Notebookcheck Logo

Breve Análise do Tablet Lenovo ThinkPad X1

Potencial Surface… o primeiro aparelho ThinkPad ao estilo Surface da Lenovo tem muitas ideias ótimas. Será que ela consegue traduzir isso em um produto coesivo, prático para o usuário empresarial?
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet (ThinkPad X1 Serie)
Processador
Intel Core m7-6Y75 2 x 1.2 - 3.1 GHz, Skylake
Placa gráfica
Intel HD Graphics 515, Análises do: 1000 MHz, 10.0.10586.0
Memória
8 GB 
, LPDDR3 1866 MHz
Pantalha
12.00 polegadas 3:2, 2160 x 1440 pixel 216 PPI, sim; multi-touch, native pen support, INT3470, IPS, Brilhante: sim, detachable screen
placa mãe
Intel Sunrise Point-LP
Disco rígido
Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP, 256 GB 
Conexões
1 USB 3.0, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, 1 Docking Station Port, Conexões Audio: 3,5 mm Kombiport, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, Sensores: girômetro, acelerômetro
Funcionamento em rede
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.2
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 13 x 289 x 216
Bateria
37 Wh Lítio-Polímero
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: 2.0, side mounted, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, 12 Meses Garantia, fanless
peso
1.048 kg, Suprimento de energia: 184 g
Preço
1549 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

324 mm 226 mm 12.3 mm 1.2 kg309 mm 215 mm 21 mm 1.5 kg303 mm 209 mm 13.1 mm 1.2 kg289 mm 216 mm 13 mm 1 kg292 mm 202 mm 8.5 mm 1.1 kg291 mm 193 mm 8 mm 1.3 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g
Top: power button
Top: power button
Bottom: cover release switch, keyboard base port
Bottom: cover release switch, keyboard base port
Left: 3.5 mm combo audio, volume buttons, Kensington Lock port
Left: 3.5 mm combo audio, volume buttons, Kensington Lock port
Right: USB Type-C, USB 3.0, Mini-DisplayPort - (Not shown: microSD card)
Right: USB Type-C, USB 3.0, Mini-DisplayPort - (Not shown: microSD card)
322.7
cd/m²
315.9
cd/m²
289.9
cd/m²
314
cd/m²
342.4
cd/m²
295.3
cd/m²
314.2
cd/m²
341.3
cd/m²
302.5
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
INT3470 tested with X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Máximo: 342.4 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 315.4 cd/m² Minimum: 4.167 cd/m²
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 342.4 cd/m²
Contraste: 460:1 (Preto: 0.744 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.33 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 5.36 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
93% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
63.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
93% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
62.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.12
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
12", 2160x1440
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
12.5", 3840x2160
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
12", 1920x1080
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
13.3", 3200x1800
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
12.5", 1920x1080
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
12.3", 2736x1824
Display
32%
-19%
-6%
-32%
7%
Display P3 Coverage
62.4
83.9
34%
52.9
-15%
59.1
-5%
42.63
-32%
67.5
8%
sRGB Coverage
93
99.8
7%
71.8
-23%
85.5
-8%
63.6
-32%
96.6
4%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
63.9
98.1
54%
52.6
-18%
61
-5%
44.1
-31%
69
8%
Response Times
75%
-57%
152%
-72%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
28.4 ?(11.2, 17.2)
36 ?(19, 17)
-27%
47 ?(16, 31)
-65%
38 ?(24, 14, Spikes in between)
-34%
46 ?(17.2, 28.8)
-62%
Response Time Black / White *
17.6 ?(3.6, 14)
35 ?(8, 27)
-99%
26 ?(5, 21)
-48%
27 ?(13, 14, Spikes in between)
-53%
31 ?(6, 25.2)
-76%
PWM Frequency
222.2 ?(49)
1000 ?(20)
350%
1429 ?(20)
543%
50 ?(50)
-77%
Screen
42%
7%
15%
-8%
44%
Brightness middle
342.4
437
28%
353
3%
390
14%
342
0%
389.2
14%
Brightness
315
399
27%
347
10%
352
12%
301
-4%
392
24%
Brightness Distribution
85
81
-5%
91
7%
81
-5%
76
-11%
92
8%
Black Level *
0.744
0.35
53%
0.44
41%
0.69
7%
0.393
47%
0.27
64%
Contrast
460
1249
172%
802
74%
565
23%
870
89%
1441
213%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
5.33
3.56
33%
6.09
-14%
3.04
43%
9.69
-82%
3.61
32%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
9.25
9.3
-1%
7.01
24%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.36
2.67
50%
6.24
-16%
2.88
46%
9.27
-73%
3.8
29%
Gamma
2.12 104%
2.17 101%
2.41 91%
2.43 91%
2.95 75%
2.16 102%
CCT
7671 85%
6681 97%
7238 90%
6848 95%
6010 108%
5969 109%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
57
86
51%
46
-19%
55
-4%
40.4
-29%
63
11%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
93
100
8%
71
-24%
85
-9%
97
4%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
50% / 46%
-23% / -8%
54% / 37%
-20% / -14%
-7% / 14%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

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
17.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3.6 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. » 36 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
28.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.2 ms rise
↘ 17.2 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 34 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 detected 222.2 Hz ≤ 49 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 222.2 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 49 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 222.2 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

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.

Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
1.08 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
0.98 Points -9%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
0.94 Points -13%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
1.28 Points +19%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
1.15 Points +6%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
0.98 Points -9%
CPU Multi 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
2.62 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
2.19 Points -16%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
2.15 Points -18%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
2.47 Points -6%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
2.14 Points -18%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
2.27 Points -13%
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
119 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
104 Points -13%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
80 Points -33%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
100 Points -16%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
97 Points -18%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
88 Points -26%
CPU Multi 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
234 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
196 Points -16%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
177 Points -24%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
214 Points -9%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
190 Points -19%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
206 Points -12%
wPrime 2.10 - 1024m (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
698 s *
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
788 s * -13%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - 32M (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
640 s *
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
1248 s * -95%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
774 s * -21%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
898 s * -40%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.08 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
2.62 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
25.87 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
119 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
234 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
34.37 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Ajuda
PCMark 8
Home Score Accelerated v2 (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
2976 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
2277 Points -23%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
2675 Points -10%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
2614 Points -12%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
2816 Points -5%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
2426 Points -18%
Work Score Accelerated v2 (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
4058 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
3084 Points -24%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
4078 Points 0%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
3472 Points -14%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
3936 Points -3%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
3186 Points -21%
Creative Score Accelerated v2 (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
3583 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
2903 Points -19%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
3362 Points -6%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
3298 Points -8%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
3263 Points -9%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
2968 Points -17%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2976 pontos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
3583 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4058 pontos
Ajuda
AS SSD
AS SSD
AS SSD Copy Benchmark
AS SSD Copy Benchmark
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 Storage
Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
Velocidade de Transferência Mínima: 314.7 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Máxima: 408.5 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Média: 401.9 MB/s
Tempo de Acesso: 0.1 ms
Índice de Explosão: 114 MB/s
Uso da CPU: 4 %
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance GPU (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
1154 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
1008 Points -13%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
996 Points -14%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
1083 Points -6%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
693 Points -40%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
1206 Points +5%
1280x720 Performance Combined (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
1179 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
1007 Points -15%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
1007 Points -15%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
1006 Points -15%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
677 Points -43%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
1370 Points +16%
3DMark
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
5769 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
4362 Points -24%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
6298 Points +9%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
4286 Points -26%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
4441 Points -23%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
6597 Points +14%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
762 Points
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
606 Points -20%
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
725 Points -5%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
507 Points -33%
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
511 Points -33%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
810 Points +6%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics (sort by value)
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
18749 Points
3DMark 06 Standard Score
7515 pontos
3DMark 11 Performance
1283 pontos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
46344 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
4474 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
697 pontos
Ajuda
BioShock Infinite
1280x720 Very Low Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
44 fps
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
33.28 (13.97min - 61.13max) fps -24%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
39.7 fps -10%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
52.4 fps +19%
1366x768 Medium Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
25 fps
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
17.37 (7.16min - 64.81max) fps -31%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
20.1 fps -20%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
26.93 fps +8%
1366x768 High Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
20 fps
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
20.1 (6.67min - 32.43max) fps +1%
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
15.1 fps -24%
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
22.66 fps +13%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
6 fps
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
4.67 (2.53min - 27.13max) fps -22%
baixomédiaaltoultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 44 25 20 6
Carga Máxima
 33.8 °C38 °C39.2 °C 
 36.4 °C45.6 °C44.4 °C 
 40.6 °C51.2 °C50.2 °C 
Máximo: 51.2 °C
Médio: 42.2 °C
40 °C39.6 °C35.4 °C
45.2 °C44.6 °C37.6 °C
50.2 °C53.2 °C40.2 °C
Máximo: 53.2 °C
Médio: 42.9 °C
alimentação elétrica  45 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 42.2 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 30.2 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Convertible.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 51.2 °C / 124 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 19.6 to 55.7 °C for the class Convertible.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 53.2 °C / 128 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 37.6 °C / 100 F, compared to the device average of 30.2 °C / 86 F.
(-) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 51.2 °C / 124.2 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-23.1 °C / -41.6 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
Power Consumption
-34%
-4%
-6%
17%
Idle Minimum *
5.87
5.4
8%
4.5
23%
4.2
28%
2.4
59%
Idle Average *
6.05
10.2
-69%
7.7
-27%
8.4
-39%
4.6
24%
Idle Maximum *
6.13
12.5
-104%
8.3
-35%
8.9
-45%
5.6
9%
Load Average *
21.27
21.4
-1%
19.8
7%
15.9
25%
15.6
27%
Load Maximum *
23.03
24.4
-6%
20.6
11%
22.5
2%
30.7
-33%

* ... smaller is better

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.27 / 1.92 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 5.87 / 6.05 / 6.13 Watt
Carga midlight 21.27 / 23.03 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM871 MZYLN256HCHP
Dell XPS 12 9250 4K
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Samsung PM951 NVMe 512 GB
HP Spectre x2 12-a003ng K3D42EA
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Sandisk X300 SD7SN6S-256G-1006
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
HD Graphics 515, 6Y75, Micron M600 MTFDDAV512MBF M.2
Toshiba Portege Z20t-B-10C
HD Graphics 5300, 5Y71, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256GVNU
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
HD Graphics 515, 6Y30, Samsung MZFLV128 NVMe
Battery Runtime
-27%
38%
50%
168%
35%
Reader / Idle
628
370
-41%
954
52%
1013
61%
1616
157%
791
26%
WiFi v1.3
300
243
-19%
361
20%
402
34%
760
153%
488
63%
Load
118
93
-21%
166
41%
182
54%
348
195%
138
17%
Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
10h 28min
WiFi Websurfing
5h 00min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 58min

Pro

+ Kickstand com design inovador que melhora o conforto
+ Bom desempenho WLAN
+ Teclado confortável e bem afinado
+ Touchpad espaçoso e preciso com bons botões integrados
+ Painel vivo com gama de cores razoavelmente boa
+ Desempenho geral do sistema veloz
+ Módulos vendidos por separado são um bom conceito
+ A manutenção é possível através de um painel traseiro removível

Contra

- A carcaça, embora rígida, é mais suscetível a torções que o Surface Pro e outros concorrentes
- Difícil de carregar com uma só mão quando está aberto
- Brilho mediano e contraste pálido em comparação com a maioria dos rivais
- PWM presente em todos os níveis de brilho até 49 por cento
- O desempenho contínuo da CPU / GPU está sujeito a restrições térmicas; o afogamento é quase instantâneo
- O desempenho da GPU é, de fato, inferior ao do modelo Surface Pro m3
- Esquenta no modo inativo e esquenta ainda mais rapidamente sob estresse
- Alto falantes medíocres, no melhor dos casos
- Durações da bateria bem abaixo da média
- Caro
In review: Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet. Test model provided by Lenovo US.
In review: Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet. Test model provided by Lenovo US.

A Lenovo foi um dos pioneiros do mercado de conversíveis há muito tempo, mas o tablet X1 ($1.549 analisado) marca a primeira incursão da empresa nos designs ao estilo do Microsoft Surface com a sua linha de produtos carro chefe ThinkPad. O objetivo do aparelho era fornecer uma alternativa empresarial fácil de usar ao Surface Pro— e de diversas forma, ele consegue fazer isso. O tablet  X1 não enfatiza apenas a usabilidade com os dispositivos de entrada confortáveis, bem afinados que esperamos de um ThinkPad, mas ele também oferece um forte desempenho para um aparelho com resfriamento passivo, opções de manutenção e serviço no local (com certeza , algo a ser celebrado pelos departamentos de TI corporativos), e uma série de módulo vendido por separado para expandir a funcionalidade e a seleção de portas. Também ficamos impressionados pelo design do kickstand, que ajuda no uso sobre as pernas de forma bastante mais confortável que com o Surface Pro.

Apesar de suas desvantagens, o tablet X1 é uma primeira boa tentativa da Lenovo em fornecer uma alternativa fácil de usar ao Surface Pro 4, e os usuários (ou organizações) intrigados pelo conceito podem encontrar justamente o que o doutor receitou.

No entanto, os consumidores devem considerar uma série de desvantagens antes de se comprometer com este aparelho. Para começar, embora seja um ThinkPad, a inclusão de uma traseira removível e o uso de plástico PPS Injection Hybrid para alguns dos materiais de construção, fornecem uma resistência à torção inferior a aquelas de magnésio puro, aparelhos monobloco (como o Microsoft Surface Pro). A máquina também esquenta (pelo menos na configuração que nós avaliamos), o qual o torna desconfortável para usar durante longos períodos na mão. Enquanto avaliamos a configuração topo com Core m7, questionamos o valor desta atualização, dado que é bastante caro (cerca de $350 a mais que o m3), e várias restrições do desempenho em comparação com opções m5 e m3 de menor poder. E finalmente, a duração da bateria é inferior a quase a maioria dos concorrentes diretos, e é um pouco inferior a Ultrabooks ainda maiores com resfriamento ativo.

Talvez optar por um modelo Core m3 ou m5 poderia aliviar algumas destas desvantagens sem nenhum sacrifício notável no campo do desempenho — e com os bônus adicionais de um aparelho prático e econômico.

Esta é uma versão reduzida da análise original. Você pode ler a análise completa em inglês aqui.

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet - 06/02/2016 v5.1 (old)
Steve Schardein

Acabamento
80 / 98 → 82%
Teclado
85%
Mouse
86%
Conectividade
61 / 80 → 76%
Peso
74 / 35-78 → 91%
Bateria
82%
Pantalha
81%
Desempenho do jogos
56 / 68 → 82%
Desempenho da aplicação
85 / 87 → 98%
Workstation
40%
Temperatura
76%
Ruído
100%
Audio
50 / 91 → 55%
Camera
67 / 85 → 79%
Médio
73%
81%
Convertible - Médio equilibrado

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Tablet Lenovo ThinkPad X1
Steve Schardein, 2016-06- 3 (Update: 2020-06- 8)