hp pagewide pro 552dw vs.c242173.r73.cf3.rackcdn.com/hp-1791636100-4aa6-6061enw.pdf · cartridges,...

Custom Test Report

BuyersLab.com © 2012 Buyers Laboratory Inc. This report is the sole property of BLI. Duplication in any manner is illegal and strictly forbidden without written permission from BLI. Violators will be prosecuted. To purchase reprints of any BLI publication contact Buyers Laboratory Inc. at [email protected] report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication without the written permission of Buyers Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC • 051607

OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATINGS

HP PageWide Pro 552dw

Brother HL-L8350CDW

Lexmark CS410dn

Ricoh SP C320DN

Samsung ProXpress C2620DW

Reliability Excellent Very Good Good Very Good Fair

Consumables and packaging waste Excellent Fair Fair Fair Fair

TEC Energy Consumption Excellent Fair Fair Fair Fair

Color Output Quality Very Good Very Good Very Good Good Very Good

Black Output Quality Very Good Very Good Very Good Good Very Good

*Ratings in the table above indicate the rating of the product among this competitive group.

Test Objective

Buyers Laboratory LLC was commissioned by Hewlett-Packard to conduct comparative reliability, image quality, energy consumption, and consumables and packaging waste generation testing on the HP PageWide Pro 552dw inkjet model versus the Brother MFC-L8350CDW, Lexmark CS410dn, Ricoh SP C320DN and Samsung ProXpress C2620DW, which use laser technology. BLI used its proprietary image quality evaluation methods, and test methods that are consistent with the Energy Star Typical

Comparative Reliability, Energy Consumption, Image Quality and Waste Evaluation

HP PageWide Pro 552dw vs. Competitive Laser Models

MAY 2016

2 BuyersLab.com This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication without the written permission of Buyers Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC • 051607

HP PageWide Pro 552dw vs. Competitive Laser ModelsCOMPARATIVE CUSTOM TEST REPORT

Electricity Consumption (TEC) methodology for the comparative energy evaluation. For reliability testing, two of the HP Officejet Pro models and two each of the competitive models were tested for 150,000 impressions each. To evaluate consumables and packaging waste, BLI technicians collected and weighed all the spent cartridges, waste toner containers, imaging units and maintenance items used by one of each model during the course of the 150,000-impression test, as well as all related packaging for these items.


Brother HL-L8350CDW

Lexmark CS410dn

Ricoh SP C320DN


Street Price $699 $399 $449 $649 $499

Technology Ink Laser Laser Laser Laser

Maximum Monthly Duty Cycle 80,000 impressions 60,000 impressions 75,000 impressions 75,000 impressions 60,000 impressions

System Memory (Std/Max) 512 MB/512 MB 128 MB/384 MB 256 MB/2.25 GB 384 MB/768 MB 256 MB/512 MB

Print speed (Color/Black) 50 ppm/50 ppm 32 ppm/32 ppm 32 ppm/32 ppm 26 ppm/26 ppm 27 ppm/27 ppm

Standard Paper Capacity 550 sheets 250 sheets 250 sheets 600 sheets 300 sheets

Maximum Paper Capacity 1,550 sheets 800 sheets 1,100 sheets 1,100 sheets 820 sheets

Black Ink/Toner Yield 17,000 pages 4,000 pages 4,000 pages 7,200 pages 6,000 pages

Color Ink/Toner Yield 13,000 pages 3,500 pages 3,000 pages 6,600 pages 3,500 pages

Executive Summary

Over the course of BLI’s 150,000-impression test, the HP PageWide Pro 552dw demonstrated a consider-able advantage over the competitive laser models tested in several of the test categories. Not only did the HP model generate the least amount of consumables and packaging waste (up to 95.3% less by weight), but it also consumed significantly less energy than the competitive laser printers tested. In fact, the HP model consumed 49.5 percent to 71.2 percent less energy than the laser models in BLI’s energy testing.



In terms of overall reliability, the two HP test units experienced fewer total misfeeds than any of the laser models. However, while the HP models required nothing more than a quick regularly scheduled mainte-nance visit to replace a roller at end of life, one Ricoh unit experienced two image quality defects related to defective toner cartridges that were resolved by replacing the cartridges; each of the Brother units also had a defective cartridge. While the Samsung unit only required scheduled maintenance, it experienced a total of 10 misfeeds; the Lexmark models didn’t require service but experienced 9 misfeeds during testing.

Based on the results of this test, BLI feels the HP PageWide Pro 552dw delivered the best performance overall, with vastly better energy efficiency and waste generation, and reliability and image quality that is on par with or better than that of the laser competitors, making it a strong choice for general office environ-ments.

HP OfficeJet Pro X551: 700,000 Impressions and Still Going Strong

BLI began testing four of the HP OfficeJet Pro X551dw models, the previous-generation model using Page-Wide inkjet technology, in early 2014, with the initial plan of subjecting the printer to a 75,000-impres-sion test to prove the technology was stable when compared to laser printers. After the initial test, BLI extended the test, pushing the X551dw to reach the 150,000-impression mark. Testing was again extended to the 225,000 impressions and when the OfficeJet Pro X551dw reached that milestone testing continued to 500,000 impressions. At present count, two OfficeJet Pro X551dw models in BLI's lave have produced 750,000 impressions with little more than regularly scheduled maintenance, which is the equivalent of al-most 10 and a half years of use under typical conditions mid- to high-volume small workgoups (assumes the maximum average monthly page volume of 6,000 impressions). The other two models have reached 700,000 impressions, but are in need of scheduled maintenance.

Reliability Test Results

Printer reliability should be a key concern for buyers, since a reliable device helps minimize downtime, resulting in improved worker productivity. BLI conducted comparative reliability testing on all six of the test units, with each run for 150,000 impressions over 40 business days, using a variable test schedule to simulate real-world usage (for instance, varying run lengths, incorporating periods of high and low print volumes, as well as periods of inactivity).



During these BLI tests, the PageWide Pro 552dw (3 misfeeds over two units) units completed reliability testing with the fewest misfeeds. The Brother HL-L8350CDW experienced 4 misfeeds over two test units. However, while the PageWide Pro 552dw models’ routine part replacement (which reached end of life) took only 20 minutes, the Brother units were down for two hours while service was performed to replace main-tenance items. The Samsung units experienced a total of 10 misfeeds over two test units and required one scheduled maintenance visit to replace the fuser and rollers, which took about an hour. The Ricoh units experienced a total of 9 misfeeds and required scheduled maintenance during testing (replacement of the fuser and image transfer unit). The Lexmark models experienced a total of 9 misfeeds, but did not require anything beyond user maintenance during testing.

However, one Ricoh unit experienced image quality issues that required BLI technicians to replace toner cartridges that were defective (one had a faulty chip that did not prompt the operator when it was empty and the other produced excessive toner speckling down the center of pages that could not be cleared with a calibration procedure). The Brother units also each had a failed toner cartridge during testing.

Detailed Reliability Data

RELIABILITY TEST TOTALS

Unit Model Total Misfeeds Failed Toner/Ink Cartridges TOTAL Average number of

issuesScheduled

Maintenance

A HP PageWide Pro 552dw 1 0 11.5

1 (roller replacement; took about 20 mins)

B HP PageWide Pro 552dw 2 0 2 1 (roller replacement; took about 20 mins)

C Brother HL-L8350CDW 2 1 3

2

1 (fuser, transfer unit, rollers and laser unit replacement; took

about 2 hours)

D Brother HL-L8350CDW 0 1 1

1 (fuser, transfer unit, rollers and laser unit replacement; took

about 2 hours)

E Lexmark CS410dn 3 0 34.5

0

F Lexmark CS410dn 6 0 6 0

G Ricoh C320DN 0 2 2

2.5

1(fuser and transfer unit replacement; took about 1 hour)

H Ricoh C320DN 3 0 31(fuser and transfer unit replacement; took about 1 hour)

i Samsung ProXpress C2620DW 6 0 6

5

1(fuser, transfer roll-ers and transfer unit replacement; took

about 1 hour)

j Samsung ProXpress C2620DW 4 0 4

1(fuser, transfer roll-ers and transfer unit replacement; took

about 1 hour)



Exhibit A: Brother HL-L8350CDW Black Streaking (Defective Cartridge)

At 40,423 impressions on Brother Unit D and 46,659 impressions on Brother Unit C (shown above) into testing, a defective black cartridge, which had just been installed, caused streaking and speckling on output. BLI technicians replaced the black toner cartridge, which resolved the issue. Output enlarged to show detail.

Exhibit B: Ricoh SP C320DN Black Speckling (Defective Cartridge)

At 58,819 impressions into testing, a defective cartridge, which had just been installed about 150 impressions prior, caused speckling on output. BLI technicians replaced the black toner cartridge, which resolved the issue. Output enlarged to show detail.



Exhibit C: Ricoh SP C320DN Black Dropout/Fade (Defective Cartridge)

At 73,707 impressions into testing, a defective cartridge resulted in dropout and fade of black output; upon further investigation, technicians found the cartridge was empty, but the device never indicated it as such and printing was allowed to continue. BLI technicians replaced the black toner cartridge, which resolved the issue. Output enlarged to show detail.

Consumables and Packaging Waste

Total Consumables and Packaging Waste Generated at 150,000 Impressions

(Based on testing with the ISO 24712 test target)

Packaging and supplies waste can have multiple impacts on businesses, as well as on the environment. For instance, in enterprise environments, limiting supplies waste can help reduce storage space requirements and costs, lower shipping expenses, and reduce recycling/disposal expenses, while favorably impacting the environment. In BLI’s evaluation of consumables waste for one of each model tested, the HP Page-Wide Pro 552dw not only used the fewest ink cartridges and other supply items to print 150,000 pages, which means fewer interruptions to change supplies, but also produced the least amount of consumables and packaging waste over the test—in fact, by as much as 95.3% less by weight. The total weight of all cartridges and cartridge packaging required to print 150,000 impressions was just 10.3 pounds for the HP model. Total weights of all user-replaceable consumable items used (toner, drums and waste contain-ers) and associated packaging for the competitive devices ranged from 114.38 pounds for the Lexmark CS410dn to 216.85 pounds for the Ricoh SP C320DN.



Total Consumable Items Used Over 150,000 Impressions (Toner/Ink, Drums, Waste Containers, etc.)

Total Consumable Items Used Over 150,000 Impressions (Toner/Ink, Drums, Waste Containers, etc.)

ModelBlack Cart-ridges

Cyan Cart-ridges

Magenta Cart-ridges

Yellow Cart-ridges

Waste Tanks

Imaging Unit Kits

Transfer Belt Units

Fuser Units

Laser Units

P/U Units

Transfer Roller Totals

HP PageWide Pro 552dw 7 9 9 10 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 37

Brother HL-8350CDW 35 35 39 36 0 6 1 1 1 1 0 155

Lexmark CS410dn 38 44 41 41 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 173

Ricoh SP C320DN 21 24 24 21 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 93


19 33 34 32 8 0 1 1 0 1 1 130



Total Consumables and Packaging Waste Over 150,000 Impressions

ModelTotal Waste Weight (Drum Units,

Toner/Ink Cartridges, Waste Toner and Packaging) in Pounds

Percent Less Waste Generated by the PageWide Pro 552dw

Percent More Waste Generated by Laser Models

HP PageWide Pro 552dw 10.3 -- --

Brother HL-8350CDW 186.34 94.47% 1709.13%

Lexmark CS410dn 114.38 90.99% 1010.49%

Ricoh SP C320DN 216.85 95.25% 2005.34%

Samsung ProXpress C2620DW 194.36 94.70% 1786.99%

Note: Weights above include all user replaceable consumable items used (toner, drums, waste containers, etc.) and associated packaging.



The HP PageWide Pro 552dw generated 10.30 pounds of waste, consisting of 35 cartridges, a waste tank and print bar, plus associated packaging.

The Brother HL-L8350CDW generated 186.34 pounds of waste, consisting of 145 cartridges, 6 imaging unit kits and various maintenance items (fuser unit, laser unit, transfer belt, etc.), plus associated packaging.

The Lexmark CS410dn generated 114.38 pounds of waste, consisting of 164 toner cartridges, 2 drum unit kits and 7 waste containers, plus associated packaging.

The Ricoh SP C320DN generated 216.85 pounds of waste, consisting of 90 toner cartridges, one waste container, one maintenance kit and one image transfer kit, plus associated packaging.

The Samsung ProXpress C2620DW generated 194.36 pounds of waste, consisting of 118 cartridges, 8 waste tanks and various maintenance items (fuser, transfer belt and rollers, etc.), plus associated packaging.

^



Comparative Energy Consumption Testing

As corporate responsibility to the environment has moved to the forefront in many industries, many compa-nies have adopted and continue to enforce policies to maximize the energy efficiency of systems and devices within the enterprise, including PCs and printers. Because a printer's energy consumption is a significant part of the printing cost of a device that not only affects the company’s bottom line, but also its environmental impact, HP commissioned BLI to conduct a comparative energy-consumption evaluation using test methods consistent with the ENERGY STAR Typical Electricity Consumption (TEC) method, with the energy consumed recorded as kilo-Watt hours (kWh). The test measures the energy that is consumed over a specified period, during which each device prints multiple single-sided sets of a 12-page black document and also spends time in sleep mode, warm-up mode and ready mode. For the three models comprising this group, typical usage is assumed as being 288 pages per day. The values that are reported for each device have been calculated to reflect one week’s worth of electricity consumption. Note that calculations are based on single devices only, and values would increase as the number of devices deployed in the fleet increases.

• Based on BLI’s testing, it is projected that during a typical week of usage the HP PageWide Pro 552dw will consume the least amount of energy, at just 0.728 kWh, making it the most energy efficient model of the group.

• The Samsung ProXpressC2620DW came in second place, consuming 98.2 percent more energy than the HP model

• The Brother HL-8350CDW consumed 113.6 percent more energy than the HP model.

• The Lexmark CS410dn consumed 180.4 percent more energy than the HP model.

• The least energy efficient model of the group, the Ricoh SP C320DN, consumed 247.7 percent more energy than the HP model.

Percent Difference in Weekly Energy Consumption Compared to HP

Typical Weekly Electricity Consumption (kWh)

Percent Less Energy Consumed by HP PageWide Pro 552dw

Percent More Energy Consumed by laser models

HP PageWide Pro 552dw 0.728 -- --

Brother HL-8350CDW 1.555 53.20% 113.60%

Lexmark CS410dn 2.041 64.30% 180.40%

Ricoh SP C320DN 2.531 71.20% 247.70%

Samsung ProXpress C2620DW 1.443 49.50% 98.20%



Image Quality

Business users want quality, consistent output, and to get the results they expect the first time; if users have to reprint a page because colors are wrong or quality is lacking, time and resources have been wasted. BLI evaluated image quality of all the devices using the ISO 24712 test suite on 24-lb. multipurpose paper with ColorLok technology at 10,000-page intervals throughout testing.

Although the HP and Lexmark models both produced very good overall black and color output, the Lexmark had a slight advantage, due in part to higher solid density readings and brighter color output (technicians noted the HP devices’ color output, though very good, was not as vibrant as that produced by the Lexmark model). Despite some minor overspray and jagged edges typical of ink technology, the HP’s black output was very good overall and certainly suitable for general office use. The Samsung and the Brother models provided the next best image quality, followed by the Ricoh model, which received the lowest overall score.

In terms of consistency of output over time, BLI found that the HP model showed less variation in density readings for all four colors compared to all four laser models tested. Over the course of testing, BLI techni-cians noted that a visual examination showed that black and color output from the HP model remained very consistent; black output from the Ricoh model had inconsistent coverage and became even more mottled and blotchy as testing progressed Technicians also noted pastel shades produced by the Lexmark model became inaccurate (blue shifted toward cyan).



Maximum Density Variance Over 150,000 Impressions


Maximum Density Variance

Brother HL-L8350CDW


Lexmark CS410dn Maximum Density

Variance

Ricoh Aficio SPC320dn




Cyan 6.12% 13.54% 23.81% 10.53% 31.13%

Magenta 6.03% 21.50% 25.00% 13.56% 16.52%

Yellow 5.81% 27.03% 22.47% 7.14% 17.50%

Black 5.22% 20.16% 16.42% 5.59% 26.36%

Maximum density variance is calculated as a percentage of change in density readings from the highest to the lowest, based on density readings taken at the start of testing and every 10,000 pages throughout the test period. A smaller number indicates less fluctuation in output.

HP PageWide Pro 552dw Density Readings

Brother HL-L8350CDW Density Readings



Lexmark CS410dn Density Readings

Ricoh SP C320DN Density Readings



Exhibit D: Ricoh SP C320DN Mottled Black Output

Early in testing, BLI technicians noted mottling in solid black areas of page 5 of the test target used for the test. Output enlarged to show detail.

Exhibit E: Ricoh SP C320DN Mottled Black Output

When the black cartridge had about 10% life remaining, BLI technicians noted more severe mottling in solid black areas. Output enlarged to show detail.



Exhibit F: HP PageWide Pro 552dw Color Print Samples

Colors produced by the PageWide model were accurately produced, but were not as vibrant as the output from the Lexmark model; skin tones had a slight red undertone.

Exhibit G: Brother HL-L8350CDW Color Print Samples

Brother's color output, though most colors were accurately produced, exhibited slightly reddish skin tones and solid blue output had a purple undertone.

Exhibit H: Lexmark CS410dn Color Print Samples

Color output from the Lexmark model was vibrant, though skintones had a slight red undertone. In addition, color production became more inaccurate, as blue output shifted toward cyan as testing progressed.



Exhibit I: Ricoh SP C320DN Color Print Samples

Color saturation in output from the Ricoh model was not as bright as that from the other models. In addition, some pastel shades and back-grounds were washed out and colors inaccurately produced. Skin tones were natural looking at the start of testing, though they appeared more reddish as testing progressed.

Exhibit J: Samsung ProXpress C2620DW Color Print Samples

Colors in output from the Samsung model were not as bright as that from the Lexmark model, and backgrounds tended to bea bit to darkover-all. Skin tones were natural looking at the start of testing, though they appeared more reddish as testing progressed. Some black speckling/spotting was also visble on some color output.



Exhibit K: HP PageWide Pro 552dw Black Print Samples (magnified to show detail)

Black output from the HP model exhibited jagged edges and some ink overspray when viewed under magnification. To the unaided eye, text was dark, but not as crisp as that produced by the laser models.

Exhibit L: Brother HL-L8350CDW Black Print Samples (magnified to show detail)

Black output from the Brother model showed some jagged edges when text was magnified.

Exhibit M: Lexmark CS410dn Black Print Samples (magnified to show detail)

Black output from the Lexmark model was dark and fully formed, with above-average sharpness and smoothness.



Exhibit N: Ricoh SP C320DN Black Print Samples (magnified to show detail)

Black output from the Ricoh model was dark, but not crisp, due to toner overspray. At several points throughout testing, particularly as the black cartridge neared end of life, toner coverage was less consistent, with black output becoming visibly blotchy.

Exhibit O: Samsung ProXpress C2620DW Black Print Samples (magni-fied to show detail)

Black output from the Lexmark model was dark and fully formed, with above-average sharpness and smoothness.



Appendix A: Supporting Test Data

Section 1: Relibility Data

Detailed Breakdown of Additional Issues Encountered

Unit Model Meter Issues Encountered

A HP PageWide Pro 552dw

40,22557,44166,729

Performed three head cleaning procedures: Thin voids in output; technician performed head cleaning to resolve (routine maintenance).

B HP PageWide Pro 552dw

33,91645,66051,65656,469

Performed four head cleaning procedures:Thin voids in output; technician performed head cleaning to resolve (routine maintenance).

C Brother HL-L8350CDW 45,923

After replacing the Black Toner Cartridge, the technician noticed dark streaks and speckling down the right side of the page. The technician removed the black cartridge and replaced with a new one, the problem was resolved

D Brother HL-L8350CDW

7,828 BLI technician noted magenta dots along the right side of the page. The dots cleared within 200 prints

40,428

After replacing the Black Toner Cartridge, the technician noticed dark streaks and speckling down the right side of the page. The technician removed the black cartridge and replaced with a new one, the problem was resolved

G Ricoh Aficio SP C320DN

58,819

After changing black cartridge, technicians ran about 150 pages, after which black toner speckles were visible down the center of the page. Calibration did not resolve problem. Replacing the black cartridge, which was defective, resolved the problem.

73,707Black print completely faded due to the cartridge being empty but no message appeared on the LCD. BLI’s test technician replaced the depleted cartridge, which resolved the problem.

JSamsung ProXpress 2620DW

48,429 Error message appeared on the LCD : “GUUI has been terminated (673) Please Restart.” BLI technician restarted the device and it returned to normal state



Section 2: Image Quality Data

Image Quality Scores Over 150,000 Impressions*

HP PageWide Pro X552dw

0 10K 20K 30K 40K 50K 60K 70K 80K 90K 100K 110K 120K 130K 140K 150K Average Total

Text 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Line Art 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Solids 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 80

Color Business Graphics

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Color Photographic Output

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Density Range 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4.9 79

Total 415

Numbers in the chart above indicate BLI’s standard image quality ratings, where 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Good, 2 = Fair and 1 = Poor.

Brother HL-L8350CDW


Text 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.6 57

Line Art 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Solids 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4.4 70


4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64


4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 64

Density Range 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4.5 72

Total 391


Lexmark CS410dn 0 10K 20K 30K 40K 50K 60K 70K 80K 90K 100K 110K 120K 130K 140K 150K Average Total

Text 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3.94 63

Line Art 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.00 64

Solids 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5.00 80


5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.13 66


4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.00 64

Density Range 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5.00 80

Total 417




Samsung Pro Xpress C2620DW


Text 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.0 64

Line Art 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.1 65

Solids 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.1 65


4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.0 64


5 4 4 4 4 G 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.1 62

Density Range 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4.4 71

Total 391


Ricoh SP C320DN


Text 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3.19 51

Line Art 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3.69 59

Solids 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3.69 59


3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.00 48


4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.13 50

Density Range 5 5 5 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4.38 70

Total 337


Density Readings Over 150,000 Impressions

HP PageWide Pro X552dw

0 10K 20K 30K 40K 50K 60K 70K 80K 90K 100K 110K 120K 130K 140K 150K

Cyan 1.01 0.98 1.02 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.04 1.02 1.01 1.00 1.01 1.01 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.00

Magenta 1.23 1.20 1.19 1.21 1.20 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.21 1.19 1.17 1.17 1.21 1.21 1.16 1.17

Yellow 0.89 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.89 0.88 0.91 0.88 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.91 0.88 0.89

Black 1.38 1.34 1.36 1.39 1.40 1.38 1.39 1.39 1.40 1.35 1.38 1.38 1.37 1.39 1.41 1.37

The higher the number the darker the density.



Density Readings Over 150,000 Impressions

Brother HL-L8350CDW


Cyan 0.96 0.99 0.96 1.04 1.00 1.03 1.09 1.03 1.09 1.05 0.99 1.00 1.04 1.01 1.01 0.99

Magenta 1.12 1.30 1.21 1.25 1.26 1.22 1.20 1.29 1.24 1.21 1.07 1.28 1.22 1.26 1.20 1.25

Yellow 0.74 0.89 0.74 0.94 0.92 0.91 0.85 0.90 0.84 0.83 0.77 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.77

Black 1.29 1.44 1.43 1.50 1.50 1.47 1.51 1.50 1.47 1.42 1.50 1.45 1.41 1.44 1.47 1.55


Lexmark CS410dn 0 10K 20K 30K 40K 50K 60K 70K 80K 90K 100K 110K 120K 130K 140K 150K

Cyan 1.36 1.40 1.42 1.39 1.45 1.37 1.35 1.44 1.41 1.42 1.45 1.46 1.44 1.33 1.41 1.47

Magenta 1.18 1.30 1.34 1.26 1.26 1.25 1.25 1.33 1.31 1.29 1.31 1.33 1.32 1.21 1.30 1.34

Yellow 1.05 1.03 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.01 1.04 1.05 1.03 1.03 1.05 1.05 0.98 1.05 1.04

Black 1.44 1.46 1.51 1.50 1.44 1.48 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.49 1.45 1.47 1.50 1.43 1.45 1.51


Ricoh SP C320DN


Cyan 1.06 1.22 1.09 1.30 1.18 1.09 1.20 1.16 1.26 1.17 1.06 1.19 1.16 1.39 1.28 1.34

Magenta 1.17 1.21 1.31 1.28 1.18 1.22 1.26 1.21 1.16 1.15 1.20 1.34 1.22 1.34 1.20 1.16

Yellow 0.81 0.86 0.88 0.81 0.91 0.80 0.86 0.82 0.89 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.84 0.92 0.83 0.91

Black 1.43 1.48 1.40 1.46 1.36 1.29 1.45 1.46 1.31 1.53 1.31 1.63 1.47 1.34 1.37 1.36


Samsung ProX-press C2620DW


Cyan 0.93 1.00 0.86 0.94 0.97 0.97 0.98 1.04 0.94 0.95 0.91 0.96 0.88 0.99 0.84 0.91

Magenta 1.18 1.16 1.31 1.30 1.39 1.39 1.23 1.45 1.26 1.20 1.19 1.28 1.19 1.36 1.30 1.32

Yellow 0.89 0.95 0.96 0.97 1.02 1.08 0.91 1.09 0.98 0.96 1.00 1.01 0.99 1.06 0.93 1.03

Black 1.36 1.45 1.50 1.49 1.44 1.53 1.52 1.55 1.47 1.42 1.55 1.34 1.44 1.45 1.56 1.47




Appendix B: Test Methodology

Test Environment

Testing was conducted under ambient conditions of 68F to 78F and 45% RH (+/- 10%), monitored daily by an Extech RH520 temperature/humidity digital recorder and Honeywell Model 61 Seven-Day Temperature/Humidity Chart Recorder, in BLI’s test facility located at 80 Little Falls Road, Fairfield, NJ (U.S.A).

Test Equipment

BLI’s dedicated test network, consisting of Windows 2003 servers, Windows 7 Professional workstations, 10BaseT/100BaseTX network switches and CAT5 cabling, Yokogawa WT210 power meter, Powerstat voltage regulator and ESP D5143NT Transient Voltage Surge Supressor.

Test Procedures

For electricity consumption testing, a method similar to and consistent with ENERGY STAR Typical Electricity Consumption (TEC) principles was used to determine typical weekly energy usage for each device, which is based on printing 288 pages per day, with the device spending the remainder of the time in idle and sleep modes after printing is completed. The Yokagawa WT210 power meter was used to measure energy usage during all modes for each device. Reliability testing was performed using GP Spectrum and/or Boise X9 20-lb. bond and GP 30% recycled paper. Image quality was evaluated on HP ColorLok 96 brightness, 24-lb. bond. For waste calculation, BLI technicians collected and weighed all packaging and cartridges, drums, waste containers and maintenance items generated during a 150,000-impression test.

About Buyers Laboratory

Since 1961, Buyers Laboratory LLC (BLI) has been the leading global independent office-equipment test lab. In addition to publishing the industry’s most comprehensive and accurate test reports on office document imaging devices, each representing months of exhaustive hands-on testing in BLI’s US and UK laboratories, the company has been the leading source for extensive runnability testing on imaging media and consumables, as well as exten-sive specifications/pricing databases on MFPs, printers, scanners and fax machines. BLI also has a long-standing reputation for being the industry’s most trustworthy and complete source for quality testing services and global competitive intelligence.

In addition to testing over 200 office document imaging devices and related consumables annually for its subscrib-ers, BLI provides consulting services to buyers and a range of private testing services that include document imag-ing device beta and pre-launch testing, performance certification testing, consumables testing (including toner, ink, fusers and photoconductors), solutions evaluations, and imaging media runnability testing.

For more information on BLI, call (973) 797-2100, visit www.buyerslab.com, or email [email protected].

hp pagewide pro 552dw vs.c242173.r73.cf3.rackcdn.com/hp-1791636100-4aa6-6061enw.pdf · cartridges,...

Documents