Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarKısa inceleme: Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 (Core i5, Full HD) Laptop
For the original German review, see here.
The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon has been part of the manufacturer's portfolio for several years. Since then, these business laptops have belonged to the most mobile devices on the market. In terms of price, the 2017 model ranges at the high-end and at 1669 Euros (~$1869; a similar unit costs about $1200 in the US) our test model is not particularly cheap. However, as usual, the buyer is presented with an excellently built device that is very robust thanks to the very good selection of materials, yet very light at only 1.1 kg (2.4 lb). Our test unit is driven by an Intel Core i5-7200U with 8 GB of LPDDR3 RAM. The fastest NVMe SSD offers 256 GB of storage space and ensures running at a very smooth speed. In addition, our test unit is equipped with a 14-inch IPS display.
The manufacturer's website offers two base configurations which can be further configured. However, we should mention at this point, that the RAM memory cannot be expanded. If 16 GB of RAM is absolutely necessary, the considerably more expensive device must be selected.
As competing devices for this test, we selected the devices of the preceding generation as well as current business models from HP and Fujitsu. You can find an overview of the devices in the following table.
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2016 | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
| CPU | Intel Core i7-7500U | Intel Core i5-6300U | Intel Core i7-6500U | Intel Core i7-7600U | Intel Core i5-6300U | Intel Core i5-7200U |
| GPU | Intel HD Graphics 620 | Intel HD Graphics 520 | Intel HD Graphics 520 | Intel HD Graphics 620 | Intel HD Graphics 520 | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
| Panel | 14 inch 1920 x 1080 | 14 inch 1920 x 1080 | 14 inch 2560 x 1440 | 14 inch 2560 x 1440 | 14 inch 2560 x 1440 | 14 inch 1920 x 1080 |
| RAM | 16 GB LPDDR3-1866 | 8 GB LPDDR3-1866 | 8 GB LPDDR3-1600 | 16 GB DDR4-2400 | 8 GB DDR4-24016 | 8 GB DDR4-2133 |
| SSD | 512 GB, NVMe | 256 GB, NVMe | 256 GB | 1 TB, NVMe | 256 GB, NVMe | 256 GB |
Case
The slightly updated case is identical to that of the recently tested Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 to which we refer for this subject.
Features
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
| Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE | |
| Fujitsu LifeBook U747 | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 | |
Display
Our test unit is equipped with the same 14-inch FHD IPS panel as the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 based on the Intel Core i7 that we recently tested. Alternatively, there will also be an IPS panel with a WQHD resolution (2560x1440 pixels) for the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon. However, at the current time of testing, this is not available yet. According to the device specs, the average brightness of the panel is supposed to be 300 cd/m². Although it could not quite achieve this in our measurements, at 271 cd/m² the deviation from the manufacturer specifications is within a passable limit. The full display brightness is also available in battery operation. The screen is made by AU Optronics and we could not detect any PWM in our measurements. The screen did have some slight problems with clouding, which was visible in the corners. The high contrast (1738:1) in connection with the very low black value (0.16) ensures a vibrant color display. The homogeneous brightness distribution is also very good and is the second best value in our comparison here.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aydınlatma: 91 %
Batarya modunda parlaklık: 277 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1738:1 (Siyah: 0.16 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 3.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
87.5% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
62.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
87.6% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
61.6% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.02
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE B140HAN03_1, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 B140HAN03_1, , 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE VVX14T058J00, , 2560x1440, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 B140QAN01.5, , 2560x1440, 14" | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 AUO1136, , 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 LG LP140WF3, , 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -1% | -4% | 8% | 11% | 11% | 1% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 61.6 | 61.4 0% | 58.9 -4% | 66.7 8% | 69 12% | 67.9 10% | 66.1 7% |
| sRGB Coverage | 87.6 | 85.9 -2% | 83.1 -5% | 94.7 8% | 95.1 9% | 96.8 11% | 84.8 -3% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 62.6 | 62.4 0% | 60.3 -4% | 68.4 9% | 69.6 11% | 70 12% | 62 -1% |
| Response Times | 5% | 6% | 15% | 4% | 8% | 25% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 48 ? | 41.6 ? 13% | 47.2 ? 2% | 44 ? 8% | 46.4 ? 3% | 46.4 ? 3% | 36 ? 25% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 30.4 ? | 31.6 ? -4% | 27.6 ? 9% | 24 ? 21% | 28.8 ? 5% | 26.4 ? 13% | 23.2 ? 24% |
| PWM Frequency | 220 ? | ||||||
| Screen | -19% | -7% | -7% | -29% | -15% | -17% | |
| Brightness middle | 278 | 311 12% | 321.7 16% | 272 -2% | 327 18% | 327 18% | 291 5% |
| Brightness | 271 | 288 6% | 301 11% | 268 -1% | 311 15% | 316 17% | 296 9% |
| Brightness Distribution | 91 | 85 -7% | 89 -2% | 95 4% | 88 -3% | 87 -4% | 84 -8% |
| Black Level * | 0.16 | 0.24 -50% | 0.294 -84% | 0.32 -100% | 0.25 -56% | 0.35 -119% | 0.32 -100% |
| Contrast | 1738 | 1296 -25% | 1094 -37% | 850 -51% | 1308 -25% | 934 -46% | 909 -48% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.5 | 5.5 -22% | 3.96 12% | 2.61 42% | 6.1 -36% | 4.39 2% | 4.3 4% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.4 | 9 -7% | 6.69 20% | 6.43 23% | 12.2 -45% | 7.27 13% | 7.5 11% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.2 | 6.2 -94% | 3.15 2% | 3.31 -3% | 8.8 -175% | 4.69 -47% | 4.3 -34% |
| Gamma | 2.02 109% | 2.02 109% | 2.34 94% | 2.35 94% | 2.18 101% | 2.15 102% | 2.31 95% |
| CCT | 7042 92% | 5950 109% | 7082 92% | 6360 102% | 6172 105% | 7101 92% | 6529 100% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 57 | 55.96 -2% | 53.8 -6% | 63 11% | 61.56 8% | 62.52 10% | 55.46 -3% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 87.5 | 85.77 -2% | 82.7 -5% | 95 9% | 94.88 8% | 96.71 11% | 84.77 -3% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -5% /
-12% | -2% /
-5% | 5% /
-1% | -5% /
-17% | 1% /
-6% | 3% /
-8% |
* ... smaller is better
The subjective image quality is good, which can be attributed to the high contrast ratio and low black value. Nonetheless, the color-space deviations from the sRGB color space are slightly elevated in the delivery state. Compared to the structurally identical laptop with the Intel Core i7 CPU, our device comes out slightly better. Calibration with our X-Rite i1Pro 2 spectral photometer provides a clear improvement, especially in the grayscale.
Both of the 2017 devices are on the same level in the color-space coverage. We measure the color-space coverage of our test unit at 87% sRGB and 57% AdobeRGB. Here as well, the 2017 model cannot reach the values of its predecessor with the WQHD panel. For everyday life in the office, this is not an obstacle. The device can still be used for image-processing, but for professional image-processing you should rather use an external display with high color accuracy.
Although the display is covered with an anti-reflective layer which lowers the reflections, the semi-matte surface still shows reflections in unfavorable light conditions. Due to the low brightness, the outdoor suitability is limited. Despite the non-reflective surface, a place in the shade is necessary.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 30.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11.6 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. » 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 | ||
| 48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 26 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. » 81 % 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Thanks to the IPS panel, the viewing angles of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon can be called good. Like other IPS displays, our test unit has slight problems showing a gray veil at a steep angle from the corners. Such untypical viewing angles unusually do not occur in everyday life, so we do not expect any limitations. From a normal angle, the test image is displayed very well.
Performance
The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon is equipped with a modern Kaby Lake CPU. The combination with the very fast SSD results in a very high operational speed without any longer latencies. The Intel Core i5-7200U is the smallest model which is available for this model series. Yet the performance of the small dual-core SoC is good and can easily handle everyday life office tasks. Depending on the base configuration selected, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon is available with 8 or 16 GB of LPDDR3 RAM. However, there is no option to combine the Intel Core i5-7200U with the 16 GB of RAM. For that, the considerably more expensive device that can be configured with the Intel Core i5-7300U as the smallest CPU must be selected on the in-house shopping site. In any case, the integrated GPU of the processor handles the graphics output.
Processor
The Intel Core i5-7200U is a dual-core processor and currently a very widespread model. Of course it also supports Hyper-Threading, so that it can run multi-task operations excellently. Like in its sibling model with the Intel Core i7-7500U, the performance capabilities get a free run, which means that in our test unit with the Intel Core i5-7200U, the TDP was also raised to 25 Watts. In comparison to the reference devices, our test unit remained consistently in the middle of the field.
You can find further benchmarks for the Intel Core i5-7200U here.
In the continuous loop of Cinebench R15, the performance of the Intel Core i5-7200U can also be considered consistently positive. Starting at slightly above 320 points, the performance drops only minimally and then levels out at between 310 and 320 points. The comparison of the two Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 devices shows that the Intel Core i5-7200U can keep up very well with the Intel Core i7-7500U during continuous load. The reason can be found quickly, since the temperature goal of the Core i7 is already reached after a few seconds, so that the performance has to be throttled considerably. Thus the advantage of the supposedly much faster processor drops to a minimum, since in the continuous loop of Cinebench R15, the similar model with the Intel Core i7-7500U achieved only 324 points on average.
* ... smaller is better
System Performance
The system performance shows that all the devices that are equipped with an Intel processor from the seventh generation lead the field. However, our test unit is consistently beaten by the slightly faster devices equipped with the Core i7. The subjective overall performance of the system is mainly influenced positively by the fast NVMe SSD.
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3824 puan | |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 4600 puan | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4602 puan | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 3214 puan | |
Yardım | ||
Storage Solution
In our case, Lenovo trusts a 256 GB SSD by Toshiba for the storage solution. The M.2-format SSD is connected via the fast PCIe connector. The performance of the Toshiba SSD is good. According to AS SSD, the SSD achieves 1649 MB/s during sequential reads and a still good 775 MB/s during sequential writes. We also like the 4K-read performance which is at 34 MB/s. As a security feature, the SSD also supports self-encryption according to the OPAL 2.0 standard. The SSD can be exchanged without problems, since the bottom of the base can be removed easily. There are currently M.2 SSDs with storage capacities of 2 TB. According to information from the manufacturer, the open M.2-2242 slot (placeholder for a WWAN module) cannot be combined with an SSD.
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | 79% | 68% | -30% | 83% | 76% | -24% | |
| Read Seq | 1277 | 1827 43% | 1720 35% | 439.3 -66% | 1760 38% | 1649 29% | 504 -61% |
| Write Seq | 648 | 1383 113% | 1263 95% | 308.1 -52% | 1666 157% | 1265 95% | 497.8 -23% |
| Read 512 | 972 | 814 -16% | 1223 26% | 299.5 -69% | 832 -14% | 1252 29% | 396.7 -59% |
| Write 512 | 311 | 1098 253% | 1249 302% | 304.2 -2% | 1064 242% | 1244 300% | 283.4 -9% |
| Read 4k | 34.63 | 61 76% | 49.65 43% | 34.05 -2% | 53.2 54% | 53.3 54% | 35.73 3% |
| Write 4k | 128.5 | 172.2 34% | 123 -4% | 86.5 -33% | 167.4 30% | 159.9 24% | 87.8 -32% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 477.3 | 601 26% | 464.6 -3% | 339.6 -29% | 630 32% | 559 17% | 399.1 -16% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 241.2 | 495.6 105% | 354.7 47% | 279.2 16% | 533 121% | 376.7 56% | 249.7 4% |
Graphics Card
The integrated Intel HD Graphics 620 graphics unit alone is responsible for the graphics output. The manufacturer foregoes a dedicated graphics card. In connection with the Intel Core i5, the core clock speed is 1000 MHz. Since the RAM memory operates in dual-channel mode, the Intel HD Graphics 620 can unfold its full potential. The integrated graphics unit masters everyday office tasks just as well as playing high-resolution videos, since the H.265/HVEC video codecs as well as Google's VP9 can now be decoded directly by the hardware.
A look at the comparison shows that the two devices with the Core i7 from the seventh generation are dominant here as well. This results in a higher clock speed of the Intel HD Graphics 620 (1050 MHz), so that they can achieve better values here.
You can find further benchmarks of the Intel HD Graphics 620 here.
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 1706 puan | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 67643 puan | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 6140 puan | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 950 puan | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 435 puan | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 367 puan | |
Yardım | ||
Gaming Performance
The performance of the integrated graphics unit is limited to older and less-demanding games. Often the performance of the Intel HD Graphics 620 in our test unit is only sufficient for the minimum preset at a very low resolution. Newer games such as The Witcher 3 or Rise of the Tomb Raider completely overtax the graphics unit, so that playable frame rates cannot be achieved even in the lowest graphics settings.
| düşük | orta | yüksek | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 46.1 | 28.6 | 27.7 | 8.5 |
| Battlefield 4 (2013) | 36.2 | 27.6 | 18.5 | 6.1 |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 11.1 | |||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 16.9 | 8.7 |
Emissions
Noise Development
The cooling unit of our Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon consists of two heat-pipes and a small fan, which moves the hot air out of the case on the right side. The case does not have good passive cooling characteristics. As can be seen in the chart, the device is silent during idle operation. When working with the device, the fan turns on after some time. However, the background noise of the fan is very modest. Especially under full load, the Core i5 model differentiates itself from the Core i7 model in terms of noise volume. Compared to the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 (Core i7 model), the fan operates considerably more quietly and turns on less, which makes daily work with the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 (Core i5 model) clearly more pleasant. It should also be mentioned that the manufacturer has improved the BIOS in the meantime. Mainly in the Core i7 model, the update ensured a slight improvement in the noise development under low load. Only the Fujitsu Lifebook U747 is consistently quieter. At 33 dB(A), it is still very quiet under load.
Ses yüksekliği
| Boşta |
| 29.6 / 29.6 / 32.2 dB |
| Çalışırken |
| 34.2 / 36.1 dB |
 | ||
30 dB sessiz 40 dB(A) duyulabilirlik 50 dB(A) gürültülü |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm uzaklık) environment noise: 29.6 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 HD Graphics 620, i7-7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE HD Graphics 520, 6500U, Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -1% | 3% | 1% | -2% | 3% | 8% | |
| off / environment * | 29.6 | 29.3 1% | 28.8 3% | 29.1 2% | 28.9 2% | 29.1 2% | 28.2 5% |
| Idle Minimum * | 29.6 | 29.3 1% | 28.8 3% | 29.1 2% | 28.9 2% | 29.1 2% | 28.2 5% |
| Idle Average * | 29.6 | 29.3 1% | 28.9 2% | 29.1 2% | 28.9 2% | 29.1 2% | 28.2 5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 32.2 | 32.2 -0% | 28.9 10% | 29.1 10% | 30.1 7% | 29.1 10% | 28.2 12% |
| Load Average * | 34.2 | 34.3 -0% | 35 -2% | 35.6 -4% | 39.2 -15% | 32.6 5% | 31.2 9% |
| Load Maximum * | 36.1 | 39.3 -9% | 35.8 1% | 38.1 -6% | 39.2 -9% | 37.8 -5% | 33 9% |
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
In the temperatures measured, our test unit acts similar to the recently tested Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon that is based on the Core i7. In idle operation, the case does not warm up much. All the measured values remain under the 30 °C (86 °F) mark. Under load, the picture changes completely and the case temperatures rise up to 48 °C (118 °F) on top of the base, and the bottom is not much cooler at a maximum of 46 °C (114 °F). Thus it can become uncomfortable in the long run under load if the device sits on the lap.
The CPU starts the load test with the two Prime95 and FurMark tools at a clock speed of 3.1 GHz. In the beginning, the GPU runs at a clock speed of 950 MHz. Thus the full performance of 25 Watts is requested. However, after about six minutes the "temperature target" (75 °C, 167 °F) of the CPU is reached, so that the clock speed must now be reduced by thermal throttling. In further operation, the clock speed of the processor settles at 2.3 to 2.4 GHz. In the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 (Core i7 model) the clock speed of the CPU even dropped down to 1.8 - 1.9 GHz during the load test. This results in a clear advantage for our test unit with the Intel Core i5-7200U, which could maintain a higher clock speed consistently. In the GPU, there is no such performance drop. Even after an hour of continuous load, it still runs at 950 MHz.
To test the 3D performance after the load test, we run 3DMark 11 again immediately afterwards. The result is only minimally lower than compared to the cold start. In everyday operation, it should not come to any limitations worth mentioning.
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 HD Graphics 620, i7-7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2 | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE HD Graphics 520, 6500U, Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 HD Graphics 620, i7-7600U, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 HD Graphics 520, 6300U, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 HD Graphics 620, i5-7200U, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 9% | 8% | -1% | 9% | -3% | 15% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 48.5 | 48 1% | 40 18% | 43.2 11% | 43.5 10% | 43.2 11% | 42.6 12% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 46.1 | 47.2 -2% | 42.8 7% | 45 2% | 46.1 -0% | 47.1 -2% | 34.4 25% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 28.5 | 23.5 18% | 26.6 7% | 30.2 -6% | 24.7 13% | 30.5 -7% | 25.1 12% |
| Idle Bottom * | 27.8 | 22.6 19% | 27.4 1% | 30.6 -10% | 24.3 13% | 31.5 -13% | 24.6 12% |
* ... smaller is better
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48.5 °C / 119 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 46.1 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 29.5 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (33.9 °C / 93 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 27.7 °C / 81.9 F (-6.2 °C / -11.1 F).
Power Management
Power Consumption
In the direct comparison to the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 equipped with the Core i7, a clear advantage of our test unit with a Core i5 CPU is shown here. With 34 Watts during average load, it is considerably more efficient. We measure a maximum value of a good 43 Watts in the stress test. The Fujitsu Lifebook U747 allows itself still much less under load, but cannot maintain its advantage since the consumption values are too high during idle operation. The 65-Watt power supply offers sufficient power reserves and can provide power to the notebook through both USB-C ports.
| Kapalı / Bekleme modu | 0.25 / 0.42 Watt |
| Boşta | 3.8 / 7.1 / 8.3 Watt |
| Çalışırken |
34.2 / 43.3 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS 6300U, HD Graphics 520, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256 m.2, IPS, 1920x1080, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520, Samsung SSD PM871 MZNLN256HCHP, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | Lenovo ThinkPad T470s-20HGS00V00 i7-7600U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520, Samsung SM951 MZVPV256HDGL m.2 PCI-e, IPS, 2560x1440, 14" | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung MZYTY256HDHP, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -6% | -17% | 3% | -18% | -26% | 3% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 3.8 | 3.84 -1% | 7.6 -100% | 3.8 -0% | 4.64 -22% | 6.3 -66% | 4.11 -8% |
| Idle Average * | 7.1 | 6.3 11% | 9 -27% | 7.1 -0% | 8.93 -26% | 9.4 -32% | 7.87 -11% |
| Idle Maximum * | 8.3 | 8.6 -4% | 9.6 -16% | 7.7 7% | 9.12 -10% | 10.1 -22% | 8.74 -5% |
| Load Average * | 34.2 | 41.9 -23% | 24.5 28% | 30.2 12% | 42.2 -23% | 33.3 3% | 30.2 12% |
| Load Maximum * | 43.3 | 48.7 -12% | 30.3 30% | 44.7 -3% | 47.3 -9% | 49.5 -14% | 32.4 25% |
* ... smaller is better
Battery Life
Our test unit is equipped with a 57-Wh lithium-polymer battery which is built-in and not removable. Without load, a full battery charge lasts for a good 13.5 hours. Under load, however, the device must get back to the power supply after just two hours. Our WLAN test simulates the practical usage closer by calling up various websites in 30-second intervals based on a script. The "Balanced" power profile is active and the display brightness is adjusted to about 150 cd/m², which in our Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 corresponds to lowering the brightness by two steps. Here, the 2017 model based on the Core i5 processor achieves a runtime of 9:07 hours. You should plan about 2.5 hours (144 minutes) for a complete charging process. When playing videos, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 mutates into a little long-distance runner and lasts for a whole 9 hours and 33 minutes. The full 3D performance is also available in battery operation.
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HQS03P00 i7-7500U, HD Graphics 620, 57 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB-005XUS 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 52 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 20FB003RGE 6500U, HD Graphics 520, 52 Wh | Lenovo ThinkPad T470-20HD002HGE i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh | HP EliteBook Folio 1040 G3 6300U, HD Graphics 520, 45.6 Wh | Fujitsu LifeBook U747 i5-7200U, HD Graphics 620, 50 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 15% | -10% | -6% | -7% | -28% | -11% | |
| Reader / Idle | 819 | 1252 53% | 776 -5% | 942 15% | 530 -35% | 782 -5% | |
| H.264 | 573 | 711 24% | 510 -11% | 623 9% | 339 -41% | 490 -14% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 547 | 496 -9% | 411 -25% | 429 -22% | 438 -20% | 309 -44% | 430 -21% |
| Load | 122 | 110 -10% | 123 1% | 115 -6% | 110 -10% | 131 7% | 117 -4% |
Verdict
Artılar
Eksiler
The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 is a high-quality business laptop with faultless workmanship. The mobility, which the manufacturer aspires to with this series, in no way falls behind, since a weight of just barely above 1 kilogram (~2.2 lb) is what some other convertibles could only dream of. Compared to the 2016 model, besides an even smaller footprint, the new case also offers modern connections, such as full Thunderbolt 3 ports (USB-C port). With that, the device is also armed for the future. The good performance rounds up the whole package, which costs 1669 Euros (~$1869) with the equipment of our test unit.
Lenovo remains true to its standards and with the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 presents a very good business device. In addition, the notebook convinced us with excellent input devices - but we did not expect anything else from Lenovo.
Even though the Full HD IPS display offers good results, it cannot quite keep up with the WQHD panel of the predecessor. Overall, the device is compelling and is fun to work with. The good system performance ensures a decent work tempo in everyday life.
Yet it still gives reason for complaint. The lack of an SD-card reader can only be compensated for with an adapter, which is annoying when using SD-cards a lot. The high case temperatures under load are unpleasant as well and could make working with it on your lap uncomfortable at times.
Finally, there is also the question of which one of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 devices is better. At first glance looking at the technical data, of course a lot speaks for the model with the faster Intel Core i7-7500U processor, which can also compel with 16 GB of RAM. Nonetheless, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 based on the Intel Core i5-7200U also does very well. Even though at 8 GB, the working memory is only half the size, smooth work is ensured in the near future. In terms of performance, the faster and clearly more expensive X1 Carbon is only compelling for a short while, since under constant load it is barely faster than the considerably cheaper Core i5 model. For this reason, we are very critical of the high additional charge and would rather take the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017 with the Intel Core i5-7200U. The advantages of the Core i7 are just too small and also 16 GB of RAM is not absolutely necessary.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
- 06/14/2017 v6 (old)
Sebastian Bade
Price comparison
