@Dorby

Thanks. As I understand it the Yoga 7i with the Arc 370m has a 99 Wh battery but I'm guessing the GPU + Intel H series chip will eat right through that anyway. I will probably go with either last gen's LG Gram or the Inspiron 7620 which also seems have pretty good battery life. The Asus doesn't seem to be available in my region.

@Revachol

Unlikely because long runtimes usually require "U-series" laptop CPU, and also because 71Wh battery capacity is way too small for a 16 inch laptop. LG Gram 16 2-in-1 and Asus ZenBook Flip UX564 are good alternatives that can get comfortable full-day battery life.

Discussions about ppi aside does anyone here have an educated guess as to whether the larger battery on the model with the Intel GPU would actually result in improved battery life? Lenovo apparently claims a longer runtime for their 1080p video playback test but a shorter one for Mobile Mark 18. I'm interested in this laptop but would be using it for university where I sometimes don't have access to wall power for extended periods of time. That 8h benchmark just for websurfing is a potential dealbreaker for me

Quote from: RobertJasiek on August 05, 2022, 08:24:55Some people are farsighted while others are shortsighted; this difference explains why different people can perceive different pixel densities. Some may need 400ppi, others may be already happy with 200ppi if they cannot tell the difference to 400ppi.

A person with normal vision (and even with glasses) instantly sees a radically the best picture on 15.6" panel, if you set two version for it person with FHD and True 4K panels beside. I see instantly and the desire to use the FHD panel instantly disappears.

In the same way, if a person has everything ok with reactions, he instantly sees the difference as a picture in the dynamics on the "60Hz" panel with a response below 10ms and more than 30ms.

These statements are easily checked in any retail shop with their own eyes.

Anyone who instantly does not see the difference between the panel with 45-46% NTSC and 72%+ - by the definition of color blind. As far as I know, about 2 men from 10 color piles in the world and 1 woman out of 10. But this does not cancel the unfortunate fact that the cunning manufacturer uses the complete illiteracy of people to the panels in laptops, on which it is even impossible to see the pictures shot from the smartphone, not to mention About some serious work with color. Is it normal when cheap smartphones, almost all, without exception, have more than 90% SRGB, and a lot of laptops in the market, which is especially parasite - "game series" shameful screens with 45-46% and fake "60Hz", "120Hz" (this class is especially fake), etc.

Take the same ASUS TUF 2021 - there were no panels at all except fake "120Hz" with shameful color reproduction for 45-46% NTSC. Well, etc and huge response for true 120Hz class. Selling a "gaming laptop" that can not even draw 60FPS without disruption of synchronization is nonsense! What can be for example, the autosimulator games, if such a slow panel with response >16ms? I'm not even talking about collective games on the network, there with such a panel you can simply forget about competition and winning - even if the SoC and the GPU are formally get 100fps+, no sense on such a panel from this (from the point of view of the control circuit PC+human (I don't even talk about the inputlag for panel). Then why do people are plowing this stagnant garbage in warehouses?

NicoB provides some interesting opinions, may sometimes have to be more careful with technical terms and needs to respect other readers more. NicoB, it is possible to criticise others when they lack knowledge but it is unacceptable to criticise others for having other health conditions.

Some people are farsighted while others are shortsighted; this difference explains why different people can perceive different pixel densities. Some may need 400ppi, others may be already happy with 200ppi if they cannot tell the difference to 400ppi.

OK, so I won't be discussing with NikoB anymore. He obviously has a big opinion of himself, putting himself way above others and insulting them when he's absolutely nobody. I have been an IT specialist for the last 28 years, but unlike that guy, I never felt the need to brag about it. What's the use of being a "technical specialist" when you're still confused between refresh rate and response time? Lol.

He keeps talking nonsense, wanting 4K on a 16" screen at all costs "just because potatoes", calling others "laymen" and "illiterate", but refusig to check out a simple link by Tom's Hardware, simply because it proves him wrong. ROFL.

So I'm done with him. I wonder why he keeps posting here, since obviously this Lenovo convertible doesn't interest him. I guess he's posting here only out of frustration, bugging others instead of getting himself a life. Poor guy.

*End of transmission - I won't be replying to him anymore*

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 04, 2022, 19:57:58So yes, 4K is useless in a 16" computer screen.

You apparently blindly do not see the best quality of the text and the picture even on both eyes, even on the screen 14 "with 4K, and I already in at least two reviews clearly and clearly outlined the problem of the 2560s, which cannot be switched to FHD. And 4K can .

My smartphone has a PPI more than 440 and I never want less now. As well as I do not want to take a laptop with PPI less than 250. At least. And these are the same 4K+. I really laugh on an illiterate public, apparently blind, and even all the color blinds, since they cannot instantly distinguish 45-46% NTSC from 72%+. Although 99.9% have a smartphone with 72%+. Strange yes? On a funny screen 5-6 "(even in cheap smartphones), they look at the pictures in full color with excellent PPI (the picture looks like printed on a laser printer), and on 15-16"-they get a squalor instead of quality. And put up with this, that's what is amazing ...

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 04, 2022, 19:57:58I'm talking about a screen that refreshes itself 60 times per second, and YES, that is enough for most users.

Are you even able to read what I wrote earlier or do you also suffer from dyslexia?

All screens "60Hz" in fact is fake in laptop panels. In desktop monitor - there are fast and for "60Hz" class, this is evidenced by my old monitor before my eyes, in addition with a color space of 94-95% AdobeRGB.

When response above 30ms+ for B2W/G2G, which is typical for frank garbage "60Hz" panels in laptops, there can be no talk of any sufficiency, these are your personal speculations and no more. This is not enough for anyone. 100% of the townsfolk want more, just the majority are technically illiterate, but I do not.

And when the panel with a response of more than 16ms is sold in the "game laptop" - this is generally beyond the line of cynicism from brands.

And I do not need to give links to reviews for amateurs. I have been a technical expert for a long time.

@Dorby : I never said I preferred the 12700H/Arc 370M model. I only pointed out the differences (99 Wh battery). I'm assuming most of us know the differences between thin ultrabooks with low power "U/P" chips and performance laptops with "H/HS" chips.

@NikoB : seriously, do yourself a favor and try to improve your english in the future. You're starting your post with "I am ridiculous to read this from the owner of the smartphone"... and yes, you are indeed ridiculous. There are at least three mistakes in that very sentence.

So yes, 4K is useless in a 16" computer screen. In the same way, we could say 1080p is useless in a 8" smartphone screen. But there's a difference: we look at smartphones with our eyes centimeters away from the screen, so we can see the smallest details much more easily. We look at a computer screen with our eyes 0.5 to 1m away. It's not the same. One day you'll get it. Keep thinking.

About refresh rate and response time, you don't get it either. I'm not talking about any marketing class. I'm talking about a screen that refreshes itself 60 times per second, and YES, that is enough for most users.

Response time is something else ! Response time is the time it takes the screen to react after an action from the user (keypress, mouse click, etc). That's why it's so important for gamers, and so unimportant for other people.

But don't take my word for it. Do yourself a favor and read this link from Tom's Guide: tomsguide DOT com/us/refresh-rates-vs-response-times,news-24345.html
If it's too long for you, you can just stop at this: "As a general rule, if you're not gaming, 60 Hz is fine. If you are gaming, you want the highest refresh rate and the lowest response time you can afford."
You're welcome.

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 03, 2022, 16:58:53You seem to think that just because we want a convertible, we should compromise on things like CPU/GPU power.

There are 2 large categories of laptops sorted by presence of CPU and GPU power class - Ultrabook, and Performance Laptop. If you need CPU/GPU power, that's what a "2-in-1 Performance Laptop" is for. THIS review unit is a category of "2-in-1 Ultrabook" (the version of Lenovo Yoga 7 16 without Intel ARC dGPU). Some things you mentioned might be true for someone looking for a Performance Laptop, but rarely applies to those who want an Ultrabook.

Being lightweight, having good stylus, bright display, good speakers - all these features that make up the user-experience matter more to target consumers who are also simultaneously considering iPads, Surface, and Galaxy Tablets. Or maybe looking to make a switch over as loyal users of those more popular brands. This is where Samsung's Galaxy Book 360 lineup takes the crown , because it caters to this segment of the market better than the other 2-in-1 Ultrabook brands do, like the Yoga 16 iGPU.

Do not be confused, these are NOT the same people looking to buy hot, bulky and heavy performance laptop that adds the 2-in-1 functionality as a mere afterthought. (e.g. MSI Summit E16, Asus Flow X16, HP Spectre x360 16, etc). The Lenovo Yoga 7 16 with Intel H-series CPU + ARC dGPU would also belong in this second category.

Hope this answer clarifies parts of my previous comment.

I love the 0.3nits minimum brightness! Companies, or lenovo at least, finally pay attention to night time users :)

My perfect laptop display would be
-OLED or microled
-2K+ resolution
-120hz
-0.1nits minimum brightness

Also wanna comment on the discussion. I think most people dont care about resolution as long as its at least 1080p. Its enough and cheap, looks good. But 1080p definitely doesnt give the "retina" feeling. You definitely need a higher res screen even on a laptop. Ive been using 1080p 17.3 laptop for 9 years. Never had a problem when it comes to detail. But if you look for it, you can see that small text(under icons in dekstop or just general small text) isnt the smoothest, can notice the "square-ness" of it if you will. Kinda noticable from 75cm, even more obvious from 60cm and closer.

I'd just love a 3k+ laptop screen. Ive seen a 217 ppi 5k 27inc imac in store and no matter how close i looked at it i could never see a pixel it was really cool imo :)
From a normal distance everything is just super smooth and tiniest bits of detail is completely visible and detailed, no pixellation whatsoever. There was also a 21.5inch 2k model next to it, which comes to 136ppi, difference in the same picture was really big

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 04, 2022, 11:04:07No, 4K doesn't make any sense in a 16" screen, unless you have exceptional sight.

I am ridiculous to read this from the owner of the smartphone. And how do you survive there with 300PPI+ on the smartphone screen? Have not spoiled vision yet? And how I survive with 441ppi - horror full! I can't laugh ... Have you ever heard about scaling?

Once again - the higher the PPI - the more clearly the text and the picture. The higher the resolution the better. This can be said on autonomy, but most of the time people use laptops from BP, but in this case it does not matter, but the eyes are immediately relief. And without scaling, even FHD resolution is too small and you still need to do scaling.

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 04, 2022, 11:04:07Most people are fine with 60 Hz. I've been fine with 60 Hz for the last 30 years.

You write illiterate nonsense again. "60Hz" is just a designation of the class and no more than which hides fraud of manufacturers with different levels of panels.

I have a monitor with "60Hz" in front of my eyes, but with a response only 7ms and nearby Dell G5 with "60Hz", but there is a tall of more than 35 ms. Guess where even surpit is disgusting to me and my eyes get tired many times more? This is your homework for today.

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 04, 2022, 11:04:07But it's a SMALL DETAIL for most people.

Most people are illiterate and do not understand what they are depriving themselves of. I could give quotes of classics about the "majority", but I will not. You will find yourself...

The task of a technic specialist and just a civil activist is to turn the illiterate majority for the better future, and not vice versa, as greedy manufacturers and cunning marketers try.

To NikoB, I would advise two things:
1. Stop lecturing others like you were superior to them. Your writing style is unpleasant, at least to me.
2. Improve your written english. Some parts of your text hurt the eyes way more than 60 Hz scrolling.

I will only comment on two things:

1. 4K.
- No, 4K doesn't make any sense in a 16" screen, unless you have exceptional sight. Which very few people have. You seem to forget that not everybody is 20 years old, that a lot of people wear glasses, and that when you're 45 you generally start losing sight.
- Even if it made any sense (which again it doesn't), the price to pay in terms of GPU power is too high for the moment in any demanding application. It's too high even for desktops, so it's even worse with laptop GPUs, with physical constraints, heat constraints, noise constraints, etc. Sure, you can switch to 1080p whenever you need it. So you'll be forced to spend your time switching back and forth. I personally hate that.

2. Response time and Refresh rate.
- Most people are fine with 60 Hz. I've been fine with 60 Hz for the last 30 years. Sure, scrolling is not perfect, but no, it does NOT hurt the eyes. White browser backgrounds hurt my eyes much, much more. Of course 120 Hz is better. Smoother scrolling and everything. Yes, it's definitely better. But it's a SMALL DETAIL for most people. That is the truth. Only capricious/picky people would complain about something so unimportant.
- Similar thing for response time. It's important for gamers, and much less for the average user.

You don't speak like a layman. You speak like a youngster that hasn't understood yet that there are other people on this planet and that we don't all have the same needs. Either you are a youngster or you act like one, but the result is the same. So before lecturing others, maybe start with yourself. Cheers!

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 03, 2022, 10:33:34and definitely not 4K (I don't need that much pixels, and the GPU doesn't need them either).

A very naive misconception of the layman-dilent.
Firstly, 4K is a super-clear screen for the eyes. There can be no dispute about the fact that the higher the PPI, the more monolitical and more clearly the text, like the graphics/video/photo.
Secondly, 4K easily switches to the FHD mode, thanks to 100% compatibility (division 3840/2 - 4 pixels 4k to 1 pixel fhd) and exactly the same clarity of the picture (except for the fall PPI by 2 times). What are the screens of the 2560x don't offer a priori. When switching them in the 1920x - we get a unclear picture on the screen. This is not an analog CRT, but a digital screen.
Well, in the third - most often only 4K panels for laptops remained true 8-bit hardware without 6+2(frc). And their viewing angles are usually the best. At the same time, 120Hz 4K panel is already the second year, at least from AUO.

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 03, 2022, 10:33:34ow response and high refresh rate (I'm not a gamer - if you are then buy a gaming laptop !)

Another misconception of the layman-dilent:
As many times I already wrote, on slow panels, even scrolling the text in the browser torments eyes (ghost/blurring), not to mention the terrible quality of the video. Panels with a response of more than 16ms(B2W/G2G) are fundamentally not able to draw 60fps video without disruption of synchronization in 100% of cases. Therefore, in 2022, all panels, without exception, are required to have a response of no more than 16ms on B2W/G2G. This is the minimum possible standard of a normal eyebrush panel and especially for video content.

Quote from: Dorby on August 03, 2022, 13:22:25Personally have tried 16:10 on convertible laptops. As an iPad (4:3) user, it is still much too narrow and effectively kills Portrait mode because most windows apps are not designed to be used vertically.

Even on YouTube, you can immediately see the advantage 16:10 - the controls do not close the picture. Yes, 16:10 are less pleasant to watch a fullscreen video and especially cinema (21: 9) - but who in his right mind watch a movie on the laptop screen (yes, I am aware that youth even watching 90% on smartphones. Pictures on the scale of the spectacle). For this, there are projectors and large screens.


----------
Specifically for the topic -  there are several cons:
1. Low contrast of the panel. Moreover, in the glossy version - 1000:1...this is a shame. At least they can achieved 1500:1, on smartphones with a glossy screen 2000:1 happens even in cheap models...
2. Poorly optimized memory - high latency (>100ns) and low throughput (especially write mode).
3. Wi-Fi is not good for AX somewhere wrong with the antennas.

In testing, I do not like that "Average Load" does not correspond to the basic TDP - ~28-30W. Moreover, PL1 24W. The author - how did it happen that it eats 60W+, with such small PL1 в sustained mode?!

The noise is certainly wild - the device is too noisy. There is no check on the base for the Alder Lake P TDP of 28W, it is not clear how it is noisy with such consumption. In general, if the noise is more than 28dB at a cores load in the region of 25-30% - this is a bad choice for lovers of quiet and not distracting the attention laptops.

I will not comment on weight, because it is impossible to call "portable" 16" a priori, even if it weighed 1.3kg. Therefore, the tablet mode is frank nonsense, like a glossy screen, which is a forced as feature due to the touchscreen.

Well, again, I emphasize - in the yard 2022! 32GB of memory is a penny (cheaper than 1TB SSD from "brands"). As long as they try to sell us soldered, miserable 16GB, greedy manufacturers?

If you don't understand why 16:10 is useful it's probably because you don't need it. Other people do. I would even prefer 3:2, but I don't know of any 3:2 convertible with a 15"+ screen. So 16:10 is the next best thing.

You seem to think that just because we want a convertible, we should compromise on things like CPU/GPU power. I disagree. I won't compromise on anything except on weight. I don't care if the thing weights 2 kg. I can handle it. I prefer a 2 kg beast rather than a 1.5 kg with outdated hardware such as the LG Gram 16T90P. Not to mention that the Gram isn't even sold in France where I live, but that's another story.

If I don't wanted a 2-in-1, there would be plenty of other options. But I want a 2-in-1. So currently my choices involve :
- This Lenovo convertible, either with a 1260P or a 12700H chip (depends on the Intel Arc 370M)
- Some other convertible with a new-gen AMD chip (6800U or 6800H) - still waiting for it, possibly the new Lenovo Ideapad Flex 5 Gen 8 in a few months, or any other alternative.
- The next LG Gram, provided the chip is updated and it sells in France, which is unlikely. The Gram was my first choice a year ago, until I discovered that I just couldn't buy it. And I want an AZERTY keyboard, not a QWERTY one.

I don't see any other options, since I won't even consider 15.6" screens.

I hope you can see that we all have our own criteria that don't necessarily match yours. ;)

Personally have tried 16:10 on convertible laptops. As an iPad user, it felt much too narrow and effectively killed Portrait mode because most touchscreen-based windows apps (that I use) were not designed to be used vertically. For instance when you have a giant left side menu-bar in the app 16:10 feels like 90 degree rotated 21:9 in portrait mode. That's why I prefer 4:3 on any tablet.

Quote from: Jose Hidalgo on August 03, 2022, 10:33:34And sorry but more processing power and more comfortable keyboards are things that matter much more to me than brightness (I don't care about brightness, I don't even use laptops outside), low response and high refresh rate (I'm not a gamer - if you are then buy a gaming laptop !) or stylus (who even needs a stylus?).

These are convertible laptops first and foremost. Yoga 7 16 is definitely a better "clamshell ultrabook" of the two and what you should get IF the 2-in-1 factor has no importance to you. But you would be over-paying for features that you aren't event going to use, because what makes the Yoga 7 so expensive IS the fact that it's a 2-in-1 laptop.