12197, n=27, last 2 years)
10563 Points +21%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
9826 Points +13%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Quadro T1000 (Laptop), i7-9850H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
9566 Points +10%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
9530 Points +9%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
8890 Points +2%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
8704 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
8704 Points 0%
Productivity
Average of class Workstation
  (7846 - 10820, n=27, last 2 years)
9145 Points +29%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
7796 Points +10%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
7668 Points +8%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
7384 Points +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Quadro T1000 (Laptop), i7-9850H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
7243 Points +2%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
7080 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
7080 Points 0%
Digital Content Creation
Average of class Workstation
  (5399 - 13947, n=27, last 2 years)
9339 Points +41%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
7269 Points +9%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
6646 Points
Average Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
6646 Points 0%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
5805 Points -13%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Quadro T1000 (Laptop), i7-9850H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
5033 Points -24%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
4563 Points -31%
PCMark 10 Score
5324 points
Help

DPC Latency

Our DPC Latency test shows big spikes, so the ZBook Studio is not suited for real-time audio applications. We also saw some dropped frames during 4K video playback on YouTube.

LatencyMon Main
LatencyMon Main
LatencyMon Drivers
LatencyMon Drivers
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
5475 μs *
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
3260 μs * +40%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
716 μs * +87%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
305 μs * +94%

* ... smaller is better

Storage Devices

Replaceable M.2-2280 SSD
Replaceable M.2-2280 SSD

There is a single M.2-2280 slot for SSDs that is attached via PCIe 3.0 x4 interface. Our test unit is equipped with a Micron 2300 and a storage capacity of 1 TB; you can use around 900 GB after the initial setup. The transfer rates of the SSD are very high, only modern PCIe 4.0 drives are much faster.

HP ZBook Studio G7
Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Apple SSD AP1024 7171
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
Average Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
15%
1%
13%
-7%
15%
15%
Write 4K
95.5
114.1
19%
122.6
28%
162.2
70%
55.5
-42%
132.9
39%
Read 4K
48.99
57.2
17%
42.4
-13%
43.71
-11%
16.21
-67%
46.73
-5%
Write Seq
2001
2580
29%
2167
8%
2441
22%
1959
-2%
2214
11%
Read Seq
1600
2527
58%
1747
9%
1753
10%
1763
10%
2018
26%
Write 4K Q32T1
410.2
480.2
17%
388.8
-5%
397.6
-3%
398.5
-3%
478.9
17%
506 ?(410 - 644, n=4)
23%
Read 4K Q32T1
394.7
387.6
-2%
367.3
-7%
520
32%
648
64%
540
37%
511 ?(395 - 665, n=4)
29%
Write Seq Q32T1
3148
2996
-5%
2629
-16%
2519
-20%
2727
-13%
2975
-5%
Read Seq Q32T1
3227
2853
-12%
3460
7%
3448
7%
3242
0%
3195
-1%
Write 4K Q8T8
1381
Read 4K Q8T8
1371
AS SSD
8%
-21%
55%
23%
38%
39%
Seq Read
2548
2127
-17%
2039
-20%
2980
17%
2531
-1%
1982
-22%
Seq Write
1312
1296
-1%
1376
5%
2094
60%
2289
74%
2252
72%
4K Read
45.38
54.8
21%
44.11
-3%
45.05
-1%
15.85
-65%
47.13
4%
4K Write
83
110.8
33%
113.3
37%
155.4
87%
39.88
-52%
88.2
6%
4K-64 Read
935
1420
52%
1094
17%
1291
38%
1267
36%
1481
58%
1272 ?(935 - 1485, n=4)
36%
4K-64 Write
2314
2012
-13%
1630
-30%
1506
-35%
1749
-24%
1842
-20%
1864 ?(1247 - 2314, n=4)
-19%
Access Time Read *
0.057
0.046
19%
0.059
-4%
0.064
-12%
0.122
-114%
0.087
-53%
0.04975 ?(0.034 - 0.057, n=4)
13%
Access Time Write *
0.098
0.099
-1%
0.99
-910%
0.024
76%
0.095
3%
0.04
59%
0.181 ?(0.098 - 0.282, n=4)
-85%
Score Read
1235
1687
37%
1342
9%
1634
32%
1536
24%
1726
40%
Score Write
2528
2253
-11%
1881
-26%
1871
-26%
2018
-20%
2155
-15%
2175 ?(1611 - 2528, n=4)
-14%
Score Total
4342
4770
10%
3883
-11%
4300
-1%
4317
-1%
4781
10%
Copy ISO MB/s
3142
2779
-12%
2489
-21%
2015
-36%
1995
-37%
1982
-37%
2199 ?(1563 - 3142, n=3)
-30%
Copy Program MB/s
126.1
123.3
-2%
682
441%
597
373%
584
363%
501
297%
Copy Game MB/s
477.4
440.8
-8%
1515
217%
1449
204%
1135
138%
1140
139%
1274 ?(477 - 1786, n=3)
167%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
12% / 10%
-10% / -13%
34% / 40%
8% / 12%
27% / 30%
27% / 30%

* ... smaller is better

Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3227 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 3148 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 394.7 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 410.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1600 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2001 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 48.99 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 95.5 MB/s

Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8

No graph data

GPU Performance - Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q with 60W

GPU-Z Intel
GPU-Z Intel
GPU-Z Nvidia
GPU-Z Nvidia

HP uses the efficient Max-Q versions of the Quadro RTX GPUs. The RTX 3000 Max-Q in our test unit is the 60W version, so it is the slowest configuration of this GPU. We expect the two more powerful versions (Quadro RTX 4000/RTX 5000 Max-Q) will also be the slowest versions in terms of TGP.

The GPU runs at up to 1530 MHz during our benchmarks and is usually slightly slower than the average scores in our database for this GPU model. All in all, the results are still good and better compared to the rivals with smaller Quadro GPUs. The performance is also stable; the demanding 3DMark Time Spy stress test is passed at 97.3%.

The GPU performance is heavily reduced on battery power (-64%) and the graphics card is limited to 35W.

Easy workloads are handled by the integrated GPU of the processor. This is definitely an advantage compared to older ZBooks with DreamColor displays, where the iGPU was deactivated.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
27607 Points +58%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
26369 Points +50%
Average of class Workstation
  (7432 - 54334, n=28, last 2 years)
23663 Points +35%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (17074 - 19513, n=3)
18037 Points +3%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
17523 Points
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
14725 Points -16%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
11454 Points -35%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
10407 Points -41%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
19924 Points +46%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
19759 Points +45%
Average of class Workstation
  (4816 - 35868, n=28, last 2 years)
16713 Points +23%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (13196 - 14328, n=3)
13714 Points +1%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
13617 Points
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
10399 Points -24%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
8416 Points -38%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
7558 Points -44%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
7459 Points +48%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
7443 Points +47%
Average of class Workstation
  (1882 - 16218, n=28, last 2 years)
6558 Points +30%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (4943 - 5405, n=3)
5132 Points +2%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
5048 Points
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
3364 Points -33%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
3122 Points -38%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
2834 Points -44%
SPECviewperf 13
Solidworks (sw-04)
Average of class Workstation
  (91.8 - 227, n=26, last 2 years)
152.1 fps +20%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
142.6 fps +13%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
138.3 fps +9%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
126.7 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (110.8 - 126.7, n=3)
120.4 fps -5%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
103.9 fps -18%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
92.3 fps -27%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
89.2 fps -30%
Siemens NX (snx-03)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
292.9 fps +50%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
285.1 fps +46%
Average of class Workstation
  (48.9 - 551, n=26, last 2 years)
242 fps +24%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
195.8 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (179.4 - 202, n=3)
192.4 fps -2%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
157 fps -20%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
139.4 fps -29%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
127.8 fps -35%
Showcase (showcase-02)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
97.2 fps +36%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
95.7 fps +34%
Average of class Workstation
  (24.8 - 190.3, n=26, last 2 years)
82.2 fps +15%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
71.5 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (67.8 - 72.8, n=3)
70.7 fps -1%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
62.4 fps -13%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
42.39 fps -41%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
35.27 fps -51%
Maya (maya-05)
Average of class Workstation
  (77.5 - 449, n=26, last 2 years)
220 fps +37%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
214.3 fps +33%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
200.5 fps +25%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
160.8 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (146.4 - 168.8, n=3)
158.7 fps -1%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
126 fps -22%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
110.2 fps -31%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
101 fps -37%
Energy (energy-02)
Average of class Workstation
  (7.71 - 109.7, n=26, last 2 years)
41.3 fps +53%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
39.92 fps +47%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
36.9 fps +36%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (25.9 - 28.6, n=3)
27.2 fps 0%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
27.08 fps
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
17.04 fps -37%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
15.66 fps -42%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
12 fps -56%
Creo (creo-02)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
231.9 fps +38%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
223.1 fps +33%
Average of class Workstation
  (76.8 - 398, n=25, last 2 years)
205 fps +22%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
168.3 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (151.8 - 180.9, n=3)
167 fps -1%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
116.8 fps -31%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
99.9 fps -41%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
93.1 fps -45%
Catia (catia-05)
Average of class Workstation
  (99.5 - 409, n=26, last 2 years)
231 fps +19%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
225.3 fps +16%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
225 fps +16%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
194.8 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (166.9 - 198.6, n=3)
186.8 fps -4%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
143.9 fps -26%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
125 fps -36%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
121.3 fps -38%
3ds Max (3dsmax-06)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
180.9 fps +34%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Intel Xeon W-10885M
176.8 fps +31%
Average of class Workstation
  (61.6 - 284, n=25, last 2 years)
155.6 fps +16%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
134.6 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (120.3 - 136.2, n=3)
130.4 fps -3%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, Intel Core i9-9880H
89 fps -34%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q, Intel Core i7-10875H
88.9 fps -34%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-9850H
83.9 fps -38%
SPECviewperf 2020
1920x1080 Solidworks (solidworks-05)
Average of class Workstation
  (46.3 - 347, n=27, last 2 years)
156 fps +66%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
93.8 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
93.8 fps 0%
1920x1080 Siemens NX (snx-04)
Average of class Workstation
  (48.5 - 554, n=27, last 2 years)
236 fps +28%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
184 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
184 fps 0%
1920x1080 Medical (medical-03)
Average of class Workstation
  (13.5 - 92, n=27, last 2 years)
43.6 fps +29%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
33.9 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
33.9 fps 0%
1920x1080 Maya (maya-06)
Average of class Workstation
  (86.9 - 460, n=27, last 2 years)
246 fps +39%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
177 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
177 fps 0%
1920x1080 Energy (energy-03)
Average of class Workstation
  (6.72 - 109.7, n=27, last 2 years)
41 fps +40%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
29.3 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
29.3 fps 0%
1920x1080 Creo (creo-03)
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
101 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
101 fps 0%
Average of class Workstation
  (44.5 - 169.5, n=27, last 2 years)
99.1 fps -2%
1920x1080 CATIA (catia-06)
Average of class Workstation
  (21 - 130, n=27, last 2 years)
65.9 fps +17%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
56.4 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
56.4 fps 0%
1920x1080 3ds Max (3dsmax-07)
Average of class Workstation
  (28.3 - 174.7, n=27, last 2 years)
78.5 fps +20%
HP ZBook Studio G7
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-10885H
65.5 fps
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  ()
65.5 fps 0%
3DMark 11 Performance
16577 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
12642 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
5357 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Nvidia's professional drivers handle gaming very well and we did not encounter any compatibility issues during the gaming benchmarks. The gaming performance is roughly comparable with a GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q, so many modern titles run smoothly in 1080p with high settings. However, the GPU is usually too slow for gaming in the native 4K resolution. The gaming performance is stable and there is no drop in longer gaming sessions.

The Witcher 3
1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
149.8 (141min - 158max) fps +54%
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
125.4 fps +29%
Average of class Workstation
  (34.9 - 298, n=28, last 2 years)
114.5 fps +18%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (95.9 - 107.4, n=3)
100.1 fps +3%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
97 fps
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H, AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
68 (61min - 76max) fps -30%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H, NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
62.5 (57min - 69max) fps -36%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H, NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop)
52.7 fps -46%
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Intel Core i7-10875H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
83.6 fps +60%
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Intel Xeon W-10885M, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
79.5 (76min - 85max) fps +53%
Average of class Workstation
  (19.6 - 156.5, n=29, last 2 years)
63.4 fps +22%
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
  (48.5 - 57.2, n=3)
52.6 fps +1%
HP ZBook Studio G7
Intel Core i9-10885H, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
52.1 (49min, 50P1 - 55max) fps
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Intel Core i9-9880H, AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
38.8 (34min - 43max) fps -26%
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Intel Core i7-10875H, NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
33.4 (29min - 37max) fps -36%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Intel Core i7-9850H, NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop)
30.9 (28min, 28P1 - 32max) fps -41%
05101520253035404550Tooltip
HP ZBook Studio G7 Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV: Ø52.1 (49-55)
low med. high ultraQHD4K
The Witcher 3 (2015) 270 181 97 52.1 34
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 156 141 137 125 71.6
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 107 93.9 79.5 63.5
Far Cry 5 (2018) 143 87 79 75 26
Death Stranding (2020) 98 85 79 76 54 29
Horizon Zero Dawn (2020) 118 76 65 56 41 23
Watch Dogs Legion (2020) 110 70 61 33 12
Dirt 5 (2020) 133 71 58 47 37 23
Assassin´s Creed Valhalla (2020) 90 60 50 44 19
Yakuza Like a Dragon (2020) 131 88 66 59 18
Immortals Fenyx Rising (2020) 105 71 63 58 24
Cyberpunk 2077 1.0 (2020) 93 52 43 36 10
Hitman 3 (2021) 178 100 86 78 27

Emissions - Decent temperatures, but loud fans

System Noise

Similar to the larger ZBook Fury 15, the HP Studio G7 is equipped with a vapor chamber cooling. These vapor chambers replace traditional heat pipes and allow better heat dissipation of the processors on a larger cooling surface. The two fans are usually turned off or very quiet at 27.9 dB(A) in light workloads, which is hardly audible at all. Once you increase the stress, like combined CPU/GPU workloads or gaming, the two fans will quickly ramp up and reach the maximum noise level of 46.3 dB(A). This constant murmur is definitely audible, but the frequency is not unpleasant. We would still recommend a headset for longer gaming sessions. We did not notice any electronic sounds like coil whine.

Noise Level

Idle
24.4 / 24.4 / 27.9 dB(A)
Load
38.8 / 46.3 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 24.4 dB(A)
HP ZBook Studio G7
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, i9-10885H, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, W-10885M, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Quadro T2000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
Quadro T1000 (Laptop), i7-9850H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
Radeon Pro 5500M, i9-9880H, Apple SSD AP1024 7171
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, i7-10875H, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR
Noise
-1%
-1%
-5%
-12%
-12%
off / environment *
24.4
26.4
-8%
26.2
-7%
28.8
-18%
29.8
-22%
30.1
-23%
Idle Minimum *
24.4
26.4
-8%
26.2
-7%
28.8
-18%
29.9
-23%
30.1
-23%
Idle Average *
24.4
26.4
-8%
26.2
-7%
28.8
-18%
29.9
-23%
30.1
-23%
Idle Maximum *
27.9
26.4
5%
26.2
6%
28.8
-3%
29.9
-7%
30.1
-8%
Load Average *
38.8
31.7
18%
39.2
-1%
36.1
7%
43
-11%
42.3
-9%
Witcher 3 ultra *
46.3
47
-2%
39
16%
45.4
2%
48.2
-4%
Load Maximum *
46.3
47
-2%
50.6
-9%
36.7
21%
46.1
-0%
42.1
9%

* ... smaller is better

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.634.730.832.629.829.230.62522.230.126.430.524.724.725.13130.534.829.83330.328.829.14029.830.426.430.72629.528.45024.525.823.928.125.433.627.56325.232.52429.220.721.421.88029.530.428.826.323.119.626.610028.326.528.827.426.724.526.412524.423.725.522.920.318.82216026.428.127.326.621.418.423.520027.727.228.92623.818.625.625026.625.928.125.719.516.825.33152825.729.425.117.715.422.940031.729.93427.620.812.823.950033.832.136.13018.413.425.363033.230.334.327.91712.82680030.527.932.425.715.511.525.2100031.328.833.626.317.211.626.6125033.730.836.829.517.111.625.9160034.231.236.729.416.91126.6200034.631.737.730.317.511.327.6250032.829.536.428.114.711.328.8315031.52834.125.413.511.826.3400029.826.933.524.512.41226.350002723.830.120.312.212.121.1630025.420.728.917.512.512.517.4800020.816.924.414.812.413.114.31000015.91418.613.412.512.513.11250013.41315.212.912.512.312.61600012.112.112.712.111.611.711.8SPL43.540.646.338.827.924.437.5N4.33.45.32.910.62.6median 28.3median 27.2median 30.1median 25.7median 17median 12.5median 25.3Delta4.74.553.93.82.43.3hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseHP ZBook Studio G7

Temperature

The device gets pretty warm under load and the metal surfaces can be uncomfortable to touch. We measure ~45 °C above the keyboard area and ~50 °C at the bottom, so you should not put the Studio G7 on you lap when you stress it. All in all, the temperatures are still reasonable and the device does not really warm up at all under light workloads.

Our stress test shows that the cooling solution is working at its limits. The graphics card is favored by the system and continues to operate at 60W, while the processor is quickly throttled down to 35W. There is no performance reduction immediately after the stress test. With this observation in mind, it is possible that the more powerful GPU options will not have a significant performance benefit in combined workloads.

Stress test
Stress test
Max. Load
 45.4 °C
114 F
45.7 °C
114 F
43.5 °C
110 F
 
 41.8 °C
107 F
43.1 °C
110 F
42.5 °C
109 F
 
 37.1 °C
99 F
33.4 °C
92 F
36.4 °C
98 F
 
Maximum: 45.7 °C = 114 F
Average: 41 °C = 106 F
47.5 °C
118 F
50.4 °C
123 F
46.9 °C
116 F
49.6 °C
121 F
50.6 °C
123 F
43.6 °C
110 F
34.6 °C
94 F
36.5 °C
98 F
33.2 °C
92 F
Maximum: 50.6 °C = 123 F
Average: 43.7 °C = 111 F
Power Supply (max.)  49.1 °C = 120 F | Room Temperature 20.1 °C = 68 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 32 °C / 90 F for the devices in the class Workstation.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.7 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 38.1 °C / 101 F, ranging from 22.2 to 69.8 °C for the class Workstation.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 50.6 °C / 123 F, compared to the average of 41.3 °C / 106 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.3 °C / 76 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 41.5 °C / 107 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 38.2 °C / 100.8 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.8 °C / 82 F (-10.4 °C / -18.8 F).
Surface temperatures stress test (top)
Surface temperatures stress test (top)
Surface temperatures stress test (bottom)
Surface temperatures stress test (bottom)

Speakers

There are four speakers (two at the bottom, two above the keyboard) and the produce a very good sound. The maximum volume is high and the result is very rich. HP's laptop can definitely keep up with Apple in this regard. The front of the base unit will vibrate a bit at high volumes though. All in all, the speakers are very enjoyable and they are well-suited for video or music playback.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.233.52524.730.43128.833.94029.532.35033.633.76321.436.88019.645.310024.554.412518.857.916018.467.920018.672.525016.867.631515.468.340012.866.350013.46363012.86280011.570.7100011.672.8125011.673.916001173.6200011.374.2250011.369.3315011.862.540001269.8500012.176.9630012.574.9800013.169.61000012.5711250012.368.81600011.763SPL24.484.3N0.663.6median 12.5median 69.3Delta2.44.636.13736.131.530.231.526.125.126.127.425.527.430.222.630.24123.74145.221.745.256.620.256.662.817.662.864.817.564.866.116.366.171.116.271.171.517.371.569.616.469.669.71569.770.114.370.172.313.972.375.813.575.87713.37774.713.474.767.413.367.467.313.567.369.213.869.271.21471.271.914.371.975.214.775.274.514.174.573.113.873.172.413.772.467.512.867.58526.28568.60.868.6median 71.1median 14.1median 71.13.51.43.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHP ZBook Studio G7Dell Precision 5550 P91F
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
HP ZBook Studio G7 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 5.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Dell Precision 5550 P91F audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 5.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (6.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Energy Management - 4K panel affects battery runtime

Power Consumption

200W PSU
200W PSU

Models of the ZBook Studio G7 with Quadro RTX GPUs are shipped with a more powerful 200W power adapter (15.1 x 7.2 x 2.3 cm), the less powerful model with a 150W adapter. The maximum consumption is 203W, but it will quickly level off at ~134W.

The idle results benefit from the integrated GPU, but the bright 4K screen still consumes quite a lot of power. If you are looking for long battery runtimes we recommend you get the Studio G7 with one of the two 1080p screens. HP optimized the power consumption very well when the device is in standby or tuned off.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.07 / 0.13 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 5.5 / 13.7 / 16.6 Watt
Load midlight 118.4 / 203.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
HP ZBook Studio G7
i9-10885H, Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, Micron 2300 1TB MTFDHBA1T0TDV, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
W-10885M, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
i7-10875H, Quadro T2000 Max-Q, SK Hynix PC601A NVMe 1TB, IPS, 3840x2400, 15.60
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.60
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M, Apple SSD AP1024 7171, IPS, 3072x1920, 16.00
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
i7-10875H, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.60
Average NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
 
Average of class Workstation
 
Power Consumption
-6%
13%
-26%
22%
-39%
-6%
-2%
Idle Minimum *
5.5
4.6
16%
5.6
-2%
13.7
-149%
3.7
33%
13.4
-144%
7.7 ?(5.5 - 11.3, n=3)
-40%
Idle Average *
13.7
13.6
1%
11.2
18%
17.5
-28%
12.1
12%
18
-31%
14.6 ?(13.7 - 16, n=3)
-7%
Idle Maximum *
16.6
21.5
-30%
18.4
-11%
20.9
-26%
17
-2%
26.1
-57%
Load Average *
118.4
113.1
4%
114
4%
77.2
35%
91.5
23%
115
3%
Witcher 3 ultra *
120
157.5
-31%
76.7
36%
103
14%
145
-21%
Load Maximum *
203.3
199
2%
134.2
34%
123.7
39%
102.3
50%
165
19%
173.5 ?(130.7 - 203, n=3)
15%

* ... smaller is better

Batttery Runtime

As expected, the battery runtimes are not great, but still decent considering the specs. The 83 Wh battery lasts for almost 8 hours in our Wi-Fi test at 150 nits, but this value drops to just 4.5 hours when we use the maximum display brightness. Video playback at 150 nits (power saver, wireless turned off) is possible for more than 10 hours. The load runtime is just little more than 1.5 hours.

Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing (Edge 89)
7h 48min
WiFi Websurfing max. Brightness
4h 30min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
10h 47min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 36min
HP ZBook Studio G7
i9-10885H, Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, 83 Wh
HP ZBook Fury 15 G7
W-10885M, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, 94 Wh
Dell Precision 5550 P91F
i7-10875H, Quadro T2000 Max-Q, 86 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), 80 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M
i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M, 99.8 Wh
Razer Blade 15 Studio Edition 2020
i7-10875H, Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q, 80 Wh
Average of class Workstation
 
Battery Runtime
-4%
0%
-6%
1%
-15%
4%
H.264
647
560
-13%
580
-10%
383
-41%
WiFi v1.3
468
515
10%
540
15%
532
14%
718
53%
341
-27%
Load
96
79
-18%
82
-15%
79
-18%
58
-40%
119
24%
Witcher 3 ultra
54

Pros

+ high-quality and compact chassis
+ fast GPUs
+ high system performance
+ very accurate DreamColor display
+ decent performance utilization
+ excellent speakers
+ comfortable input devices

Cons

- soldered RAM
- loud fans under load
- no camera shutter
- no WWAN
- slow display response times

Verdict - ZBook Studio is a very good mobile workstation

In review: HP ZBook Studio G7. Test model courtesy of HP Germany.
In review: HP ZBook Studio G7. Test model courtesy of HP Germany.

The HP ZBook Studio G7 leaves a very good impression in our review. The build quality of the case is excellent and the whole device has a very premium appearance. The Studio G7 is also one of the few slim workstations with powerful Quadro RTX GPUs from Nvidia, so the support ray tracing. The competitors from Dell and Lenovo fall behind in this respect. HP also offers the device as ZBook Create G7 with regular GeForce GPUs for content creators.

Our test unit is also equipped with the optional 4K DreamColor display, which is already very accurate out of the box. However, the new version of the DreamColor panel "only" supports the P3 gamut, while previous version supported the wider AdobeRGB gamut. The new panel does have one advantage: The iGPU of the processor can be used, which improves the power consumption. The battery runtime is still affected by the bright 4K screen. The results are okay, but versions of the Studio G7 with 1080p screens would last longer on battery power.

High-quality chassis, very good DreamColor display, and plenty of performance: The ZBook Studio G7 offers more than many rivals and is currently the best mobile workstation you can get. 

The ZBook Studio G7 also convinces in other sections: The input devices are very good, the speaker system is one of the best in the mobile segment and the port selection includes all the important stuff, including a fast SD-card reader.

there are still some drawbacks, most of them are linked to the slim construction. The vapor chamber cooling does a good job and can dissipate the heat from the components well, but the two fans are still very loud when you stress the device. The memory is also soldered, and we do not like that on a mobile workstation. HP also waived a mechanical shutter for the webcam and there is no WWAN module, not even as an option.

All in all, the ZBook Studio G7 is ahead of many rivals in terms of GPU performance. The drawbacks are also pretty small, so we can definitely recommend HP's workstation for many usage scenarios. Only real-time audio applications can be a problem due to increased DPC latencies.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Price and Availability

The ZBook Studio G7 in a less expensive SKU is available at Amazon for $2599. You can also configure your laptop on the HP website.

HP ZBook Studio G7 - 03/22/2021 v7
Andreas Osthoff

Chassis
88 / 98 → 90%
Keyboard
93%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
68 / 80 → 85%
Weight
64 / 10-66 → 96%
Battery
83 / 95 → 87%
Display
95%
Games Performance
91%
Application Performance
92%
Temperature
82 / 95 → 87%
Noise
87 / 90 → 97%
Audio
89%
Camera
38 / 85 → 44%
Average
82%
91%
Workstation - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 18 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > HP ZBook Studio G7 Laptop Review - The best mobile workstation thanks to vapor chamber and DreamColor?
Andreas Osthoff, 2021-03-23 (Update: 2021-03-23)