Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Chinese
MagyarTest: Lenovo ThinkPad T480 (Core i7-8650U, FHD) Laptop (Sammanfattning)
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| Dell Latitude 7490 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Office (22.7 - 198.5, n=35, last 2 years) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) | |
| Dell Latitude 7490 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Average of class Office (25 - 249, n=32, last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 90 %
Mitt på batteriet: 276.7 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1318:1 (Svärta: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.22 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93, calibrated: 5.01
ΔE Greyscale 6.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
54% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
34% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
37.51% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
54.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
36.31% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.321
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US B140HAK01.0, TFT-LCD, 14", 1920x1080 | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS NV140FHM-N46, TFT-LCD, 14", 1920x1080 | Dell Latitude 7490 AU Optronics AU0223D, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA IVO M140NVF7 R0, IPS, 14", 1920x1080 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 B140QAN02.0, IPS, 14", 2560x1440 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 9% | 70% | 65% | 130% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 36.31 | 39.69 9% | 63.6 75% | 61 68% | 87.7 142% |
| sRGB Coverage | 54.5 | 59.2 9% | 88.8 63% | 87.7 61% | 100 83% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 37.51 | 41 9% | 64.8 73% | 62.1 66% | 99.9 166% |
| Response Times | -11% | -14% | 16% | -32% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 39.2 ? | 44 ? -12% | 48.4 ? -23% | 33 ? 16% | 59.2 ? -51% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 30.8 ? | 34 ? -10% | 32.4 ? -5% | 26 ? 16% | 34.4 ? -12% |
| PWM Frequency | 990 | 3125 ? | |||
| Screen | 8% | 24% | 41% | 61% | |
| Brightness middle | 276.7 | 288.3 4% | 328.2 19% | 655 137% | 578 109% |
| Brightness | 272 | 281 3% | 305 12% | 630 132% | 533 96% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 86 -4% | 87 -3% | 93 3% | 84 -7% |
| Black Level * | 0.21 | 0.21 -0% | 0.37 -76% | 0.56 -167% | 0.38 -81% |
| Contrast | 1318 | 1373 4% | 887 -33% | 1170 -11% | 1521 15% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 7.22 | 6.16 15% | 3.82 47% | 3.27 55% | 1.9 74% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 25.87 | 18.99 27% | 5.58 78% | 5.92 77% | 3.8 85% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 5.01 | 4.51 10% | 3.5 30% | 3.22 36% | 0.8 84% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.7 | 6.3 6% | 3 55% | 2.85 57% | 3 55% |
| Gamma | 2.321 95% | 2.517 87% | 2.36 93% | 2.45 90% | 2.14 103% |
| CCT | 6656 98% | 6886 94% | 6962 93% | 6065 107% | 6377 102% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 34 | 37.67 11% | 58 71% | 57 68% | 88.8 161% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 54 | 58.9 9% | 88 63% | 88 63% | 100 85% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 2% /
6% | 27% /
28% | 41% /
42% | 53% /
63% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 30.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (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 (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 56 % 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)
| 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 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3846 poäng | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 4027 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Dell Latitude 7490 Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Average Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -18% | -18% | -31% | 5% | -13% | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 382.3 | 905 | 1107 | 1057 ? | ||
| Copy Program MB/s | 227.1 | 326.2 | 460.2 | 454 ? | ||
| Copy ISO MB/s | 872 | 1688 | 1247 | 1755 ? | ||
| Score Total | 4425 | 3048 -31% | 2350 -47% | 2630 -41% | 3529 -20% | 3966 ? -10% |
| Score Write | 1945 | 921 -53% | 536 -72% | 1084 -44% | 1801 -7% | 1780 ? -8% |
| Score Read | 1639 | 1435 -12% | 1242 -24% | 1070 -35% | 1168 -29% | 1451 ? -11% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.035 | 0.038 -9% | 0.03 14% | 0.055 -57% | 0.027 23% | 0.08337 ? -138% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.045 | 0.055 -22% | 0.04 11% | 0.059 -31% | 0.029 36% | 0.05092 ? -13% |
| 4K-64 Write | 1704 | 706 -59% | 329.6 -81% | 908 -47% | 1529 -10% | 1504 ? -12% |
| 4K-64 Read | 1447 | 1183 -18% | 955 -34% | 813 -44% | 876 -39% | 1203 ? -17% |
| 4K Write | 107.4 | 97.8 -9% | 114.9 7% | 90 -16% | 134.3 25% | 112 ? 4% |
| 4K Read | 50.5 | 42.09 -17% | 48.13 -5% | 26.75 -47% | 52.4 4% | 50.5 ? 0% |
| Seq Write | 1341 | 1172 -13% | 919 -31% | 856 -36% | 1376 3% | 1637 ? 22% |
| Seq Read | 1420 | 2094 47% | 2385 68% | 2300 62% | 2396 69% | 1976 ? 39% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1978 poäng | |
Hjälp | ||
| låg | med. | hög | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 63 | 31 | 27 | 9 |
Ljudnivå
| Låg belastning |
| 28.3 / 28.3 / 28.3 dB(A) |
| Hög belastning |
| 35.7 / 38.8 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB tyst 40 dB(A) hörbar 50 dB(A) högt ljud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  BK Precision 732A (15 cm avstånd) environment noise: 28.3 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US UHD Graphics 620, i7-8650U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS UHD Graphics 620, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L6S01V00 GeForce MX150, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | Dell Latitude 7490 UHD Graphics 620, i7-8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 UHD Graphics 620, i5-8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -0% | 0% | -1% | -2% | -2% | |
| off / environment * | 28.3 | 28.1 1% | 29 -2% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -7% | 28.9 -2% |
| Idle Minimum * | 28.3 | 28.1 1% | 29 -2% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -7% | 28.9 -2% |
| Idle Average * | 28.3 | 28.1 1% | 29 -2% | 28.2 -0% | 30.3 -7% | 28.9 -2% |
| Idle Maximum * | 28.3 | 28.1 1% | 29 -2% | 31.4 -11% | 30.3 -7% | 32.5 -15% |
| Load Average * | 35.7 | 35.5 1% | 35.6 -0% | 31.7 11% | 33.8 5% | 35.1 2% |
| Load Maximum * | 38.8 | 41.5 -7% | 35.6 8% | 41.2 -6% | 33.8 13% | 35.1 10% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 32.5 |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.2 °C / 104 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 54.6 °C / 130 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.2 °C / 79 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 30.4 °C / 86.7 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-2.7 °C / -4.8 F).
Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (75 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 57% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Dell Latitude 7490 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby | 0.32 / 0.57 Watt |
| Låg belastning | 3.8 / 7.7 / 9.3 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
45.7 / 46.1 Watt |
   
| |
Förklaring:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, TFT-LCD, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, TFT-LCD, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L6S01V00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Dell Latitude 7490 i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 20% | -15% | 13% | 4% | -12% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.8 | 3.1 18% | 3.6 5% | 3.1 18% | 3.8 -0% | 3.8 -0% |
| Idle Average * | 7.7 | 6.4 17% | 7.1 8% | 6.5 16% | 8.3 -8% | 8.9 -16% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9.3 | 9.4 -1% | 9.5 -2% | 7.6 18% | 10.7 -15% | 11.9 -28% |
| Load Average * | 45.7 | 29.8 35% | 63.9 -40% | 43 6% | 35.5 22% | 47.5 -4% |
| Load Maximum * | 46.1 | 31.2 32% | 67.3 -46% | 43.8 5% | 37 20% | 52.5 -14% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 53.9 |
* ... smaller is better
| Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, 24 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS i5-8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L6S01V00 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, 72 Wh | Dell Latitude 7490 i7-8650U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh | HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900 i5-8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 24% | 82% | 28% | 2% | 19% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 437 | 541 24% | 794 82% | 561 28% | 444 2% | 519 19% |
| Reader / Idle | 1671 | 1116 | 1328 | |||
| Load | 159 | 91 | 106 |
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Likt tidigare förblir Lenovos aktningsvärda ThinkPad T480 en toppmodell på företagsmarknaden. Den är resultatet av många års förfining och noggrann revidering och kan bara matchas av en handfull riktiga topp-maskiner. Som vi påpekade i vår senaste recension är konstruktionen för det mesta riktigt gedigen, designen är som alltid praktisk (och omedelbart igenkännbar) och ett bra utbud av portar finns på plats. Inmatningsenheterna är också väldigt bra, maskinen är tyst vid drift och den är dessutom snabb — åtminstone när det gäller allmän systemprestanda jämfört med den genomsnittliga CPU-prestandan i den här kategorin.
Det som har förbättrats med dagens modell jämfört med den tidigare är främst priset, som för tillfället ligger på runt 17.000 kronor. Utöver det så är temperaturnivåer och energiförbrukning långt under dom värden vi uppmätte hos den tidigare modellen, då den här konfiguration saknar dedikerad grafik — men trots detta finns det vid belastning några problematiska varma områden på maskinens undersida. Skärmen är fortfarande ljusstark och har bra kontrast, men likt tidigare är färgtäckningen sorgligt inexakt, vilket leder till tråkiga urvattnade färger och slapp bildkvalitet.
Även om den vacklar när det kommer till skärmens färgkvalitet och några andra enstaka egenskaper så är Lenovos aktningsvärda ThinkPad T480 fortfarande är av dom bästa modellerna som tävlar på företagsmarknaden. Den är ett resultat av många års förfining och noggrann revidering och kan bara kan matchas av en handfull riktiga topp-maskiner.
Till skillnad från MX150-varianten så kan den här maskinen (förstås) inte riktigt hantera någon form av tungt GPU-arbete, inte ens lätt spelande. Detta hade vi förväntat oss — men vad vi inte hade förväntat oss var att vi skulle få lägre CPU-prestanda från vår testenhets Core i7-8650U jämfört med den billigare Core i7-8550U som satt i modellen i testade i Mars. Kanske märkligast av allt är den veritabla ravin som separerar CPU-prestandan från T480s och dagens T480; även med den senaste BIOS-versionen och alla energi-inställningar korrekt inställda så kunde vi inte uppnå poäng som hamnar i närheten av vad vi fick från vår Core i5-utrustade T480s i förra veckan.
Men även om den vacklar när det kommer till skärmens färgkvalitet och några andra enstaka egenskaper så förblir T480 värd att nämna bland respekterade konkurrenter som Dells Latitude 7490, HP:s Elitebook 840 G5 och Lenovos egna X1 Carbon. Det riktiga valet rör huruvida T480 eller T480s passar dina syften bäst — men bortsett från tidigare nämnda krångel så är det svårt att hitta några större fel på något av dessa alternativ.
Lenovo ThinkPad T480-20L50010US
-
07/16/2018 v6 (old)
Steve Schardein
Price comparison
