Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo ThinkPad T570 (Core i5, Full HD)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Fujitsu LifeBook U757 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE | |
| HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE | |
| HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET | |
| Fujitsu LifeBook U757 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 89 %
iluminação com acumulador: 257 cd/m²
Contraste: 1092:1 (Preto: 0.24 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
65.4% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
42.04% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
45.66% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
65.6% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
44.08% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.32
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE N156HCA-EAA, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) 2880x1800, 15.4" | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 LP156WF6-SPP1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET AUO35ED, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) Sharp SHP1453 LQ156M1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad T560-20FH001FGE LTN156HL09901, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 38% | 29% | 54% | -7% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage | 44.08 | 65.8 49% | 56.8 29% | 68.9 56% | 40.96 -7% | |
| sRGB Coverage | 65.6 | 84.8 29% | 83.7 28% | 98.9 51% | 61.3 -7% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 45.66 | 62 36% | 58.7 29% | 70.9 55% | 42.36 -7% | |
| Response Times | 95% | -7% | -28% | -91% | -70% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 41.6 ? | 47.3 ? -14% | 36 ? 13% | 47.2 ? -13% | 54 ? -30% | 58 ? -39% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 20.8 ? | 31.2 ? -50% | 26.4 ? -27% | 15.2 ? 27% | 52.4 ? -152% | 36 ? -73% |
| PWM Frequency | 26040 ? | 117000 ? 349% | 199.2 ? -99% | 220 ? -99% | ||
| Screen | 46% | 7% | -68% | 13% | -29% | |
| Brightness middle | 262 | 483 84% | 313 19% | 338 29% | 400 53% | 243 -7% |
| Brightness | 245 | 465 90% | 294 20% | 341 39% | 392 60% | 220 -10% |
| Brightness Distribution | 89 | 92 3% | 84 -6% | 90 1% | 89 0% | 84 -6% |
| Black Level * | 0.24 | 0.33 -38% | 0.27 -13% | 0.81 -238% | 0.26 -8% | 0.27 -13% |
| Contrast | 1092 | 1464 34% | 1159 6% | 417 -62% | 1538 41% | 900 -18% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.5 | 1.4 69% | 4.5 -0% | 10.9 -142% | 4.9 -9% | 7.49 -66% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.5 | 3 71% | 10.5 -0% | 18.7 -78% | 11 -5% | 15.13 -44% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.5 | 1.5 57% | 4 -14% | 13.3 -280% | 7.2 -106% | 7.5 -114% |
| Gamma | 2.32 95% | 2.34 94% | 2.24 98% | 2.11 104% | 2.11 104% | 2.35 94% |
| CCT | 6524 100% | 6650 98% | 6387 102% | 16030 41% | 6911 94% | 6115 106% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 42.04 | 55.3 32% | 53.8 28% | 64.2 53% | 38.9 -7% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 65.4 | 84.74 30% | 83.4 28% | 98.9 51% | 60.9 -7% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 71% /
60% | 13% /
12% | -22% /
-42% | -8% /
7% | -35% /
-33% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 20.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 6.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 14 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. » 42 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 41.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19.6 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. » 64 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 26040 Hz | ≤ 40 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 26040 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 40 % 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 | 3523 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4380 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4606 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) Apple SSD SM0256L | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET Samsung PM951 NVMe MZVLV256 | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | -17% | -46% | -28% | -92% | 20% | |
| Read Seq | 1318 | 1298 -2% | 509 -61% | 1245 -6% | 123 -91% | 1760 34% |
| Write Seq | 1166 | 1343 15% | 488.4 -58% | 298.6 -74% | 74.2 -94% | 1666 43% |
| Read 512 | 933 | 842 -10% | 414.3 -56% | 673 -28% | 101.7 -89% | 832 -11% |
| Write 512 | 860 | 945 10% | 321.7 -63% | 298.8 -65% | 42.51 -95% | 1064 24% |
| Read 4k | 56.6 | 9.8 -83% | 36.43 -36% | 41.79 -26% | 10.84 -81% | 53.2 -6% |
| Write 4k | 130.6 | 13 -90% | 88.4 -32% | 138.4 6% | 1.021 -99% | 167.4 28% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 510 | 630 24% | 402.8 -21% | 495 -3% | 69.8 -86% | 630 24% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 426.4 | 443 4% | 256.7 -40% | 297.5 -30% | 1.057 -100% | 533 25% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1533 pontos | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 51988 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 5741 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 774 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomb Raider (2013) | 66.9 | 33.6 | 19.7 | 9.5 |
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 41.7 | 24.4 | 20.2 | 6.6 |
| Battlefield 4 (2013) | 30.3 | 25.2 | 15.5 | 4.8 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 13.1 | |||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 10.5 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 29.3 / 29.3 / 31.2 dB |
| Carga |
| 35.1 / 38.7 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: 29.3 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) 6700HQ, Radeon Pro 450 | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile | Lenovo ThinkPad T560-20FH001FGE 6200U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -5% | 7% | 6% | -14% | 2% | |
| off / environment * | 29.3 | 30.4 -4% | 28.2 4% | 29 1% | 30.3 -3% | 29 1% |
| Idle Minimum * | 29.3 | 30.6 -4% | 28.2 4% | 29 1% | 31.6 -8% | 30.8 -5% |
| Idle Average * | 29.3 | 30.6 -4% | 28.2 4% | 29 1% | 31.6 -8% | 30.8 -5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 31.2 | 30.6 2% | 28.2 10% | 29 7% | 33.4 -7% | 30.8 1% |
| Load Average * | 35.1 | 34.7 1% | 33.3 5% | 31 12% | 47.8 -36% | 33.1 6% |
| Load Maximum * | 38.7 | 46.3 -20% | 34 12% | 33.4 14% | 47.8 -24% | 34.4 11% |
* ... smaller is better
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.5 °C / 103 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 48.3 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.1 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (33.6 °C / 92.5 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.6 °C / 81.7 F (-6 °C / -10.8 F).
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) 6700HQ, Radeon Pro 450 | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620 | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile | Lenovo ThinkPad T560-20FH001FGE 6200U, HD Graphics 520 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 1% | -2% | 9% | -12% | 1% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 39.5 | 43 -9% | 42 -6% | 37 6% | 47.6 -21% | 33.3 16% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 48.3 | 40 17% | 38.8 20% | 41.1 15% | 42.1 13% | 40.1 17% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 24.5 | 26 -6% | 29.2 -19% | 23.2 5% | 29.9 -22% | 27.4 -12% |
| Idle Bottom * | 25.3 | 25 1% | 26.3 -4% | 23.2 8% | 29.8 -18% | 29.6 -17% |
* ... smaller is better
Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 13% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.24 / 0.33 Watt |
| Ocioso | 3.6 / 7.7 / 8.2 Watt |
| Carga |
30.8 / 46.1 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) 6700HQ, Radeon Pro 450, 2880x1800 | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080 | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 1920x1080 | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 1920x1080 | Lenovo ThinkPad T560-20FH001FGE 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 1920x1080 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -47% | 4% | 12% | -93% | 7% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.6 | 2.9 19% | 3.96 -10% | 3.58 1% | 6.6 -83% | 4.3 -19% |
| Idle Average * | 7.7 | 9.7 -26% | 7.74 -1% | 5.97 22% | 9 -17% | 7.3 5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 8.2 | 10.1 -23% | 8.64 -5% | 6.81 17% | 10.7 -30% | 7.8 5% |
| Load Average * | 30.8 | 65 -111% | 28.8 6% | 29.4 5% | 77.5 -152% | 26.3 15% |
| Load Maximum * | 46.1 | 89.5 -94% | 32 31% | 39.7 14% | 130 -182% | 32 31% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 56 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016 (2.6 GHz, 450) 6700HQ, Radeon Pro 450, 76 Wh | Fujitsu LifeBook U757 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | HP EliteBook 850 G4-Z2W86ET i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 51 Wh | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 56 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T560-20FH001FGE 6200U, HD Graphics 520, 67 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -17% | -3% | -0% | -45% | 12% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1167 | 1081 -7% | 565 -52% | 1085 -7% | ||
| H.264 | 587 | 516 -12% | 637 9% | 571 -3% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 454 | 602 33% | 440 -3% | 530 17% | 334 -26% | 661 46% |
| Load | 201 | 55 -73% | 160 -20% | 84 -58% | 226 12% |
Pro
Contra
This year's update of the Lenovo ThinkPad T570 is a very good business notebook in many areas, but A atualização deste ano do Lenovo ThinkPad T570 é um portátil empresarial muito bom em muitas áreas, mas também existem alguns bugs, que esperamos sejam resolvidos em breve.
Realmente gostamos do chassi mais compacto. A Lenovo voltou ao esquema de cores escuras para os mais recentes modelos da série T e conseguiu projetar uma carcaça menor. Isto é particularmente notável nos marcos mais estreitos da tela. A estabilidade e a qualidade de construção não sofreram. No entanto, o acesso aos componentes é bastante complicado, o qual já acontecia com o irmão menor ThinkPad T470.
Outras vantagens incluem os excelentes dispositivos de entrada, embora algumas teclas agora sejam mais estreitas, devido à nova carcaça. Porém, ainda não há reclamos em termos de experiência de digitação. O touchpad também melhorou, em comparação com o modelo anterior. A Lenovo não faz compromissos em termos de recursos de segurança, desempenho wireless, variedade de portas ou a duração da bateria.
Boa carcaça, boa conectividade, e bons dispositivos de entrada – painel Full HD medíocre e engasgos ocasionais do desempenho: O Lenovo ThinkPad T570 poderia ser um muito bom portátil empresarial com alguns ajustes finos.
Uma fraqueza não mudou, dado que a Lenovo ainda utiliza um painel Full HD medíocre. Baseia-se na tecnologia IPS e mais brilhante em comparação com o predecessor ThinkPad T560 com ~250 nits, mas ele não tem chances em contra dos outros rivais. A gama de cores também é limitada.
Ficamos muito surpresos pelos ocasionais engasgos do desempenho e pelas temperaturas. Os problemas de desempenho foram raros, portanto, suspeitamos que seja um problema de software. O processador ULV pode utilizar todo seu potencial, em teoria, mas, às vezes é retrasado e também atingira seus limites de temperatura depois de um tempo. A limitação significante do desempenho com a bateria é desnecessária, porque o processador não consegue manter sua velocidade base. Esperamos que o problema seja resolvido em breve. Como com o ThinkPad T470s, no entanto, vamos deduzir 3% de sua avaliação final, até que isso ocorra. Portanto, o ThinkPad T570 perde uma avaliação "muito boa" no estado atual.
Lenovo ThinkPad T570-20H90002GE
- 04/15/2017 v6 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
Price comparison
