Test: Lenovo ThinkPad E485 (Ryzen 5, Vega 8) Laptop (Sammanfattning)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Average of class Office (22.7 - 198.5, n=35, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Latitude 3490 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Office (25 - 249, n=31, last 2 years) | |
| Dell Latitude 3490 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 87 %
Mitt på batteriet: 289 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1521:1 (Svärta: 0.19 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.7
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
58.5% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
37.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39.76% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
57.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
38.48% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 1.96
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE B140HAN04.2, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW Innolux N140HCA-EAC, , 1920x1080, 14" | HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA Innolux N140HCA-EAB, , 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 3490 LP140WF6 / LGD059D, , 1920x1080, 14" | HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA LG Philips, LGD05F1, , 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 6% | 4% | 2% | -3% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 39.21 38.48 | 41.56 6% | 40.67 4% | 39.81 2% | 38.08 -3% |
| sRGB Coverage | 58.8 57.9 | 62.2 6% | 61.2 4% | 59.6 1% | 57.2 -3% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 40.52 39.76 | 42.96 6% | 42.03 4% | 41.16 2% | 39.37 -3% |
| Response Times | 4% | 25% | 24% | 13% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 44.8 ? | 44.8 ? -0% | 33 ? 26% | 36.4 ? 19% | 41.6 ? 7% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 33.6 ? | 31.2 ? 7% | 26 ? 23% | 24 ? 29% | 27.2 ? 19% |
| PWM Frequency | 25000 ? | 100 ? | |||
| Screen | -20% | -27% | -12% | -12% | |
| Brightness middle | 289 | 262 -9% | 225 -22% | 250 -13% | 256 -11% |
| Brightness | 271 | 245 -10% | 209 -23% | 241 -11% | 238 -12% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 83 -5% | 89 2% | 81 -7% | 85 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.19 | 0.19 -0% | 0.68 -258% | 0.25 -32% | 0.23 -21% |
| Contrast | 1521 | 1379 -9% | 331 -78% | 1000 -34% | 1113 -27% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.6 | 7 -25% | 4.54 19% | 5.5 2% | 6.2 -11% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 20.8 | 23.6 -13% | 7.2 65% | 23.5 -13% | 18.2 12% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.7 | 2.87 39% | 4.8 -2% | 5.2 -11% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 6.4 -137% | 4.14 -53% | 3.5 -30% | 3.8 -41% |
| Gamma | 1.96 112% | 2.14 103% | 2.13 103% | 2.27 97% | 2.5 88% |
| CCT | 6506 100% | 6065 107% | 6624 98% | 7049 92% | 6643 98% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 37.2 | 39.5 6% | 39 5% | 37.9 2% | 36.1 -3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 58.5 | 61.9 6% | 61 4% | 59.4 2% | 56.9 -3% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -3% /
-11% | 1% /
-15% | 5% /
-5% | -1% /
-7% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 15.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 89 % 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 | ||
| 44.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20.4 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. » 74 % 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 74 %
Mitt på batteriet: 168 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1163:1 (Svärta: 0.19 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.67 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.3
ΔE Greyscale 3.81 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
62% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
Gamma: 2.24
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3550 poäng | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4249 poäng | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4870 poäng | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3321 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G | HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Dell Latitude 3490 SK hynix SC311 M.2 | HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | Average Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -82% | -47% | -45% | -2% | -59% | |
| Score Total | 2478 | 638 -74% | 1290 -48% | 1006 -59% | 2040 -18% | 2565 ? 4% |
| Score Write | 575 | 182 -68% | 323 -44% | 387 -33% | 669 16% | 587 ? 2% |
| Score Read | 1277 | 324 -75% | 638 -50% | 409 -68% | 954 -25% | 1378 ? 8% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.059 | 0.235 -298% | 0.063 -7% | 0.052 12% | 0.047 20% | 0.4637 ? -686% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.054 | 0.106 -96% | 0.144 -167% | 0.097 -80% | 0.067 -24% | 0.06777 ? -26% |
| 4K-64 Write | 371.5 | 92.1 -75% | 216 -42% | 286.1 -23% | 499.5 34% | 419 ? 13% |
| 4K-64 Read | 1035 | 190.9 -82% | 433.3 -58% | 332.7 -68% | 724 -30% | 1112 ? 7% |
| 4K Write | 63.9 | 78.9 23% | 76.8 20% | 68.9 8% | 119.7 87% | 91.6 ? 43% |
| 4K Read | 38.63 | 31.13 -19% | 25.35 -34% | 27.67 -28% | 31.17 -19% | 45.1 ? 17% |
| Seq Write | 1395 | 115.4 -92% | 305.2 -78% | 318.8 -77% | 493.6 -65% | 960 ? -31% |
| Seq Read | 2030 | 1015 -50% | 1797 -11% | 484.7 -76% | 1983 -2% | 2019 ? -1% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Average of class Office (1468 - 13132, n=89, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) (1668 - 4317, n=44) | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA | |
| Dell Latitude 3490 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW | |
| 3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Average of class Office (736 - 9375, n=91, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) (1095 - 2901, n=41) | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA | |
| Dell Latitude 3490 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 2807 poäng | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 7035 poäng | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 1469 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KQS00000 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) (7.6 - 28, n=30) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA | |
| Dell Latitude 3490 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider | |
| 1024x768 Lowest Preset | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) (27.7 - 49.3, n=10) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW | |
| 1920x1080 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) (5.9 - 15.4, n=11) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE | |
| HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA | |
| HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW | |
| låg | med. | hög | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 74.4 | 13.26 | ||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 30.4 | 10.8 | ||
| Doom (2016) | 25.1 | 10.4 | ||
| Civilization VI (2016) | 56.3 | 12.4 | ||
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) | 26.5 | 9.1 |
Ljudnivå
| Låg belastning |
| 29.4 / 29.4 / 31.2 dB(A) |
| Hög belastning |
| 32.7 / 35.3 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB tyst 40 dB(A) hörbar 50 dB(A) högt ljud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm avstånd) environment noise: 29.4 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE Vega 8, R5 2500U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G | HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA Vega 8, R5 PRO 2500U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G | Dell Latitude 3490 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2 | HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 2% | -4% | -7% | 2% | |
| off / environment * | 29.4 | 29.1 1% | 30.8 -5% | 29.8 -1% | 29.4 -0% |
| Idle Minimum * | 29.4 | 29.1 1% | 30.8 -5% | 29.8 -1% | 29.4 -0% |
| Idle Average * | 29.4 | 29.1 1% | 30.8 -5% | 29.8 -1% | 29.4 -0% |
| Idle Maximum * | 31.2 | 30.3 3% | 30.8 1% | 29.8 4% | 30.2 3% |
| Load Average * | 32.7 | 31.8 3% | 34.7 -6% | 39.1 -20% | 31.8 3% |
| Load Maximum * | 35.3 | 33.8 4% | 36.4 -3% | 44.3 -25% | 33.1 6% |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.3 °C / 108 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 45.2 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.9 °C / 80 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 25.7 °C / 78.3 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.6 °C / 81.7 F (+1.9 °C / 3.4 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (70.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 79% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby | 0.43 / 0.57 Watt |
| Låg belastning | 6.2 / 8.6 / 9.7 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
37.4 / 44.8 Watt |
   
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE R5 2500U, Vega 8, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA R5 PRO 2500U, Vega 8, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 3490 i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix SC311 M.2, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | Average of class Office | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 29% | -9% | 8% | 24% | -0% | 0% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 6.2 | 3.5 44% | 7.2 -16% | 3.2 48% | 2.98 52% | 5.68 ? 8% | 4.46 ? 28% |
| Idle Average * | 8.6 | 5.3 38% | 9.7 -13% | 5.5 36% | 5.4 37% | 8.75 ? -2% | 7.42 ? 14% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9.7 | 6.1 37% | 10.3 -6% | 8.1 16% | 7.9 19% | 10.1 ? -4% | 8.9 ? 8% |
| Load Average * | 37.4 | 30 20% | 42 -12% | 40.8 -9% | 34.5 8% | 37.8 ? -1% | 42 ? -12% |
| Load Maximum * | 44.8 | 42.3 6% | 44.2 1% | 68.1 -52% | 43.3 3% | 46.2 ? -3% | 61.6 ? -38% |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE R5 2500U, Vega 8, 45 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad E480-20KNCTO1WW i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | HP ProBook 645 G4 3UP62EA R5 PRO 2500U, Vega 8, 48 Wh | Dell Latitude 3490 i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh | HP ProBook 440 G6-5TK01EA i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh | Average of class Office | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 61% | 1% | 115% | 78% | 102% | |
| Reader / Idle | 545 | 1106 103% | 560 3% | 1024 88% | 1239 ? 127% | |
| H.264 | 341 | 431 26% | 253 -26% | 458 34% | 716 ? 110% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 323 | 495 53% | 290 -10% | 694 115% | 504 56% | 608 ? 88% |
| Load | 65 | 105 62% | 88 35% | 151 132% | 117.4 ? 81% |
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
ThinkPad E485 lämnar ett aningen blandat intryck. Om vi tittar på enheten försig är det en gedigen företagslaptop på instegsnivå med ett robust hölje, en skaplig skärm och utmärkta inmatningsenheter. Men om du jämför den med ThinkPad E480, som är tänkt att vara samma modell fast med en Intel-processor, så finns det flera skillnader. Vi pratar i huvudsak om att den saknar ett bakgrundsbelyst tangentbord, vilket inte ens finns som tillval, samt att plastmaterialet på basenhetens ovansida är av aningen sämre kvalitet. Ibland får vi känslan av att tillverkarna vill ha en artificiell distans från Intel-modellerna.
Å andra sidan, ThinkPad E485 har förstås ett lägre pris och de flesta användare bör kunna leva med materialskillnaderna. Ett annat problem rör otur med utrustningen. Även om alla vet att den inbyggda AMD GPU:n drar stor nytta av RAM med dubbla kanaler så kommer tyvärr alla förkonfigurerade modeller med bara en enda RAM-modul. Även om det är ganska lätt att uppgradera så bör 8 GB vara tillräckligt för de flesta användare och mer RAM kostar dessutom mer. Det hade varit bättre om Lenovo från början istället hade byggt in två moduler på 4 GB. Men det största problemet är nog den högre energiförbrukningen som leder till mycket kortare batteritid. Huruvida detta bara beror på bristande optimering eller på att AMD:s plattform helt enkelt drar mer energi är en helt annan fråga.
En missad chans: Jämfört med dess Intel-syskon så visar ThinkPad E485 upp en del svagheter som inte har något att göra med AMD-processorn. Som exempel förstår vi inte varför den som skaffar E485 behöver klara sig utan ett bakgrundsbelyst tangentbord. Men den som kan leva med detta och en kortare batteritid får en riktigt gedigen instegsenhet till att attraktivt pris i form av ThinkPad E485.
ThinkPad E485 har också en hel uppsättning fördelar som inte är självklara i det här prisskiktet. Processorn har mer än tillräckligt med prestanda för de flesta uppgifter och tack vare en snabb SSD-enhet från Samsung kan du se fram mot ett riktigt responsivt system vid vardagsanvändning. Dessutom har den en skaplig IPS-skärm (men det kan eventuellt finnas några mindre skillnader beroende på leverantör). För det här låga priset kan vi hursomhelst rekommendera E485.
Uppdatering: Tyvärr visar sig den alternativa Innolux-skärmen vara mycket sämre i våra tester än modellen från AU Optronics, i synnerhet när det kommer till ljusstyrka. Med den alternativa panelen sjunker den totala poängsumman från 86.4% till 85.8%. Tyvärr har du ingen möjlighet att påverka vilken panelvariant som är inbyggd när du köper enheten, så du får stå ut med Lenovos skärmlotteri.
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
- 04/05/2019 v6 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
Price comparison
