Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 16 G9 im Test - Multimedia-Laptop mit 120-Hz-Display und Core Ultra 7

[Redaktion]

Das IdeaPad Pro 5 16 ist ein großer Multimedia-Laptop mit einem aktuellen Meteor-Lake-Prozessor, 120-Hz-Display und modernen Anschlüssen. Lenovo bietet aber auch ein AMD-Modell und wir wollen herausfinden, was die bessere Wahl ist.

https://www.notebookcheck.com/Lenovo-IdeaPad-Pro-5-16-G9-im-Test-Multimedia-Laptop-mit-120-Hz-Display-und-Core-Ultra-7.833162.0.html

[NikoB]

The author clearly deliberately overestimated the results by 10-15%, because in this review (www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Lenovo-Yoga-Pro-7-14-Laptop-Intel-Arc-stellt-sich-der-Radeon-780M.808871.0.html)
The 55W 155H produced much less than the 50W here.
Again, the loss of the 155H to the outdated 7840U (at 2 times smaller PL1) is colossal in the AIDA64 RayTrace64 test, which only proves that some tests simply do not show reality.

Memory latency is depressing - it determines the response speed of the system and software. This is a shame for x86 at the memory controller level.

Again, the lack of power in the back or an angular round plug precludes comfortable use of the laptop in a relaxed state reclining on the sofa or bed - for right-handed people, the USB-C power plug will stick out strictly perpendicular to the body on the left, in the same place as the legs in this position - therefore spontaneous, accidental Breaking out the USB-C power socket is almost guaranteed. What prevented you from making the power supply in the back or a round corner plug, and leaving USB-C as a backup option on the road (although I doubt that anyone will carry a 2kg+ 16") laptop with them on business trips), for example through an adapter?

Again, the SD card test is outdated. Your "reference" card, author, is long outdated - buy a normal SD UHS3+ class with at least a read/write speed of 200MB/s.

It's also a complete shame that the business laptop obviously doesn't have RJ45 at 5Gbps for high-speed connection to home NAS/routers and corporate networks. And this is in 2024, in the middle!

The author himself noted that the noise is increased, and at the slightest serious load, the coolers begin to howl wildly. This means that during real surfing, and even more so during intensive work in 2-3 browsers (plus the background software constantly jerking the cores by 15-20%) - the coolers will constantly howl at an extremely unpleasant noise level, which will very quickly bring a normal worker out of a nervous state balance.

Even from the point of view of playing games that are 9-10 years outdated, this model is shameful. 16fps in Ultra quality in GTA V covered with moss and only 40fps in High! Despite the fact that the mobile GTX1050 from 2016 (8 years ago, damn it!) produced 55-60fps in High settings! Where is at least stable 60fps in GTV5 in Ultra quality from the mass-produced cheap ordinary igpu 2024?

The question is: why such a model, who is the target group? I don't understand! For business purposes everything is disgusting. For multimedia it's also bad. I see from our retail networks that this series is not popular (can be seen from the frequency of purchases and the number of reviews), which is obvious with such shortcomings and limitations.

Finally, someone make a normal 17-18" 4k 16:10 1500:1+ office/home multimedia laptop with a real IPS response time of 6-7 ms on G2G/B2W and multi-row backlighting without glare. And normal ports/power at the back and on the side, so that it is comfortable for everyone to use the laptop from the power supply 100% of the time.

[Hotz]

Even from the point of view of playing games that are 9-10 years outdated, this model is shameful. 16fps in Ultra quality in GTA V covered with moss and only 40fps in High! Despite the fact that the mobile GTX1050 from 2016 (8 years ago, damn it!) produced 55-60fps in High settings! Where is at least stable 60fps in GTV5 in Ultra quality from the mass-produced cheap ordinary igpu 2024?

The GTX 1050 Ti was "supra-optimised" by Nvidia. And especially for GTA5. The high fps of the 1050Ti in GTA5 still amazes me compared to other GPUs.

If integrated graphics drivers were as optimised as that, we could have had the same performance 5 years ago already. AMD is close to that, at least closer than Intel.

If you wish to know why the Intel Core Ultra is ultra-bad on GTA5 high/ultra settings: it was explained in an interview with an Intel engineer on Gamer Nexus: there is an error in the GTA5 game engine with the MSAA setting, which causes the huge frame drop. And it only happens with this game engine, not in others. AMD and Nvidia had the same problem, but "fixed" it via workaround in their drivers (which is paradox in its own way, that OTHERS have to fix the issue of a flawed game engine...).

Game engines and drivers seem to be mess, often demanding fixes on a per-game-basis. As ridiculous as it sounds. That is also the reason, why the driver packages from Nvidia and AMD are so big - because it contains countless optimisations on per-game-basis and even game-settings-basis, and has grown bigger and bigger.

Most people would think (I did as well), that driver updates would improve the performance generally, for everything, but it absolutely doesn't seem to be that way.

[NikoB]

Yes, for a person who doesn't care about games, why don't they need drivers bloated by 4-6 times in size (monstrous 2GB!). We need compact versions of 100-150MB and nothing extra. I recently discovered that even the latest NVidia drivers are significantly worse in terms of settings than the AMD drivers from 15 years ago. And not only that, what works in AMD drivers and seems to be in NVidia drivers (like manually setting a new video mode) does not work in NVidia drivers, but works fine in AMD drivers of older versions. This makes me very sad. The drivers are getting bigger and bigger, but the basic features are getting smaller and smaller...