Breve Análise do Portátil Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019: A segunda geração do principal portátil multimídia da Lenovo piorou
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
87.1 % v7 (old) | 02/2020 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile | 1.7 kg | 18.7 mm | 15.60" | 3840x2160 | |
87.8 % v7 (old) | 08/2019 | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 i9-9980HK, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile | 2 kg | 17 mm | 15.60" | 3840x2160 | |
89.7 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M | 2 kg | 16.2 mm | 16.00" | 3072x1920 | |
87.3 % v7 (old) | 11/2019 | Acer ConceptD 7 CN715-71-743N i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile | 2.2 kg | 17.9 mm | 15.60" | 3840x2160 | |
86 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Lenovo Yoga C940-15IRH i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | 2 kg | 19.7 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
85.2 % v7 (old) | 11/2019 | MSI Prestige 15 A10SC i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | 1.7 kg | 16 mm | 15.60" | 3840x2160 |
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
Size Comparison
SD Card Reader | |
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
MSI Prestige 15 A10SC (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
Average of class Multimedia (18.4 - 201, n=60, last 2 years) | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
MSI Prestige 15 A10SC (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Average of class Multimedia (25.8 - 266, n=59, last 2 years) |
|
iluminação: 90 %
iluminação com acumulador: 465 cd/m²
Contraste: 1289:1 (Preto: 0.36 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 0.8
ΔE Greyscale 7.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
85.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
96.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.1% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
82% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.17
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE NE156QUM-N66, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M APPA044, IPS, 3072x1920, 16" | Acer ConceptD 7 CN715-71-743N AU Optronics AUO31EB, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo Yoga C940-15IRH LG Philips LP156WFC-SPU1, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Prestige 15 A10SC Sharp LQ156D1JW42, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000XGE B156ZAN03.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 1% | 3% | -22% | -1% | 3% | ||
Display P3 Coverage | 82 | 88.1 7% | 85.7 5% | 61.5 -25% | 82 0% | 86.3 5% | |
sRGB Coverage | 99.1 | 99.6 1% | 100 1% | 92.7 -6% | 98.3 -1% | 100 1% | |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 96.9 | 91.8 -5% | 99 2% | 63.6 -34% | 96.2 -1% | 99.4 3% | |
Response Times | 94% | -14% | -3% | -12% | -33% | -19% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 46.4 ? | 2.3 ? 95% | 52.4 ? -13% | 49 ? -6% | 48.4 ? -4% | 60 ? -29% | 61.6 ? -33% |
Response Time Black / White * | 30.4 ? | 2.4 ? 92% | 34.9 ? -15% | 30 ? 1% | 36.4 ? -20% | 41.2 ? -36% | 32 ? -5% |
PWM Frequency | 59.5 ? | 131700 | 26040 ? | ||||
Screen | -0% | 17% | 18% | 3% | -23% | 4% | |
Brightness middle | 464 | 421.2 -9% | 519 12% | 365 -21% | 484.8 4% | 464.5 0% | 396 -15% |
Brightness | 448 | 417 -7% | 477 6% | 357 -20% | 463 3% | 451 1% | 380 -15% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 94 4% | 86 -4% | 84 -7% | 82 -9% | 92 2% | 90 0% |
Black Level * | 0.36 | 0.39 -8% | 0.275 24% | 0.26 28% | 0.5 -39% | 0.28 22% | |
Contrast | 1289 | 1331 3% | 1327 3% | 1865 45% | 929 -28% | 1414 10% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.2 | 6.06 -44% | 2.28 46% | 0.99 76% | 4.5 -7% | 3.36 20% | 4 5% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11.4 | 11.89 -4% | 6.54 43% | 1.89 83% | 7.55 34% | 7.06 38% | 7.6 33% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 0.8 | 0.86 -8% | 1.01 -26% | 1.19 -49% | 3.42 -328% | 0.9 -13% | |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.2 | 2.8 61% | 0.9 87% | 1.29 82% | 5.7 21% | 1.3 82% | 6.1 15% |
Gamma | 2.17 101% | 2.15 102% | 2145 0% | 2.2 100% | 2.45 90% | 2.14 103% | 2.25 98% |
CCT | 6345 102% | 6235 104% | 6572 99% | 6548 99% | 6101 107% | 6596 99% | 7786 83% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 85.2 | 81 -5% | 78 -8% | 88 3% | 58.7 -31% | 84.8 0% | 88.5 4% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99 | 99.6 1% | 100 1% | 92.8 -6% | 98.3 -1% | 100 1% | |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 32% /
14% | 2% /
12% | 6% /
13% | -10% /
-4% | -19% /
-20% | -4% /
1% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
30.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17.2 ms rise | |
↘ 13.2 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. » 81 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
46.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise | |
↘ 24.4 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. » 78 % 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 not detected | |||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8710 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3417 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4836 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4241 pontos | |
PCMark 10 Score | 4535 pontos | |
Ajuda |
3DMark 11 Performance | 10546 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 6909 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 3425 pontos | |
3DMark Time Spy Score | 3080 pontos | |
Ajuda |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | 4K | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 160.2 | 102.6 | 55.4 | 29.9 | 19.6 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 121 | 109 | 94 | 89 | 43.6 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 154.9 | 102.8 | 57.8 | 47.3 | 20.2 |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 90 | 68 | 59.2 | ||
GRID 2019 (2019) | 98.2 | 67.3 | 51.7 | 34.3 | 13.5 |
Barulho
Ocioso |
| 28.5 / 28.5 / 28.5 dB |
Carga |
| 36.3 / 36.3 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: 28.5 dB(A) |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i9-9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02 | Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M Radeon Pro 5500M, i9-9880H, Apple SSD AP1024 7171 | Acer ConceptD 7 CN715-71-743N GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G | Lenovo Yoga C940-15IRH GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-9750H, Intel Optane Memory H10 with Solid State Storage 32GB + 512GB HBRPEKNX0202A(L/H) | MSI Prestige 15 A10SC GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000XGE GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, i7-8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | -12% | -13% | -13% | -11% | -6% | -3% | |
off / environment * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.8 -5% | 30.4 -7% | 28.7 -1% | 29.3 -3% | 28.8 -1% |
Idle Minimum * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.9 -5% | 30.6 -7% | 28.7 -1% | 30.1 -6% | 28.8 -1% |
Idle Average * | 28.5 | 28.2 1% | 29.9 -5% | 30.6 -7% | 28.8 -1% | 30.2 -6% | 28.8 -1% |
Idle Maximum * | 28.5 | 30.4 -7% | 29.9 -5% | 30.6 -7% | 28.8 -1% | 30.2 -6% | 31.3 -10% |
Load Average * | 36.3 | 43.8 -21% | 43 -18% | 44 -21% | 45 -24% | 31.5 13% | 36.4 -0% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 36.3 | 47.2 -30% | 45.4 -25% | 43.9 -21% | 44.7 -23% | 37 -2% | 36.4 -0% |
Load Maximum * | 36.3 | 47.2 -30% | 46.1 -27% | 44.2 -22% | 44.7 -23% | 47 -29% | 39.2 -8% |
* ... smaller is better
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46.8 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 52.4 °C / 126 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24 °C / 75 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 37.3 °C / 99 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 31.9 °C / 89.4 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-3.1 °C / -5.6 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | reduced highs - on average 6.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 84% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 48% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
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%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (6.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.08 / 0.69 Watt |
Ocioso | 8.5 / 14.7 / 19.4 Watt |
Carga |
89.6 / 129.8 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 i9-9980HK, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M, Apple SSD AP1024 7171, IPS, 3072x1920, 16" | Acer ConceptD 7 CN715-71-743N i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo Yoga C940-15IRH i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, Intel Optane Memory H10 with Solid State Storage 32GB + 512GB HBRPEKNX0202A(L/H), IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Prestige 15 A10SC i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000XGE i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile | Average of class Multimedia | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -14% | 6% | 16% | -14% | 8% | 18% | 7% | 23% | 22% | |
Idle Minimum * | 8.5 | 13.7 -61% | 6.2 27% | 3.7 56% | 7.6 11% | 5.2 39% | 6.1 28% | 7.6 11% | 4.96 ? 42% | 6.54 ? 23% |
Idle Average * | 14.7 | 17.5 -19% | 9.6 35% | 12.1 18% | 13.6 7% | 10.7 27% | 13.2 10% | 14.8 -1% | 8.61 ? 41% | 11.3 ? 23% |
Idle Maximum * | 19.4 | 20.9 -8% | 21.2 -9% | 17 12% | 18.2 6% | 24.3 -25% | 19.2 1% | 17.6 9% | 14.8 ? 24% | 13.3 ? 31% |
Load Average * | 89.6 | 77.2 14% | 104.3 -16% | 91.5 -2% | 102 -14% | 84.4 6% | 75 16% | 86 4% | 81.7 ? 9% | 70.7 ? 21% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 96.1 | 91.7 5% | 103 -7% | 144 -50% | 83.9 13% | 74 23% | 85 12% | |||
Load Maximum * | 129.8 | 123.7 5% | 135.3 -4% | 102.3 21% | 183 -41% | 142.8 -10% | 89.7 31% | 118.9 8% | 131.9 ? -2% | 116.1 ? 11% |
* ... smaller is better
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, 80 Wh | Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 i9-9980HK, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, 97 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M i9-9880H, Radeon Pro 5500M, 99.8 Wh | Acer ConceptD 7 CN715-71-743N i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, 84 Wh | Lenovo Yoga C940-15IRH i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, 69 Wh | MSI Prestige 15 A10SC i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, 82 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme-20MF000XGE i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 80 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad P1 2019-20QT000RGE i7-9850H, Quadro T1000 (Laptop), 80 Wh | Average of class Multimedia | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 120% | 79% | 51% | 44% | 67% | 44% | 65% | 119% | |
H.264 | 284 | 580 104% | 388 37% | 371 31% | 560 97% | 847 ? 198% | |||
WiFi v1.3 | 285 | 467 64% | 718 152% | 518 82% | 583 105% | 456 60% | 384 35% | 532 87% | 640 ? 125% |
Load | 72 | 199 176% | 58 -19% | 96 33% | 59 -18% | 125 74% | 119 65% | 79 10% | 97.1 ? 35% |
Reader / Idle | 910 | 822 | 1092 | 1147 | 691 | 1168 ? | |||
Witcher 3 ultra | 54 | 63 | 76.3 ? |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto - A Lenovo tornou o X1 Extreme pior
Em primeiro lugar, o ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 2 parece ser um excelente portátil multimídia. Combinar o chassi de seu antecessor com mais opções de telas e componentes mais rápidos deveria ser uma receita para o sucesso. No entanto, na prática, as mudanças nem sempre se mostraram positivas.
Começando com as coisas boas, o painel 4K mate oferece uma qualidade de imagem decente, embora seja somente após a calibração adicional. O X1 Extreme Gen 2 também possui alguns dos melhores dispositivos de entrada do mercado, embora haja alguns problemas dos quais nossa unidade de teste também sofre. O X1 Extreme Gen 2 também funciona mais silenciosamente sob carga.
No entanto, a partir de agora só temos más notícias. Temos a sensação de que a Lenovo simplesmente instalou novos componentes enquanto manteve a mesma solução de refrigeração. O processador mais recente sofre aqui por causa da placa gráfica mais rápida, embora o último também fique aquém das expectativas. O resultado é que o X1 Extreme Gen 2 tem uma CPU mais lenta que seu antecessor e apenas uma GPU minimamente mais rápida. Outro problema é o enorme consumo de energia do dispositivo, devido ao seu painel mate 4K, que gera durações de menos de 5 horas.
A segunda geração do ThinkPad X1 Extreme piorou em algumas áreas. Por exemplo, o desempenho da CPU está abaixo do seu antecessor, e sua GPU não pode alcançar seu potencial. Embora o painel 4K mate seja uma boa opção no que diz respeito à qualidade da imagem, ele precisa de calibração adicional e tem um impacto significativo na duração da bateria.
O desempenho da nossa unidade de teste certamente não é ruim por si só. Você não deveria ter problemas no uso diário, por exemplo. A competição simplesmente oferece mais, no entanto. Também recomendaríamos considerar a tela opcional de 500 nits de 1080p sobre a IPS 4K aqui, que oferece qualidade de imagem muito boa e consome significativamente menos energia.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE
- 02/13/2020 v7 (old)
Andreas Osthoff