Notebookcheck

Lenovo ThinkPad X240 Full HD Notebook Review

Till Schönborn (translated by Andreas Osthoff), 06/06/2014

More pixels. After the WXGA version of the ThinkPad X240 showed its qualities in our review, we now have a look at the high-end version with a Full HD display. But are the additional pixels really worth the premium price?

For the original German review, see here.

We could not criticize a lot when we reviewed the Lenovo ThinkPad X240 a couple of months ago: Great build quality, excellent mobility and comprehensive security features – even the very high retail price seemed somewhat justified.

In the meantime, the high-quality subnotebook is also available with a more suitable Full HD IPS display, which costs another 100 Euros (~$136). In the case of our review unit, you will have to pay 1,900 Euros (~$2577). For this money you get a Core i7-4600U, 8 GB RAM as well as a 256 GB SSD, and the X240 is also equipped with an integrated LTE module.

Rivals for the ThinkPad are once again mainly offered by HP and Dell. Both the EliteBook 820 G1 and the Latitude E7240 can be configured with similar hardware specifications, but they are not really cheaper, either.

Note: Because of the mostly unchanged configuration compared to our first review, we will not have a closer look at the case, the input devices and some other sections. All the details can be found in our original article.

Display – Full HD and IPS Panel

Brightness distribution
Brightness distribution

Because of the increased resolution from 1366x768 to 1920x1080 pixels (with the same diagonal size of 12.5 inches), the pixel density makes a big jump as well. Instead of 125, the display now has an impressive 176 ppi, which results in a very sharp presentation even with small viewing distances. The space on the desktop is increased at the same time: Even some multitasking is possible if you waive an adjustment of the scaling option to increase the size of symbols and fonts – this is hardly possible with the WXGA version. 

Even though our review unit cannot manage the advertised maximum brightness (400 cd/m²), the measured result of 348 cd/m² is still impressive nonetheless. The small deficit compared to the Dell Latitude E7240 (Full HD Touch: 389 cd/m², WXGA version only 211 cd/m²) is acceptable; HP's EliteBook 820 G1 (211 cd/m²) on the other hand does not stand a chance. You can adjust the brightness with 15 steps all the way down to 5 cd/m² in dark environments.

Subjectively, the brightness distribution is very even over the whole display surface, we can only see a slight case of screen bleeding under certain circumstances (black background, no ambient light, maximum luminance). However, this is hardly annoying in practice, and we can only speak for our specific review unit; there are usually somewhat large deviations in regard to the brightness distribution.

326
cd/m²
336
cd/m²
331
cd/m²
344
cd/m²
377
cd/m²
388
cd/m²
341
cd/m²
344
cd/m²
345
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
Information
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 388 cd/m²
Average: 348 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 84 %
Center on Battery: 377 cd/m²
Black: 0.518 cd/m²
Contrast: 728:1

A high-quality IPS panel is obviously the only choice for a high-end device. The panel of our review unit has the designation LP125WF2-SPB2. Lenovo also uses the same panel for the ThinkPad Yoga, although with an additional digitizer layer. Black value (0.52 cd/m² with the maximum brightness) and contrast (728:1) are above average and result in a rich and vivid picture. However, the WXGA version is not really worse in these disciplines (712:1), only the even cheaper entry-level version with a TN panel should fall behind.

Unfortunately, we cannot confirm hopes that the expensive Full HD panel would offer a better performance in terms of color reproduction. Considering the highly dissatisfying coverage of the sRGB (57 percent) as well as AdobeRGB standard (41 percent), the subnotebook is hardly suited for professional picture or graphics applications. Additionally, you will have to live with significant deviations in terms of colors (DeltaE 6.9) and grayscale (DeltaE 6.5). A calibration could not completely solve the problems; blue colors in particular clearly miss their reference values, even with the optimal settings for the display (DeltaE sometime over 15).

X240 FHD vs. AdobeRGB (t)
X240 FHD vs. AdobeRGB (t)
X240 FHD vs. sRGB (t)
X240 FHD vs. sRGB (t)
X240 FHD vs. X240 WXGA (t)
X240 FHD vs. X240 WXGA (t)
ColorChecker (pre calibration)
ColorChecker (pre calibration)
Saturation Sweeps (pre calibration)
Saturation Sweeps (pre calibration)
Grayscale (pre calibration)
Grayscale (pre calibration)
ColorChecker (calibrated)
ColorChecker (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
Grayscale (calibrated)
Grayscale (calibrated)

With the matte display surface and a powerful backlight, which also offers the full luminance on battery power – not even sunny days affect the outdoor usability. The X240 does not have any issues with annoying reflections, and the contrast is usually sufficient in most situations as well. Despite the similar luminance, users of the rival Latitude E7240 are going to be jealous of the ThinkPad since the bright Full HD Latitude display is combined with a glossy touchscreen.

Outdoor use (sunshine)
Viewing angles Lenovo ThinkPad X240 IPS
Viewing angles Lenovo ThinkPad X240 IPS

Our review unit can confirm the excellent viewing angle stability of the previously reviewed WXGA version without any restrictions. That is not really a surprise since both configurations use – as we already mentioned – a very similar IPS panel apart from the resolution. Especially viewing angles from below or from the sides do not change the picture at all. Views from above on the other hand can result in slight reflections, but they are hardly noticeable in practice.

Performance

Maximum Turbo clock of 3.3 GHz
Maximum Turbo clock of 3.3 GHz

Similar to our last review, the X240 once again uses the Core i7-4600U, which is currently Intel's fastest processor with a TDP of 15 Watts. The frugal dual-core supports Hyperthreading and runs at 2.1 GHz, but can be overclocked up to 3.3 GHz (2 cores: 2.9 GHz) via Turbo Boost. Just like any Haswell processor, the i7-4600U is manufactured in a 22 nm process with FinFETs (3D transistors).

Graphics are handled by the integrated HD Graphics 4400 that runs from 200 up to 1,100 MHz. Dedicated alternatives from AMD or Nvidia are not available for the Lenovo, HP or Dell – but that is not really an issue for a business notebook.

A drawback on the other hand is the decision of the manufacturer to use just one memory slot. This does not only limit the maximum amount of memory to the 8 GB of our review unit, but also the (GPU) performance because of the resulting single-channel memory interface. Files can be stored on a 256 GB SSD.

System information Lenovo ThinkPad X240

Processor

CPU clock at the start of the benchmark...
CPU clock at the start of the benchmark...
...and after around 30 seconds.
...and after around 30 seconds.

Even though terms like energy-efficient or ULV model do not create high expectations for the performance, the Core i7-4600U actually offers impressive performance reserves. Single thread benchmarks in particular benefit from the high clocks between 3.2-3.3 GHz, the excellent results can keep up with some much more energy-hungry mainstream CPUs.

The X240 falls slightly behind the EliteBook 820 G1 with the identical components in multithread tests. The ThinkPad can utilize its maximum Turbo potential at first, but the clock drops to 2.3-2.4 GHz after a couple of seconds. It seems that we got a pretty "bad" CPU with a high power dissipation that reaches its TDP limit of 15 Watts with this clock – we could determine around 2.5-2.6 GHz for other i7-4600 CPUs under the same circumstances. However, the difference is not really perceptible and the clock is not reduced on battery power, either.

Cinebench R11.5
CPU Multi 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X240
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV
2.67 Points ∼15%
HP EliteBook 820 G1
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Intel SSD Pro 1500 Series SSDSC2BF180A4H
2.83 Points ∼16% +6%
Dell Latitude E7240 Touch
HD Graphics 4400, 4300U, Samsung SSD SM841 128GB
2.77 Points ∼16% +4%
Dell Latitude E7240
HD Graphics 4400, 4200U, Liteonit LMT-128M6M
2.49 Points ∼14% -7%
CPU Single 64Bit (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X240
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV
1.39 Points ∼70%
HP EliteBook 820 G1
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Intel SSD Pro 1500 Series SSDSC2BF180A4H
1.43 Points ∼72% +3%
Dell Latitude E7240 Touch
HD Graphics 4400, 4300U, Samsung SSD SM841 128GB
1.29 Points ∼65% -7%
Dell Latitude E7240
HD Graphics 4400, 4200U, Liteonit LMT-128M6M
1.15 Points ∼58% -17%
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
6108 Points
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
10825 Points
Cinebench R10 Shading 64Bit
7014 Points
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
6030
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
8417
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
4638
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.39 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
2.67 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
15 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
98 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
16.24 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
248 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
124 Points
Help

Storage Devices

AS SSD Benchmark
AS SSD Benchmark

Despite the limited space, the X240 uses a standard 2.5-inch SSD from Samsung (MZ7TD256HAFV). Compared to the Intel SSD Pro 1500 of the EliteBook 820 G1, the drive manages a small advantage in almost every benchmark; only the 4K write performance (4K-64) is slightly behind the rival. The top spot, however, is secured by the Dell Latitude E7240: The Samsung SM841 manages the highest transfer rates, despite the smallest capacity.

Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV
Transfer Rate Minimum: 76.9 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum: 468.3 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average: 423 MB/s
Access Time: 0.2 ms
Burst Rate: 174.3 MB/s
CPU Usage: 1 %

System Performance

The SSD and i7 processor improve the system performance of the notebook, which is supported by the excellent PCMark 7 result of 4,629 points. The X240 is therefore on the same level with the Latitude E7240, but slightly behind HP's EliteBook. Still, the differences are very small and PCMark tests are very synthetic benchmarks, so we do not want to overstate the results.

There is no criticism in practice, either: It only takes about 30 seconds before the X240 is ready after a cold start, and the system only needs 4 seconds to wake up from standby. These times can be reduced significantly if you replace the preinstalled Windows 7 Professional with Windows 8.1, which is provided by the manufacturer as well. Simple office or web applications are no challenge for the system, neither complex software nor multitasking. Only users who frequently edit HD videos or perform similarly demanding tasks are going to want a faster, but also less frugal quad-core processor. 

PCMark 7 - Score (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X240
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV
4629 Points ∼67%
HP EliteBook 820 G1
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Intel SSD Pro 1500 Series SSDSC2BF180A4H
5196 Points ∼75% +12%
Dell Latitude E7240 Touch
HD Graphics 4400, 4300U, Samsung SSD SM841 128GB
4567 Points ∼66% -1%
Dell Latitude E7240
HD Graphics 4400, 4200U, Liteonit LMT-128M6M
4529 Points ∼65% -2%
PC Mark
PCMark 74629 points
PCMark 8 Home v22470 points
PCMark 8 Creative v22461 points
PCMark 8 Work v23697 points
Help

Graphics

4K playback with hardware acceleration
4K playback with hardware acceleration

Depending on the benchmark, the single-channel interface can limit the 3D performance of the HD Graphics 4400 by around 10 to 30 percent, which can really make a difference on such a low performance level. Even older GPUs like a GeForce GT 720M can beat the processor graphics by more than 50 percent as a result. An additional GPU would increase the power consumption, so users will have to live with it.

Apart from demanding 3D applications, for example, complex CAD projects, the HD 4400 serves its purpose: Multimedia tasks like video acceleration (even in 4K resolution) are handled without problems, and you get a very efficient hardware encoder/transcoder with Quick Sync.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad X240
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV
731 Points ∼3%
HP EliteBook 820 G1
HD Graphics 4400, 4600U, Intel SSD Pro 1500 Series SSDSC2BF180A4H
824 Points ∼4% +13%
Dell Latitude E7240 Touch
HD Graphics 4400, 4300U, Samsung SSD SM841 128GB
730 Points ∼3% 0%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Touch 20A7-002DGE
HD Graphics 5000, 4550U, Samsung MZNTD512HAGL
949 Points ∼4% +30%
3D Mark
3DMark 06
 1280x1024
4601 points
3DMark Vantage3376 points
3DMark 11828 points
3DMark Ice Storm29301 points
3DMark Cloud Gate3985 points
3DMark Fire Strike516 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Finally, we want to have a quick look at the gaming capabilities of the notebook, which are hardly convincing considering the meager GPU performance. Titles from the last two years can usually only be played in 1024x768 pixels and low settings – still, this should be sufficient for the occasional game during the break.

low med.high ultra
Anno 2070 (2011) 51.324.614.56.9fps
Tomb Raider (2013) 37.819.411.16fps
Dota 2 (2013) 55.828.312.3fps
Total War: Rome II (2013) 30.923.317.55.3fps

Emissions

System Noise

Despite the decent performance, Lenovo managed to design a very quiet notebook with the X240. The single fan is usually deactivated when idle, and just slowly increases its rpm with light workloads. The manufacturer also uses a very low minimum rpm level, so the resulting noise is basically not audible a couple of centimeters away from the notebook. 

The notebook is obviously louder under continuous maximum load, but the maximum noise of 34.7 dB(A) is not annoying by any means. You can also activate Lenovo Turbo Boost+ in favor of lower hardware temperatures if you do not care about the noise: This option results in a significant rpm increase of the fan and we can measure up to 40.5 dB(A). However, even then the ThinkPad is quieter than some rivals, for example the Latitude E7240 (up to 52.3 dB(A)).

The following amplitude frequency response diagram offers a descriptive presentation of the subjective system noise. The purple line represents the idle operation. Immediately after the start of the 3DMark 06 (brown curve) we can see a new peak at 1.5 kHz (in addition to the background noise at around 100 Hz), which gets more intense over the course of the benchmark (green curve) as well as the stress test (black curve). We cannot determine annoying high frequencies (Turbo Boost+ deactivated).

Amplitude frequency response
Amplitude frequency response

Noise Level

Idle 28.8 / 29.0 / 29.0 dB(A)
Load 34.7 / 40.5 dB(A)
 
    30 dB
silent
40 dB
audible
50 dB
loud
 
min: , med: , max:    Voltcraft SL-451 (15 cm distance)

Temperature

Stress test (Turbo Boost+ activated)
Stress test (Turbo Boost+ activated)

While the case does not even get lukewarm during idle, we can see surface temperatures above 40 °C (104 °F) at some spots during our stress test (Prime95 + FurMark). Fortunately, the high values are limited to the area around the fan exhaust (at the left back of the case). The palm rest on the other hand stays comparatively cool, so the user can continue the work without any restrictions.

The CPU only warms up to 69 °C (156.2 °F; core temperature) with the activated Turbo Boost+; we can measure around 10 °C (~18 °F) more when we waive the rpm increase. Both results are uncritical since Intel specifies the maximum temperature of the Core i7-4600U up to 100 °C (212 °F). The sometimes comparatively low clocks of the processor (1.0 GHz) and the graphics card (700 MHz) are once again a result of the TDP limitation.

 32.2 °C31.7 °C28.1 °C 
 32.4 °C32.0 °C28.5 °C 
 28.1 °C27.5 °C27.8 °C 
Maximum: 32.4 °C
Average: 29.8 °C
28.5 °C30.5 °C34.4 °C
29.5 °C33.3 °C35.1 °C
28.1 °C28.7 °C28.7 °C
Maximum: 35.1 °C
Average: 30.8 °C
Power Supply (max.)  35.8 °C | Room Temperature 22.7 °C | Fluke 62 Max

Speakers

Amplitude frequency response (White noise: blue, Pink noise: red)
Amplitude frequency response (White noise: blue, Pink noise: red)

The weak stereo speakers of the X240 are hardly suited for larger rooms. Even the maximum volume of the speakers does not result in more than a meager 76 dB(A), a low value, even for a business notebook. There is also room for improvement in terms of quality: Frequencies below 250 Hz are basically not available, so the sound experience is very tinny and focused on high tones. At least you can attach an external sound system via the stereo jack.

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Full HD instead of WXGA does not only result in more space on the desktop, but also an increased power consumption of the display. This is noticeable with the maximum luminance in particular, where our review unit pulls around 2 up to 2.5 Watts more from the socket than the previously reviewed configuration. The overall idle consumption of 3.9 up to 9.8 Watts on the other hand does not cause any criticism and corresponds with the performance and hardware equipment of the device.

Simultaneous load of the CPU and GPU results in a short peak at around 37 Watts before we can see a drop to almost 27 Watts due to TDP based throttling. The provided 45-Watt power adaptor seems to be sufficient to charge the battery during operation.

Power Consumption

Off / Standby 0.1 / 0.1 Watt
Idle 3.9 / 7.9 / 9.8 Watt
Load 26.4 / 26.7 Watt
 
Key: min: , med: , max:         Extech Power Analyzer 380803

Battery Runtime

Excuse us, it should have been batteries in the last section – the X240 actually uses two batteries with a capacity of 24 Wh each. One module is screwed into the case, whereas the other one can be attached at the back – you can even replace the latter with a larger version with up to 72 Wh (ThinkPad Battery 68+).

However, this is not necessary: Even though the battery runtimes are shorter compared to the WXGA version, the ThinkPad still manages a good result of 6 hours in our WLAN test with an adjusted display brightness (around 150 cd/m²). The EliteBook 820 G1 (46 Wh battery, 6.5 hours) manages a similar runtime, whereas the Latitude E7240 (45 Wh battery, 5 hours) has to be recharged sooner.

Reader's Test
Reader's Test
WLAN-Test
WLAN-Test
H.264-Test
H.264-Test
Classic Test
Classic Test
Charging
Charging
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
11h 59min
WiFi Surfing
6h 03min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
5h 23min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 47min

Verdict

Lenovo ThinkPad X240
Lenovo ThinkPad X240

Let us start our verdict with the important question: Is the Full HD display worth the additional charge of almost 100 Euros (~$136) or not? For everyone who often uses large Excel sheets on the road and many applications simultaneously, the clear answer is "Yes". Only the higher resolution transforms the small subnotebook into a full mobile workplace.

At the same time, we want to mention that the display does not offer any additional features apart from the higher resolution. Stable viewing angles and a powerful background illumination are also offered by the less expensive WXGA IPS version, but both panels cannot convince us in terms of colors. We would only have hoped for better performance.

Still, the X240 is one of the best subnotebooks of its class, and we do not want to get into the details of highlights like the excellent keyboard or the low emissions once again. Unfortunately, this quality comes at a price, regardless of the selected display – even an average configuration easily costs more than 1,000 Euros (~$1356). However, the situation is not different with devices from HP or Dell, so we can give the deserved purchase recommendation for the Lenovo X240.

Read all 5 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading comments

Comment this article:

In Review: Lenovo ThinkPad X240. Test model courtesy of notebooksandmore.net
In Review: Lenovo ThinkPad X240. Test model courtesy of notebooksandmore.net

Specifications

Lenovo ThinkPad X240
Graphics adapter
Intel HD Graphics 4400, Core: 200 - 1100 MHz, Memory: 800 MHz, 9.18.10.3272
Memory
8192 MB 
, 1x 8 GB, Single-Channel, 1 of 1 slots occupied
Display
12.5 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, LP125WF2-SPB2, IPS-Panel, LED-Backlight, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Lynx Point-LP
Harddisk
Samsung SSD 840 250GB MZ7TD256HAFV, 250 GB 
, 180 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Lynx Point-LP - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
2 USB 3.0, 1 VGA, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, 1 Docking Station Port, Audio Connections: Headset port (3.5 mm stereo jack), Card Reader: SD, SDHC, SDXC, MMC, 1 Fingerprint Reader,
Networking
Intel I218-LM (Clarkville ULT) Network Adapter (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Wireless-AC 7260 (a b g n ac), 4.0 Bluetooth, Sierra Wireless EM7345 4G LTE + GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 19.9 x 306 x 209 ( = 0.78 x 12.05 x 8.23 in)
Weight
1.462 kg ( = 51.57 oz) Power Supply: 182 g ( = 6.42 oz)
Battery
48 Wh Lithium-Ion, 2 x 24 Wh, 1 x 24 Wh replaceable, 11.1 V
Price
1900 Euro
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional (64 Bit) + Windows 8 Pro (64 Bit)
Additional features
Webcam: 720p, Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Driver + Windows DVDs, Lenovo ThinkVantage Tools, 36 Months Warranty

 

[+] compare
Compared to the predecessor ThinkPad X230, the Lenovo ThinkPad X240 has a...
Compared to the predecessor ThinkPad X230, the Lenovo ThinkPad X240 has a...
...significantly thinner case and is also 100 grams (~3.5 oz) lighter.
...significantly thinner case and is also 100 grams (~3.5 oz) lighter.
The typical ThinkPad design on the other hand did not change...
The typical ThinkPad design on the other hand did not change...
...and creates a familiar appearance.
...and creates a familiar appearance.
The thin chassis looks very nice, ...
The thin chassis looks very nice, ...
...but also creates a pretty crowded port layout in return.
...but also creates a pretty crowded port layout in return.
The cooling system is quiet, only the Turbo Boost+ mode...
The cooling system is quiet, only the Turbo Boost+ mode...
...creates an unpleasant noise.
...creates an unpleasant noise.
The area above the SmartCard reader can easily be pushed in.
The area above the SmartCard reader can easily be pushed in.
Large maximum opening angle of the display.
Large maximum opening angle of the display.
The formerly separate volume buttons are now integrated into the regular key row.
The formerly separate volume buttons are now integrated into the regular key row.
The case surface is slightly roughened and produces suitable haptics.
The case surface is slightly roughened and produces suitable haptics.
The keyboard is well suited for frequent writers and is illuminated.
The keyboard is well suited for frequent writers and is illuminated.
The ports on the right side have more space.
The ports on the right side have more space.
The SIM card has its own slot.
The SIM card has its own slot.
TrackPoint and the integrated buttons of the ClickPad do not work very well together.
TrackPoint and the integrated buttons of the ClickPad do not work very well together.
The X240 is a real ThinkPad and...
The X240 is a real ThinkPad and...
...can also carry the Ultrabook title.
...can also carry the Ultrabook title.
The replaceable battery has a capacity of 24 Wh.
The replaceable battery has a capacity of 24 Wh.
There is also a second, non-removable battery inside the case with the same capacity.
There is also a second, non-removable battery inside the case with the same capacity.
The docking port was revisited and is not compatible with the predecessors anymore.
The docking port was revisited and is not compatible with the predecessors anymore.
The battery fits well into the case and does not wobble.
The battery fits well into the case and does not wobble.
The standard PSU has a nominal output of 45 Watts.
The standard PSU has a nominal output of 45 Watts.

Similar Laptops

Devices with the same GPU and/or Screen Size

» Review Lenovo ThinkPad Yoga Convertible
Core i5 4200U, 1.584 kg
» Review Lenovo ThinkPad X240 Ultrabook
Core i7 4600U, 1.45 kg
» Review Dell Latitude E7240 Notebook
Core i5 4200U, 1.34 kg

Links

Compare Prices

Amazon: Invalid XML response.

Amazon.com

Show results on Amazon.com

Pricerunner n.a.

Pro

+Solid case
+Excellent keyboard
+Bright IPS display with wide viewing angles
+High application performance
+Low system noise
+Integrated LTE module
+3-year warranty
 

Cons

-Only 2x USB 3.0
-No dedicated mouse buttons
-Poor speakers
-Very high price

Shortcut

What we like

The ThinkPad X240 is certainly no bargain, but the excellent quality of the case and the keyboard can live up to the premium expectations, just like the comprehensive features. 

What we'd like to see

The new touchpad of the current ThinkPad generation is probably going to leave mixed impressions among the users in the case of the X240 as well. We miss the comfort and the reliability of earlier solutions with dedicated mouse buttons.

What surprises us

The higher resolution of the Full HD model has surprisingly big impacts on the power consumption and the battery runtimes.

The competition

Dell Latitude E7240, HP EliteBook 820 G1, Sony Vaio Pro 11, Sony Vaio Pro 13, Fujitsu Lifebook S904, Toshiba Portege Z30

Rating

Lenovo ThinkPad X240
06/25/2014 v4
Till Schönborn

Chassis
90 / 98 → 92%
Keyboard
94%
Pointing Device
80%
Connectivity
80 / 95 → 84%
Weight
69 / 78 → 79%
Battery
86%
Display
87%
Games Performance
61 / 85 → 72%
Application Performance
75%
Temperature
88 / 91 → 97%
Noise
93%
Audio
44 / 91 → 48%
Camera
45 / 85 → 53%
Average
76%
85%
Subnotebook *
Weighted Average
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Lenovo ThinkPad X240 Full HD Notebook Review
Author: Till Schönborn, 2014-06- 6 (Update: 2014-06-13)