Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019: Workstation fino com GPU mais potente e CPU mais fraca
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Workstation (49.6 - 200, n=14, last 2 years) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Workstation (81.2 - 227, n=14, last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 84 %
iluminação com acumulador: 521 cd/m²
Contraste: 1322:1 (Preto: 0.41 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.3
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
91.1% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
58.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
63.4% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
91.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
62.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.33
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE N156HCE-GN1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000RGE NV156FHM-N61, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 7590 i5 iGPU FHD LQ156M1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M Sharp SHP148D / LQ156D1, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA AUO30EB, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, , 3840x2160, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 3% | 7% | 17% | 8% | 32% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 62.4 | 68.6 10% | 66.5 7% | 76.5 23% | 68.2 9% | 88.1 41% |
| sRGB Coverage | 91.5 | 88.7 -3% | 98 7% | 98.4 8% | 96.2 5% | 99.6 9% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 63.4 | 64.8 2% | 68.4 8% | 76.4 21% | 68.8 9% | 91.8 45% |
| Response Times | -76% | -93% | -92% | -106% | 25% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 34.4 ? | 52.8 ? -53% | 52.8 ? -53% | 48 ? -40% | 60.8 ? -77% | 2.3 ? 93% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 14 ? | 36 ? -157% | 32 ? -129% | 33.6 ? -140% | 32.8 ? -134% | 2.4 ? 83% |
| PWM Frequency | 26040 ? | 21370 ? -18% | 1020 ? -96% | 1000 -96% | 59.5 ? -100% | |
| Screen | -26% | 14% | -12% | -5% | -8% | |
| Brightness middle | 542 | 331 -39% | 588 8% | 451.7 -17% | 417 -23% | 421.2 -22% |
| Brightness | 528 | 305 -42% | 555 5% | 440 -17% | 412 -22% | 417 -21% |
| Brightness Distribution | 84 | 84 0% | 89 6% | 90 7% | 85 1% | 94 12% |
| Black Level * | 0.41 | 0.24 41% | 0.4 2% | 0.4 2% | 0.29 29% | |
| Contrast | 1322 | 1379 4% | 1470 11% | 1129 -15% | 1438 9% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.5 | 5.6 -60% | 2.5 29% | 3.11 11% | 4.4 -26% | 6.06 -73% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.8 | 9.9 -27% | 6.3 19% | 8.62 -11% | 6.7 14% | 11.89 -52% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.3 | 3 -131% | 0.6 54% | 3.07 -136% | 1.9 -46% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.8 | 6.3 -31% | 4.5 6% | 3.7 23% | 5 -4% | 2.8 42% |
| Gamma | 2.33 94% | 2.33 94% | 2.2 100% | 2.11 104% | 2.28 96% | 2.15 102% |
| CCT | 7690 85% | 7152 91% | 6836 95% | 6492 100% | 7575 86% | 6235 104% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 58.8 | 58 -1% | 63.2 7% | 69 17% | 62.3 6% | 81 38% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 91.1 | 88.6 -3% | 98 8% | 98 8% | 96 5% | 99.6 9% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -33% /
-30% | -24% /
-6% | -29% /
-21% | -34% /
-15% | 16% /
7% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 14 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 9.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 31 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 34.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 44 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 26040 Hz | ≤ 70 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 26040 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 70 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 26040 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3986 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 3897 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 5332 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 5046 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB2T0HMLB | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M SK hynix PC400 512 GB | HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02 | Average WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | -21% | -23% | -26% | -7% | 8% | |
| Write 4K | 162.2 | 108 -33% | 97.8 -40% | 102.7 -37% | 104.3 -36% | 183.3 ? 13% |
| Read 4K | 43.71 | 37.24 -15% | 41.21 -6% | 38.32 -12% | 45.23 3% | 48.2 ? 10% |
| Write Seq | 2441 | 1476 -40% | 1312 -46% | 1417 -42% | 1729 -29% | 2135 ? -13% |
| Read Seq | 1753 | 1367 -22% | 1667 -5% | 1289 -26% | 1861 6% | 2102 ? 20% |
| Write 4K Q32T1 | 397.6 | 302.4 -24% | 449.5 13% | 278.9 -30% | 509 28% | 452 ? 14% |
| Read 4K Q32T1 | 520 | 375 -28% | 327.4 -37% | 348.8 -33% | 388.5 -25% | 619 ? 19% |
| Write Seq Q32T1 | 2519 | 2433 -3% | 1385 -45% | 1895 -25% | 2813 12% | 2537 ? 1% |
| Read Seq Q32T1 | 3448 | 3493 1% | 2948 -15% | 3352 -3% | 2906 -16% | 3466 ? 1% |
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 33809 pontos | |
| 3DMark Vantage P Result | 31509 pontos | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 10211 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 76341 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 23601 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 6812 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 3006 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
| Average of class Workstation (34.9 - 298, n=22, last 2 years) | |
| Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 | |
| Average NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop) (52.7 - 62.9, n=3) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000RGE | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS | |
| HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | 4K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 280.4 | 210 | 184.7 | 72.9 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 156.2 | 94.1 | 52.7 | 30.9 | |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 134 | 115 | 113 | 106 | 47.9 |
| Rainbow Six Siege (2015) | 190.3 | 159.6 | 111.6 | 97.9 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 136.2 | 86 | 53.4 | 43.8 | |
| For Honor (2017) | 163.4 | 66.7 | 63.9 | 48.8 | |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) | 94 | 47.2 | 43.9 | 24.2 | |
| Rocket League (2017) | 246.4 | 150.7 | 117 | ||
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 77.4 | 41.9 | 31.1 | ||
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) | 93.7 | 49.3 | 40.5 | 30.7 | |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 91 | 78 | 69 | ||
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) | 88 | 46 | 40 | 35 | |
| FIFA 19 (2018) | 148 | 119.2 | 113.5 | 110.8 | |
| Assassin´s Creed Odyssey (2018) | 57 | 40 | 35 | 29 | |
| Battlefield V (2018) | 61.5 | 43.2 | 37.8 | 35 | |
| Farming Simulator 19 (2018) | 182.4 | 106.7 | 86.3 | 66.5 | |
| Apex Legends (2019) | 143.7 | 73.8 | 57.8 | 55.9 | |
| Far Cry New Dawn (2019) | 77 | 48 | 46 | 43 | |
| Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) | 185.2 | 80.7 | 63.7 | 36.3 | |
| The Division 2 (2019) | 39 | 36 | 29 | ||
| Anno 1800 (2019) | 69.6 | 52.8 | 37.2 | 20 | |
| F1 2019 (2019) | 118 | 73 | 61 | 49 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.8 / 28.8 / 28.8 dB |
| Carga |
| 36.1 / 36.7 dB |
 | ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 28.8 dB(A) | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.7 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 38.2 °C / 101 F, ranging from 22.2 to 69.8 °C for the class Workstation.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49.4 °C / 121 F, compared to the average of 41.3 °C / 106 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.6 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 36.7 °C / 98 F, compared to the device average of 32 °C / 90 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 30.1 °C / 86.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.8 °C / 82 F (-2.3 °C / -4.2 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 26% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 74% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.09 / 0.78 Watt |
| Ocioso | 13.7 / 17.5 / 20.9 Watt |
| Carga |
77.2 / 123.7 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000RGE i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS E-2176M, Quadro P2000 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB2T0HMLB, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M E-2176M, Quadro P2000, SK hynix PC400 512 GB, IGZO, 3840x2160, 15.6" | HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 i9-9980HK, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Average NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop) | Average of class Workstation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 35% | 21% | 5% | 23% | 11% | 16% | 8% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 13.7 | 4.14 70% | 7.1 48% | 9.8 28% | 6.8 50% | 6.2 55% | 8.33 ? 39% | 8.1 ? 41% |
| Idle Average * | 17.5 | 7.3 58% | 14.4 18% | 16.8 4% | 11.3 35% | 9.6 45% | 11.8 ? 33% | 12.4 ? 29% |
| Idle Maximum * | 20.9 | 11.5 45% | 14.6 30% | 16.9 19% | 14.3 32% | 21.2 -1% | 15.2 ? 27% | 17.8 ? 15% |
| Load Average * | 77.2 | 78.8 -2% | 93.9 -22% | 102.3 -33% | 78 -1% | 104.3 -35% | 86.4 ? -12% | 91.9 ? -19% |
| Load Maximum * | 123.7 | 118 5% | 88.3 29% | 114.5 7% | 126 -2% | 135.3 -9% | 131.1 ? -6% | 157.4 ? -27% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 82 | 77.9 | 76.5 | 64 | 91.7 |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), 80 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000RGE i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 80 Wh | Dell XPS 15 7590 i5 iGPU FHD i5-9300H, UHD Graphics 630, 97 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad P1-20MD002LUS E-2176M, Quadro P2000 Max-Q, 80 Wh | Dell Precision 5530 Xeon E-2176M E-2176M, Quadro P2000, 97 Wh | HP ZBook Studio G5-4QH10EA i7-8750H, Quadro P1000, 97 Wh | Average of class Workstation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 16% | 58% | -40% | 17% | 24% | 6% | |
| H.264 | 560 | 576 3% | 1053 88% | 544 -3% | 671 ? 20% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 532 | 562 6% | 844 59% | 320 -40% | 501 -6% | 582 9% | 509 ? -4% |
| Load | 79 | 110 39% | 100 27% | 110 39% | 131 66% | 80.3 ? 2% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1261 | 991 | 1036 | 927 ? |
Pro
Contra
Desde que o Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019 é apenas uma atualização de seu modelo predecessor direto, o ThinkPad P1 2018, o veredicto resulta em grande parte muito similar. As únicas diferenças estão nas especificações.
A carcaça feita de carbono, magnésio e alumínio continua sendo de alta qualidade e, em contraste com o antecessor que tinha uma tela táctil, a tampa da tela não range. A carcaça preta mate contém excelentes dispositivos de entrada e diversas conexões. Além disso, o ThinkPad P1 Gen 2 continua sendo fácil de manter e atualizar (2x SO-DIMM RAM, 2 SSDs 2280-M.2). As novidades são algumas opções de tela, como a tela Full HD HDR em nossa unidade de teste, que convence com um brilho extremamente alto de mais de 500 cd/m². É lamentável que não cubra 100% do espaço de cores sRGB. Novo também é o Quadro T1000, que como uma solução de nível de entrada para o ThinkPad P1 Gen 2 ainda é mais rápido que a Nvidia Quadro P2000 Max-Q do predecessor. Outros pontos positivos são o silencio do sistema de resfriamento e o período de garantia de três anos.
Como um ponto negativo importante no ThinkPad P1 Gen 2, o desempenho da CPU se destaca claramente. Não é abismal, mas pelo contrário: O ThinkPad P1 2019 é um portátil muito poderoso. No entanto, no geral, ainda precisamos ressaltar que o desempenho da CPU permanece abaixo do desempenho do modelo predecessor. Então, a este respeito, o novo ThinkPad P1 não é uma atualização. Outros pontos negativos incluem a falta de uma opção de WWAN, a duração medíocre da bateria, o alto preço de compra, e o irritante ruído de bobina.
Pior CPU, mas melhor GPU e tela significativamente mais brilhante: As alterações do ThinkPad P1 (2019) em comparação com seu antecessor podem ser resumidas desta maneira.
Se você pesar os pontos negativos contra as características positivas, os pontos positivos ganham claramente no ThinkPad P1 Gen 2. Os compradores receberão um workstation móvel de excelente qualidade e muito bem equipado com uma tela incrivelmente brilhante. Comparado com o ThinkPad P1 2018 e muitos workstations móveis antigos de construção similar, principalmente a Nvidia Quadro T1000 representa uma boa atualização de desempenho, enquanto o desempenho da CPU é o ponto fraco do ThinkPad P1 2019.
Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE
- 10/22/2019 v7 (old)
Benjamin Herzig
Price comparison
