Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018 (WQHD HDR, i7)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 (ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018 Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i7-8550U 4 x 1.8 - 4 GHz, Kaby Lake Refresh
Placa gráfica
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Análises do: 1100 MHz
Memória
16 GB
, LPDDR3-2133, Dual-Channel, soldada
Pantalha
14.00 polegadas 16:9, 2560 x 1440 pixel 210 PPI, B140QAN02.0, IPS, Dolby Vision HDR, Brilhante: sim
placa mãe
Intel Kaby Lake-U iHDCP 2.2 Premium PCH
Disco rígido
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, 512 GB
, 448 GB livre
peso
1.126 kg, Suprimento de energia: 356 g
Preço
1839 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
B140QAN02.0 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 578 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 532.8 cd/m² Minimum: 7.2 cd/m²iluminação: 84 %
iluminação com acumulador: 579 cd/m²
Contraste: 1521:1 (Preto: 0.38 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 0.8
ΔE Greyscale 3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
88.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
99.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
87.7% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.14
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 B140QAN02.0, , 2560x1440, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR006FGE LEN40AA (LP140QH2-SPB1), , 2560x1440, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 B140HAN03_1, , 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD AUO123D, , 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 13 7380 LGD0589, , 1920x1080, 13.3" | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 Touchbar i5 APPA034, , 2560x1600, 13.3" | Dell Latitude 7480 LG Philips LGD0557, , 1920x1080, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 LG LP140WF3, , 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -14% | -27% | -32% | -22% | -0% | -22% | -26% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 87.7 | 73.5 -16% | 61.4 -30% | 55.8 -36% | 65.5 -25% | 98.6 12% | 65.4 -25% | 66.1 -25% |
| sRGB Coverage | 100 | 98.4 -2% | 85.9 -14% | 80.7 -19% | 91.8 -8% | 100 0% | 92.3 -8% | 84.8 -15% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 99.9 | 74.5 -25% | 62.4 -38% | 57.7 -42% | 65.8 -34% | 86.5 -13% | 65.8 -34% | 62 -38% |
| Response Times | 38% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 20% | 36% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 59.2 ? | 35.6 ? 40% | 41.6 ? 30% | 39 ? 34% | 34 ? 43% | 48 ? 19% | 40.8 ? 31% | 36 ? 39% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 34.4 ? | 22.4 ? 35% | 31.6 ? 8% | 23 ? 33% | 29.6 ? 14% | 33.6 ? 2% | 31.2 ? 9% | 23.2 ? 33% |
| PWM Frequency | 119000 ? | |||||||
| Screen | -42% | -55% | -123% | -70% | 17% | -26% | -44% | |
| Brightness middle | 578 | 342 -41% | 311 -46% | 346 -40% | 317 -45% | 551 -5% | 344 -40% | 291 -50% |
| Brightness | 533 | 337 -37% | 288 -46% | 317 -41% | 295 -45% | 514 -4% | 321 -40% | 296 -44% |
| Brightness Distribution | 84 | 87 4% | 85 1% | 86 2% | 87 4% | 88 5% | 85 1% | 84 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.38 | 0.37 3% | 0.24 37% | 0.86 -126% | 0.3 21% | 0.48 -26% | 0.32 16% | 0.32 16% |
| Contrast | 1521 | 924 -39% | 1296 -15% | 402 -74% | 1057 -31% | 1148 -25% | 1075 -29% | 909 -40% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.9 | 3.6 -89% | 5.5 -189% | 8.64 -355% | 6.3 -232% | 0.8 58% | 2.6 -37% | 4.3 -126% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.8 | 7.7 -103% | 9 -137% | 13.58 -257% | 10.4 -174% | 1.4 63% | 7.8 -105% | 7.5 -97% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 0.8 | |||||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3 | 5.8 -93% | 6.2 -107% | 11.24 -275% | 7.8 -160% | 1 67% | 2.6 13% | 4.3 -43% |
| Gamma | 2.14 103% | 2.2 100% | 2.02 109% | 2.62 84% | 1.81 122% | 2.16 102% | 2.28 96% | 2.31 95% |
| CCT | 6377 102% | 6693 97% | 5950 109% | 12530 52% | 7120 91% | 6672 97% | 7050 92% | 6529 100% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 88.8 | 68.8 -23% | 55.96 -37% | 52 -41% | 61 -31% | 65.82 -26% | 55.46 -38% | |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 | 98.5 -1% | 85.77 -14% | 80 -20% | 92 -8% | 92.27 -8% | 84.77 -15% | |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -6% /
-26% | -21% /
-40% | -40% /
-84% | -21% /
-47% | 9% /
12% | -9% /
-19% | -11% /
-30% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
ℹ
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 34.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16.4 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. » 91 % 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 | ||
| 59.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 28.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 30.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 95 % 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)
ℹ
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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Sequential Read:
2327 MB/s
Sequential Write:
1808 MB/s
512K Read:
419.3 MB/s
512K Write:
1272 MB/s
4K Read:
60.6 MB/s
4K Write:
132.9 MB/s
4K QD32 Read:
340.7 MB/s
4K QD32 Write:
439.7 MB/s
Consumo de energia
| desligado |   0.31 / 0.5 Watt |
| Ocioso |  3.8 / 8.9 / 11.9 Watt |
| Carga |
47.5 / 52.5 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G4-Z2V49ET ABD i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, TN, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 13 7380 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3" | Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017 Touchbar i5 i5-7267U, Iris Plus Graphics 650, Apple SSD AP0256, IPS, 2560x1600, 13.3" | Dell Latitude 7480 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Intel SSDSCKKF256H6, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 34% | 36% | -4% | 28% | 21% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.8 | 2.9 24% | 3.2 16% | 2.8 26% | 4.32 -14% | 4.11 -8% |
| Idle Average * | 8.9 | 5.6 37% | 5.5 38% | 10.9 -22% | 6.27 30% | 7.87 12% |
| Idle Maximum * | 11.9 | 8.15 32% | 6.1 49% | 11.4 4% | 6.35 47% | 8.74 27% |
| Load Average * | 47.5 | 30.6 36% | 29.5 38% | 55.4 -17% | 29.82 37% | 30.2 36% |
| Load Maximum * | 52.5 | 31 41% | 32 39% | 57.5 -10% | 30.64 42% | 32.4 38% |
* ... smaller is better
Fomos entusiasmados com a profundidade e qualidade das cores assim que vimos pela primeira vez a cor do fundo padrão da área de trabalho. Essa impressão foi agravada assistindo alguns vídeos curtos. Finalmente, há um ThinkPad com uma tela excelente que também não decepciona em outras áreas. A tela WQHD HDR do X1 Carbon também supera o já bom painel 4K encontrado no workstation móvel ThinkPad P71. O acabamento brilhante é uma desvantagem para a tela WQHD HDR, especialmente se você planeja usar o dispositivo quando viaja. Felizmente, a Lenovo ainda oferece o painel WQHD mate do modelo do ano passado.
No entanto, estamos confusos com as mudanças nos limites de temperatura. Enquanto ao remover os limites de temperatura da CPU do modelo do ano passado beneficia o desempenho e o sistema permanece estável, as temperaturas da superfície atingem mais de 50 °C sob carga. Talvez, então, a Lenovo melhor não deveria remover completamente esses limites de temperatura. Vamos monitorar isso de perto com testes adicionais, já que não podemos concluir definitivamente depois de um pouco mais de meio dia de testes.
Estamos curiosos para ver como o novo X1 Carbon se compara com o X280 e T480s revisados que também estão atualmente em teste. Também esperamos suas perguntas e sugestões.
Price comparison
