Ryzen 7 7745HX性能首次亮相:联想Legion Pro 5 16代8笔记本评测

联想Legion Pro 5 16ARX8是英特尔Legion Pro 5 16IRX8的AMD版本。两种型号都采用相同的Legion Pro 5 16 Gen 8机箱,其他方面在视觉上是相同的。我们建议查看我们的 关于Legion Pro 5 16IRX8的现有评论以了解更多关于该型号的物理特性,因为我们的许多评论仍然适用于Legion Pro 5 16ARX8。
我们的测试装置是一个更高端的配置,配备Zen 4 Ryzen 7 7745HX CPU,140 WGeForce RTX 4070 GPU,以及165 Hz 1600p IPS显示屏,零售价约为1600美元。其他SKU可能包括Ryzen 5 7645HX,GeForce RTX 4050,或240 Hz IPS显示屏。这款特殊的机型是首批配备中端Ryzen 7 7745HX的机型之一,而早期的Zen 4笔记本电脑只配备价格较高的Ryzen 9 7945HX。
这一领域的竞争者包括其他中端到高端游戏笔记本电脑,如 华硕ROG Strix G16, Razer Blade 16, 联合利华GM6PX7X, 或 MSI Pulse GL76.Legion 7系列比我们的Legion Pro 5高一个档次,有更快的CPU和GPU选项可供挑选。
更多联想的评论:
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
88.4 % | 05/2023 | Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 R7 7745HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | 2.5 kg | 26.8 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
87.9 % | 05/2023 | Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 i7-13700HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Laptop GPU | 2.5 kg | 26.8 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
88.2 % | 03/2023 | Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 i7-13700HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | 2.2 kg | 22 mm | 16.00" | 2560x2600 | |
87.7 % | 04/2023 | Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU | 2.5 kg | 29.9 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
88.4 % | 03/2023 | Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU | 2.4 kg | 30.4 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
88 % | 04/2023 | Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W R9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU | 2.7 kg | 29.7 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 |
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
案例 - 相同的外观和相同的端口
AMDLegion Pro 5 16ARX8与英特尔Legion Pro 5 16IRX8共享同一机箱。虽然大多数AMD和英特尔变体之间通常有一些端口差异,但这两个型号之间实际上没有差异,因为联想已经选择在所有Legion 5 Pro SKU上排除USB 4和Thunderbolt支持,无论CPU选项如何。这可以看作是一种迫使用户考虑更昂贵的Legion 7系列的方式,因为该系列默认包括Thunderbolt支持。
沟通
AMD型号将常见的英特尔AX211换成了不太常见的联发科MT7922。在与我们的6GHz网络配对时,性能是稳定和可靠的。
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
网络摄像头

显示器 - 165赫兹,1600p,全sRGB
有趣的是,我们的AMD供电的Legion Pro 5 16ARX8采用了与英特尔供电的Legion Pro 5 16IRX8不同的IPS面板(CSOT MNG007DA1-Q vs. AU Optronics B160QAN03.1),尽管这两块面板具有相似的165 Hz原生刷新率、1600p原生分辨率、约1000:1的对比度和100%的sRGB覆盖。CSOT面板的黑白和灰度响应时间稍快,但对于基本相同的观看体验来说,其差异充其量是微不足道的。
第二块面板是可用的,它承诺有更亮的500尼特背光和更快的240赫兹刷新率。我们下面的测量结果只反映了基本的165赫兹面板。
|
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 355.3 cd/m²
Contrast: 1110:1 (Black: 0.32 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.13 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.2, calibrated: 0.32
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
72.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.6% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
70.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.24
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 CSOT T3 MNG007DA1-Q, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 AU Optronics B160QAN03.1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 BOE CQ NE160QDM-NZ1, IPS, 2560x2600, 16.00 | Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 BOE0AF0 NE160QDM-NZ1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ TL160ADMP03-0, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W NE160QDM-NM4, MiniLED, 2560x1600, 16.00 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 0% | -4% | -4% | 18% | 22% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 70.4 | 71.2 1% | 67.5 -4% | 67.3 -4% | 97 38% | 99.4 41% |
sRGB Coverage | 99.6 | 98.8 -1% | 96.4 -3% | 96.7 -3% | 99.9 0% | 100 0% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 72.6 | 73.3 1% | 68.6 -6% | 68.9 -5% | 84.9 17% | 90.8 25% |
Response Times | -61% | -44% | -51% | 27% | -113% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 7 ? | 14.5 ? -107% | 12.6 ? -80% | 14.5 ? -107% | 5.1 ? 27% | 15.2 ? -117% |
Response Time Black / White * | 9.1 ? | 10.4 ? -14% | 9.8 ? -8% | 8.6 ? 5% | 6.6 ? 27% | 19 ? -109% |
PWM Frequency | 12000 ? | |||||
Screen | -17% | -69% | -54% | -39% | 71% | |
Brightness middle | 355.3 | 405.7 14% | 338.6 -5% | 372 5% | 470 32% | 712 100% |
Brightness | 340 | 368 8% | 328 -4% | 349 3% | 459 35% | 703 107% |
Brightness Distribution | 91 | 87 -4% | 89 -2% | 88 -3% | 93 2% | 95 4% |
Black Level * | 0.32 | 0.38 -19% | 0.32 -0% | 0.32 -0% | 0.42 -31% | 0.07 78% |
Contrast | 1110 | 1068 -4% | 1058 -5% | 1163 5% | 1119 1% | 10171 816% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.13 | 1.65 -46% | 2.18 -93% | 2.06 -82% | 1.86 -65% | 1.7 -50% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.78 | 4.2 -51% | 7.14 -157% | 3 -8% | 3.87 -39% | 4 -44% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 0.32 | 0.53 -66% | 0.93 -191% | 1.5 -369% | 0.93 -191% | 1.2 -275% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.4 | 1.2 14% | 3.7 -164% | 1.9 -36% | 2.7 -93% | 2.8 -100% |
Gamma | 2.24 98% | 2.3 96% | 2.18 101% | 2.312 95% | 2.246 98% | 2.21 100% |
CCT | 6372 102% | 6453 101% | 7245 90% | 6747 96% | 6711 97% | 6978 93% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -26% /
-20% | -39% /
-52% | -36% /
-43% | 2% /
-17% | -7% /
34% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
9.1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4.9 ms rise | |
↘ 4.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 17 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.3 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3.2 ms rise | |
↘ 3.8 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 12 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (35.1 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 18925 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. |
性能 - 中端Zen 4 Ryzen 7
测试条件
在运行以下任何基准测试之前,我们通过Windows和联想Vantage软件将我们的设备设置为性能模式。我们还确保将图形设置为dGPU模式,并激活预设的GPU超频功能。建议熟悉Vantage,因为它是控制键盘照明功能、联想特定更新、GPU行为等的主要界面。
支持MUX,以便在Optimus(iGPU + dGPU)或仅dGPU之间切换。只有在dGPU模式下,内部显示器才支持G-Sync。在Optimus和dGPU模式之间切换时,需要重启,因为不支持高级Optimus。令人讨厌的是,在图形模式之间切换时,重启过程会比普通重启的时间长很多。
处理器
在经历了令人难以置信的Zen 4Ryzen 9 7945HX后,又被不尽如人意的Zen 3所击倒。Ryzen 7 7735HS我们不确定对Zen 4的期望是什么Ryzen 7 7745HX.值得庆幸的是,作为一款中端CPU,其结果非常好,单线程和多线程性能得分分别比Ryzen 7 7735HS高出15%和30%。因此,Ryzen 7 7745HX在竞争者的范围内。 酷睿i7-13700HX在大多数基准测试中,包括LibreOffice和HWBOT x265 4K,仅有5%至15%。这绝对是一个合理的升级,从去年的Ryzen 7 6800H或 Ryzen 9 6900HX当与Ryzen 7 7735HX相比。
联想提供了一个较慢的Ryzen 5 7645HX选项,核心数量比Ryzen 7 7745HX少(6个对8个)。然而,截至目前,我们还没有亲自测试Ryzen 5 7645HX,因此这两个选项之间的性能差异目前还不清楚。
Cinebench R15 Multi Loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 5.4: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
Performance Rating | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 |
AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 |
AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 |
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
PCMark 10 / Score | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ |
PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ |
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ |
CrossMark / Overall | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
CrossMark / Productivity | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
CrossMark / Creativity | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
PCMark 10 Score | 8206 points | |
Help |
AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX |
AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 |
* ... smaller is better
DPC延时
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 |
* ... smaller is better
存储设备 - 多达两个PCIe4 x4驱动器
我们的设备配备了一个1TB 三星PM9A1NVMe SSD,这是目前最快的消费级PCIe4 x4 SSD之一。传输速率最高约为6600MB/s,但如下图所示,在我们的压力测试中,仅仅几分钟后,性能就降到了3300MB/s。结果表明,联想的固态硬盘没有得到适当的冷却,就像其他笔记本电脑中的相同固态硬盘一样,例如 联合利华GM6PX7X可以在更长的时间内维持更高的传输率。
Drive Performance Rating - Percent | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX8 | |
Uniwill GM6PX7X RTX 4070 | |
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W | |
Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ | |
Schenker XMG Neo 16 E23 |
* ... smaller is better
Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
GPU性能--中高端图形卡
原始图形性能可与去年的 移动版eForce RTX 3070 Ti.140W的TGP目标允许联想的移动RTX 4070在性能上略微超过其他大多数具有相同GPU的笔记本电脑。
降级到 移动RTX 4060或 移动RTX 4050SKU,预计性能会分别下降15%和20%。不幸的是,目前没有 移动RTX 4080选项,这将使性能比我们的移动RTX 4070大幅提高40%至50%。相反,这样的高端GPU选项是为联想的顶级Legion 7系列保留的。
根据3DMarkTime Spy ,在没有超频的情况下,在平衡电源配置文件上运行dGPU将使图形性能下降约13%。