Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo ThinkPad T480s (i5-8250U, FHD)
Os Top 10
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros
|
iluminação: 86 %
iluminação com acumulador: 288.3 cd/m²
Contraste: 1373:1 (Preto: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.16 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93, calibrated: 4.51
ΔE Greyscale 6.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
58.9% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
37.67% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
41% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
59.2% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
39.69% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.517
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS NV140FHM-N46, TFT-LCD, 14", 1920x1080 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 B140QAN02.0, IPS, 14", 2560x1440 | Dell Latitude 7490 AUO503D (D04YD_B140HAN), IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Dell Latitude 7390 LGD059B, IPS, 13.3", 1920x1080 | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA IVO M140NVF7 R0, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00 LP140QH2-SPB1, IPS, 14", 2560x1440 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 111% | 66% | 66% | 51% | 76% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 39.69 | 87.7 121% | 66.6 68% | 67.8 71% | 61 54% | 72.8 83% |
sRGB Coverage | 59.2 | 100 69% | 96.8 64% | 95.1 61% | 87.7 48% | 97.9 65% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 41 | 99.9 144% | 67.9 66% | 67.8 65% | 62.1 51% | 74.1 81% |
Response Times | -18% | 6% | 14% | 88% | 15% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 44 ? | 59.2 ? -35% | 41.6 ? 5% | 36.8 ? 16% | 33 ? 25% | 38.4 ? 13% |
Response Time Black / White * | 34 ? | 34.4 ? -1% | 32 ? 6% | 30.4 ? 11% | 26 ? 24% | 28.4 ? 16% |
PWM Frequency | 990 | 3125 ? 216% | ||||
Screen | 55% | 20% | 26% | 34% | 16% | |
Brightness middle | 288.3 | 578 100% | 308.6 7% | 303.8 5% | 655 127% | 352 22% |
Brightness | 281 | 533 90% | 294 5% | 289 3% | 630 124% | 343 22% |
Brightness Distribution | 86 | 84 -2% | 89 3% | 86 0% | 93 8% | 91 6% |
Black Level * | 0.21 | 0.38 -81% | 0.23 -10% | 0.31 -48% | 0.56 -167% | 0.46 -119% |
Contrast | 1373 | 1521 11% | 1342 -2% | 980 -29% | 1170 -15% | 765 -44% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.16 | 1.9 69% | 6.07 1% | 2.9 53% | 3.27 47% | 3.3 46% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 18.99 | 3.8 80% | 10.58 44% | 5.79 70% | 5.92 69% | 7.3 62% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.51 | 0.8 82% | 1.67 63% | 1.72 62% | 3.22 29% | |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.3 | 3 52% | 7.3 -16% | 3.7 41% | 2.85 55% | 5.3 16% |
Gamma | 2.517 87% | 2.14 103% | 2.061 107% | 2.118 104% | 2.45 90% | 2.22 99% |
CCT | 6886 94% | 6377 102% | 7269 89% | 6323 103% | 6065 107% | 6452 101% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 37.67 | 88.8 136% | 62 65% | 63 67% | 57 51% | 68.4 82% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 58.9 | 100 70% | 97 65% | 95 61% | 88 49% | 98 66% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 49% /
57% | 31% /
27% | 35% /
32% | 58% /
47% | 36% /
28% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
34 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18.8 ms rise | |
↘ 15.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 90 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 26 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 71 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 990 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 990 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 990 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 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3672 pontos | |
PCMark 10 Score | 3771 pontos | |
Ajuda |
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell Latitude 7490 Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G | Dell Latitude 7390 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02 | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Average Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AS SSD | 32% | -64% | -16% | -12% | 32% | -115% | |
Copy Game MB/s | 1107 | 352 | 905 | 1110 | 537 ? | ||
Copy Program MB/s | 460.2 | 247.4 | 326.2 | 387.5 | 343 ? | ||
Copy ISO MB/s | 1247 | 818 | 1688 | 1412 | 1004 ? | ||
Score Total | 3048 | 3529 16% | 947 -69% | 2215 -27% | 2630 -14% | 4115 35% | 2565 ? -16% |
Score Write | 921 | 1801 96% | 357 -61% | 501 -46% | 1084 18% | 1708 85% | 587 ? -36% |
Score Read | 1435 | 1168 -19% | 391 -73% | 1158 -19% | 1070 -25% | 1623 13% | 1378 ? -4% |
Access Time Write * | 0.038 | 0.027 29% | 0.056 -47% | 0.032 16% | 0.055 -45% | 0.033 13% | 0.4637 ? -1120% |
Access Time Read * | 0.055 | 0.029 47% | 0.112 -104% | 0.063 -15% | 0.059 -7% | 0.045 18% | 0.06777 ? -23% |
4K-64 Write | 706 | 1529 117% | 248.1 -65% | 302.4 -57% | 908 29% | 1456 106% | 419 ? -41% |
4K-64 Read | 1183 | 876 -26% | 316.1 -73% | 932 -21% | 813 -31% | 1329 12% | 1112 ? -6% |
4K Write | 97.8 | 134.3 37% | 79.2 -19% | 115.2 18% | 90 -8% | 114.4 17% | 91.6 ? -6% |
4K Read | 42.09 | 52.4 24% | 26.66 -37% | 49.43 17% | 26.75 -36% | 49.81 18% | 45.1 ? 7% |
Seq Write | 1172 | 1376 17% | 294.9 -75% | 830 -29% | 856 -27% | 1382 18% | 960 ? -18% |
Seq Read | 2094 | 2396 14% | 486.2 -77% | 1761 -16% | 2300 10% | 2440 17% | 2019 ? -4% |
* ... smaller is better
3DMark 11 Performance | 1862 pontos | |
Ajuda |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 55 | 30 | 24 | 8 |
Barulho
Ocioso |
| 28.1 / 28.1 / 28.1 dB |
Carga |
| 35.5 / 41.5 dB |
| ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min: , med: , max: BK Precision 732A (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 28.1 dB(A) |
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell Latitude 7490 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G | Dell Latitude 7390 UHD Graphics 620, i7-8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02 | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00 GeForce MX150, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | -2% | 3% | 1% | -1% | -1% | |
off / environment * | 28.1 | 28.9 -3% | 28.2 -0% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -8% | 29 -3% |
Idle Minimum * | 28.1 | 28.9 -3% | 28.2 -0% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -8% | 29 -3% |
Idle Average * | 28.1 | 28.9 -3% | 28.2 -0% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -8% | 29 -3% |
Idle Maximum * | 28.1 | 32.5 -16% | 28.7 -2% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -8% | 29 -3% |
Load Average * | 35.5 | 35.1 1% | 29.9 16% | 31.5 11% | 33.8 5% | 36.5 -3% |
Load Maximum * | 41.5 | 35.1 15% | 40.2 3% | 42.7 -3% | 33.8 19% | 38.2 8% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 32.8 |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.6 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.4 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.4 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28 °C / 82.4 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-0.3 °C / -0.5 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (71.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 78% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 78% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell Latitude 7490 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 30% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.32 / 0.54 Watt |
Ocioso | 3.1 / 6.4 / 9.4 Watt |
Carga |
29.8 / 31.2 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, TFT-LCD, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | Dell Latitude 7490 i5-8350U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 7390 i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS LED, 2560x1440, 14" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -43% | 9% | -11% | -21% | -51% | |
Idle Minimum * | 3.1 | 3.8 -23% | 2 35% | 3.3 -6% | 3.8 -23% | 3.4 -10% |
Idle Average * | 6.4 | 8.9 -39% | 4.7 27% | 5.9 8% | 8.3 -30% | 7.5 -17% |
Idle Maximum * | 9.4 | 11.9 -27% | 5.7 39% | 6.2 34% | 10.7 -14% | 10.8 -15% |
Load Average * | 29.8 | 47.5 -59% | 38.4 -29% | 43.2 -45% | 35.5 -19% | 55.4 -86% |
Load Maximum * | 31.2 | 52.5 -68% | 38.9 -25% | 45.2 -45% | 37 -19% | 70.3 -125% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 34 |
* ... smaller is better
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Dell Latitude 7490 i5-8350U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | Dell Latitude 7390 i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, 57 Wh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -4% | 1% | 23% | -18% | -2% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 541 | 519 -4% | 548 1% | 664 23% | 444 -18% | 530 -2% |
Reader / Idle | 1328 | 1366 | ||||
Load | 106 | 76 |
Pro
Contra
Como qualquer bom ThinkPad (ou, mais amplamente, qualquer máquina de empresarial de sucesso), são as coisas fundamentais que são o alicerce do sucesso do T480. Ainda presentes na configuração atual, é claro, todos os elementos básicos que aplaudimos durante nossas duas últimas avaliações: sólida construção CFRP de magnésio/híbrido, dispositivos de entrada de alta qualidade, muitas portas e opções de segurança robustas. O T480s é de fato um dos principais portáteis de escritório atualmente disponíveis, rivalizado por poucos em sua classe.
No entanto, para aqueles que podem ter encontrado anteriormente um preço de quase $2.000, difícil de engolir, a configuração de hoje de (aproximadamente) $1.600 somente apresenta sacrifícios menores em termos de desempenho geral. A CPU Core i5-8250U se posiciona acima da maioria dos concorrentes equipados da mesma forma, e o ainda SSD NVMe—embora abaixo do nível do ultra veloz PM981—permanece muito rápido, apesar de tudo. A opção de GPU MX150 faz sentido para aqueles interessados em um desempenho gráfico mais rápido, o Core i7 fornece um desempenho marginalmente melhor (tanto single- e multi-core), e, talvez mais significantemente—a tela WQHD está muitas ligas acima do painel FHD de hoje, que apresenta uma severa falta de saturação de cor e oferece um brilho apenas médio. Mas para um portátil de escritório básico, muito rápido e confiável, a configuração atual do T480s encaixa no perfil perfeitamente.
O T480s é de fato um dos principais portáteis de escritório atualmente disponíveis, rivalizado por poucos em sua classe. E para aqueles que podem ter encontrado anteriormente um preço de quase $2.000, difícil de engolir, a configuração de hoje de (aproximadamente) $1.600 somente apresenta sacrifícios menores em termos de desempenho geral.
Concorrentes como a venerável série Latitude 7000 da Dell (especificamente neste caso, o 7490 e 7390), o HP EliteBook 840 G5, e o excelente X1 Carbon da própria Lenovo, todos oferecem seu singular conjunto de benefícios, sem mencionar as garantias de 3 anos no local, contra a garantia de 1 ano do T480s, mas poucos conseguem alcançar o desempenho do T480s. Pelos nossos testes, um T480s equipado com um Core i5 pode ser tão capaz (ou mais) quanto um Dell Latitude 7000 ou HP EliteBook 840 equipado com um i7. É difícil errar com qualquer um destes dispositivos, mas com o T480s, a Lenovo claramente tem um vencedor em suas mãos.
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
-
07/07/2018 v6 (old)
Steve Schardein