Lenovo ThinkPad T16 G1 Intel laptop review: 16-inch marathon runner

[Redaktion]

The Lenovo ThinkPad T16 G1, a 16-inch laptop with long battery runtimes, has been redesigned with a 16:10 display, 28-watt Alder Lake and carbon fiber. The business notebook is very quiet, economical and has a strong short-term turbo. But what about long-term performance?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-T16-G1-Intel-laptop-review-16-inch-marathon-runner.656383.0.html

[NikoB]

- single-channel RAM in our model

A rhetorical question for those who senselessly test such models in single-channel mode - can you practically point out at least one idiot buyer who will use a laptop in single-channel mode? A 16 ram module is immediately bought to enable dual-channel mode. But against the backdrop of an inflated huge price, this module costs a penny. Hence the direct question - what is the point of testing an incomplete memory configuration? Readers expect something else from you. I don't see a problem with having a set of memory modules to install on my own for full-fledged tests.

---
It is surprising that in other "top" models, Lenovo some reason output Display Port 2.0, although not a single Alder Lake in reality can physically support it at 80Gb/s (otherwise it is not DP2.0 at all). Well, okay, these are all the pranks of dumb-headed marketers. Again, despite the fact that Intel assures that all Alder Lake will support HDMI 2.1, Lenovo's marketers decided not to output it in this series.

Move on. Sustained performance is unacceptably low, easily losing to AMD models, even from 2020! It's a shame! Despite the fact that in terms of noise, even with a ridiculous one heat pipe and one cooler, there is a margin - there is only 25dB (if you believe the measurements), despite the fact that the laptop, again, according to the measurements, consumes considerable 27W at this moment. For some reason, in other models, with 2 coolers and large heat pipes, Lenovo engineers disgraced themselves much more with such consumption. How so?

It turns out that the buyer of this model obviously does not reach 35-40% of the performance of 1240p (which should have at least 28W in PL1) in PL1 mode, although there is a margin for the noise shelf. This is all very strange...

At the same time, the processor again does not gain in the impulse PL2, because, according to Intel specs, it should consume 64W (and the PSU allows it). Why was it limited in PL1? It was completely possible to set even 70W/30W - PL2/PL1. Especially if add a second heat pipe, which would increase the weight by no more than 100-120g. Well, it would weigh 2.050kg, so what? 14" T models weighed more than it model for 12 years ago...

The weight of a laptop (especially with a PSU) is already too large, why save on a cooling system by weight?

Well, you can immediately cancel that the shameful memory is only 3200, instead of ddr5 4800, so the buyer is seriously deprived in terms of memory speed, which can be seen from the tests (even if we extrapolate the dual-channel mode). Despite the fact that there is no discrete chip and a dedicated vram for heavy tasks. The built-in video chip is seriously deprived in terms of memory bandwidth.

The keyboard is again completely uncomfortable - stupidly some of the keys are narrowed even in width, and the entire Fx row is absolutely not suitable for blind typing after switch from a full-fledged desktop PC keyboard.

The ports are located completely unsuccessfully, moreover, because. exhaust on the left. Why weren't they brought out like in L5Pro, including power in the back? Again sticking out to the side perpendicular to the case, the usb-c power plug, which is weak in strength, breaks out at once in this position by a right-handed person for sofa use.

I can hardly imagine the target audience of this craft. It's not portable, it's not light, it's not fast, it doesn't have a 4k screen like it old versions (and all versions from fhd to 2.5k have poor viewing angles only 170gr and no more 120-165Hz options like I5Pro/L5Pro and lower contrast), it loses the L5Pro in almost everything (especially the 2021 model), which firms are buying up for workers without giving a damn about the pointless Thinkpad series with a bunch of pointless restrictions. Clearly, the T line is getting lower and lower in status from Lenovo marketers...

One big disappointment. Even in the noise shelf below 30-31dB they could not fit in as in the early models of the E series type..A relatively solid (but pointless due to size and weight) slow "typewriter" in terms of performance expected from 2022 models on Alder Lakes SoCs...

[NikoB]

I'm sorry, the exhaust is on the right, of course (where the right-handed person has a hand on the rug with the mouse, it will sweat more from this, and as you know, most people in the world are right-handed), which does not change the essence - why is the power supply not behind a separate plug on backplate like L5Pro? Well, or left-right on the edge ( as for example in the cheap S340 series, where the power port is completely successful at the very edge, in terms of using it from a power supply unit (but the power supply unit itself is completely unsuccessful without grounding and in terms of balance in power outlets) of the usual durable angular round power plug (complete with an adapter to usb-c). Usb-c is the same as a backup power and charging port, if for some reason the normal one was not at hand. An attempt to save a penny on the reliability of use from a PSU leads to idiotic unreliable technical and ergonomically uncomfortable solutions. Engineers probably understand all this, but are they now deciding something?

[NikoB]

I draw your attention to the fact that Lenovo itself assures that the model weighs 1.65-1.67kg, and the author of the review measured almost 2kg ..

[Hunter2020]

I haven't encountered any laptop that ever did the display right.  Desktop monitors tend to have pixels sizes too large, while laptops tends to have them too small.  You know the story of Godilocks and the 3 Bears...   The optimum laptop screen size is FHD+ 16:10 at 17.3 inches.  Wished some company was smart enough to make smaller laptops with same pixels density as the 17.3 incher above.

[Marvin Gollor]

I draw your attention to the fact that Lenovo itself assures that the model weighs 1.65-1.67kg, and the author of the review measured almost 2kg ..

No, Lenovo states "starting at 1.65 kg". This is with the lower-capacity battery. also, the 2.5K screen could be lighter than FHD screens. In the review, I stated: "Our model weighs 1.95 kg, which is mostly due to the selected battery capacity."

according to RAM: We test the machines as they are sold. I think most users won't be aware they run a system in single-channel mode. It is better to test with what the machines come with. It would be possible to add dual-channel benchmarks on top, yes. But we all know how the graphics or system performance is with dual-channel. there are similar systems in the comparison field or you can add them by yourself. no need for us to do several hours of additional testing, at least not for every machine which comes in single-channel config.

@Hunter: I agree. My T410 with 1440x900 approves. Also my X201 with 1280x800. But I also like the doubled resolution so that scaling can be set to 200 %. My HP 8740W 17,1" 16:10 @FHD+ DreamColor is the best, too @100% scaling.

[Mikolaj]

Hi!
Thanks for the review. Are you able to tell me when you will post a review of the AMD version? It seems like it would be a better choice, but it lacks thunderbolt and I have been reading about Bluetooth issues on it. It would also be interesting to see a comparison between the FHD+ LP and the 2.5k displays (the quality and power consumption)

[Marvin Gollor]

Hi!
Thanks for the review. Are you able to tell me when you will post a review of the AMD version? It seems like it would be a better choice, but it lacks thunderbolt and I have been reading about Bluetooth issues on it. It would also be interesting to see a comparison between the FHD+ LP and the 2.5k displays (the quality and power consumption)

We will def. test it! Since we have a lot of review units on the waiting list, it will take a couple of weeks!

[NikoB]

The optimum laptop screen size is FHD+ 16:10 at 17.3 inches.

The higher the ppi, the higher the picture quality. This is absolutely and undeniable by anyone.

Thus, at the end of 2022, buying a screen of less than 4k is simply ridiculous, it's another matter that we are going to sell outright garbage for crazy money at a much higher price. And it looks like an oligopolistic conspiracy of the entire "workshop" of laptop manufacturers. Because a monstrous difference in the retail price between a 4k panel and an fhd panel is not observed by me in practice. The difference is tolerable, and the difference in the quality of the picture, text, photo, video is HUGE. You have to be either an idiot or a blind man to argue this, especially in business models where high 3D performance is not required. In games, even a dumb person should understand that the resolution from which fhd is obtained by integer division is many times better in sharpness than miserable 2.5k screens - neither this nor that - ppi is still small, but lowering the resolution in games will not work to fhd, because in this mode, everything will be muddy.

When I preached this in 2008-2007, in many places on the forums, I understood the technical and worldly illiteracy of the usual crowd of inhabitants. But now, when almost everyone in at least a relatively developed part of the world sees smartphone screens with 300+ ppi in front of them, what kind of troglodyte do need to be to deny the need for high ppi on a laptop and monitor screen and the extreme importance of this high resolution compatibility with fhd? Thus, we again come to a resolution of at least 4k on laptops, as the minimum required for a high-quality picture and, of course, with a color reproduction of at least 72% + NTSC.

The meaning of a high ppi is absolutely clear - to eliminate any eye fatigue (read the nervous system, i.e. the brain) during forced automatic refocusing from the picture itself to its pixel structure. It simply should not be visible at any acceptable distance. For laptops/monitors it is 30-50cm. For smartphones 20-25cm. The lower the ppi, the worse the quality of the picture. The text benefits from this as much as possible. vector fonts, i.e. are simply scaled and become this even clearer, i.e. more ergonomic.

As I wrote many times, 8k resolution will finally close this topic forever for humanity. On screens up to 32" (and you really don't need more in most cases), the picture will always look like a paper printed on a laser printer. And what is again great - 8k easily turns into 4k if necessary or fhd (for 3D if fps is lower then 60 in "ultra" quality) by integer resizing, i.e. 16 pixels 8k in 4 pixels 4k or 1 pixel fhd without any loss of pixel sharpness (i.e. only the ppi of what is displayed will suffer, but not the pixel sharpness on the screen).

[NikoB]

Everyone who sat on a 4k 15.6 screen will never voluntarily switch to an fhd screen if they have the right to choose (and it is just artificially and intentionally limited, although, as I wrote above, the difference in the retail price between a 4k panel and fhd is not so huge as % from retail price of mid-range laptops, so that some of the buyers voluntarily refuse this). As even the example of this 2022 model shows, Lenovo deliberately excluded the 4k screen option, although on the contrary, it had to sell this(and all series from mid-range) series (taking into account its price) exclusively with a 4k@120Hz screen with a really working VRR, which is important not only in games, but also in everyday use (same exactly-timed video, no VSync visual glitches). And they sell us rubbish outdated for 5-7 years as a "modern" screen..

Everything has been ready for a long time in order to throw out all the panels with ppi below 250 into the trash. And this needs to be done with some kind of strong-willed decision, as the late Steve Jobs once gave a powerful kick to the rotten cell phone market. But the new "Steve Jobs", alas, is no more, at least on the visible horizon.

As in smartphones, then higher the batch producing globaly, the lower the cost of one copy. And given the already small difference in price relative to the overall price of a laptop (and the screen is what you will be looking at for years), all this old-fashioned panels with low ppi steaming looks extremely disgusting in 2022.

[NikoB]

Moreover, even a game in fhd resolution on an 8k panel will obviously look visually better for eyes, more monolithic, because the pixel spacing will be reduced to invisible to the human eye even when 16 pixels of 8k panel display the one logical pixel in fhd mode.

[ondro]

1.The higher the ppi, the higher the picture quality.
2....at least 4k on laptops..

NikoB. I can't agree with you.
1.the higher the ppi is not a guarantee of the higher picture quality. The resulting quality depends on several factors. PPI is just one of them. Info that you have fHD/QHD 4k,... monitor(laptop, TV, ..) means nothing. The quality(technology) of the panel is more important than its resolution.

2.fHD is perfectly fine for 16". You can't see pixel structure on it(it's problem focusing from short distance).
Guess what. I have a 30" 16:10 Dell monitor with only QHD(2560x1600) resolution and I'm happy with it. I can see something like pixel structure from +-15 cm, but my standard viewing distance is 60-70cm.

[NikoB]

the higher the ppi is not a guarantee of the higher picture quality. The resulting quality depends on several factors. PPI is just one of them.

It should be quite obvious to everyone that when I write about the difference in ppi, all other factors are either the same in quality or better at higher ppi. And now it really is.

.fHD is perfectly fine for 16".

Absolutely not. You are just lying. However, any owner of a smartphone can make sure that you are lying, so what do you expect? You don't have an ace up your sleeve.

You can't see pixel structure on it(it's problem focusing from short distance).

Read above. Subpixels have nothing to do with it, pixels are visible perfectly from 30-50cm, as well as the presence of an interpixel grid (and this is the Achilles' heel of all IPS). Moreover, this 16" fhd, to its complete disgrace, merges a 16-year-old TN screen with a resolution of 1680x1050 15.4" over the solidity of the picture. And this is also a real empirical experience, although it wins in terms of color reproduction and viewing angles vertically (and far from all horizontally). Reading text and looking at photos from the point of view of the solidity of fonts and photos is much more pleasant for me on this TN from time immemorial. Is this progress? This is a complete failure of progress.

Well, or look at same the shame of the latest SSDs on the pci-e 5.0 bus - manufacturers boast of large-block and multi-threaded read/write speeds up to 10-12Gigabyte/s, and in 4k IOPs in one thread (which is most critical) all are also shameful less than 100Megabyte/s..

Gradually, here and there, new bottlenecks appear in the industry, which ordinary people, who have little understanding of IT, are simply aware of. They are not given it. Now the entire computer manufacturing industry is rapidly approaching a technological dead end, which simply does not allow providing new levels of computational speed to solve new level of aims in a new class of software so that everyone can notice a qualitative leap in progress. Quantum computing and neuroprocessors based on ordinary logic are useless today and in the next 30 years in the mass case for that new civilization jump. Here we are throwing beads purely on trifles, something that affects our senses and provides us with ergonomic comfort at least at such a primitive level, which should have long been the minimum standard (like the official minimum wage, although it is there, hehe , nuances...)

[NikoB]

I can see something like pixel structure from +-15 cm, but my standard viewing distance is 60-70cm.

I am very sorry that you have such poor eyesight. This is trouble. (

[adxlk]

I can see something like pixel structure from +-15 cm, but my standard viewing distance is 60-70cm.

I am very sorry that you have such poor eyesight. This is trouble. (

i want to have a 1 to 1 talk with you. Your knowledge is too good to not share. Can you message me? Please.