Notebookcheck

Dell Latitude 3590 review: Office laptop with major flaws

Sven Kloevekorn (translated by Greg Williams), 06/21/2019

Not even close, definitely no cigar. Dell has introduced its newest incarnation of their office and business series 3000 to the market, and adds some new issues to the already well-known weak points of this range. Not only is the screen an issue with this latest version, which we would be unhappy with in a 400-Euro (~$456) budget laptop, but also other issues on the technical side. Aside from this, it has very good battery life. UPDATE 08.07.2019: The new BIOS version 1.9.8 changes thermal and fan levels with positive results.

The Dell Latitude 3590 is an office/business laptop which is positioned in the (depending on configuration) lower to middle price class which, according to Dell, is aimed at the small to medium business community. They tout its easy servicing as well as its security features such as Windows 10 with Bitlocker drive encryption, TPM 2.0, fingerprint reader and the Dell Data Protection Suite.

The Latitude 15 3000 series first appeared in 2016, and we tested this model's predecessor, the 3570. Whilst the 2016 models were all equipped with a TN screen and 1,366x768 resolution, the current variants are all equipped with a FullHD panel - also based on the TN technology.

As well as the screen and Windows 10 Pro license, all models in the series share the same chassis, input devices and connectivity with the exception of an optional microSIM slot. Configuration options include CPU; RAM as well as SSD capacity (a more pedestrian 1 TB HDD is also available). The models on offer are not very clearly defined - the majority of variants however, are equipped with 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD. That goes for our review sample also with its i5-8250U CPU which has the model number D643G, and is available from 800 Euros (~$912).

To select the competition for this laptop, we focused on the same class and format and of course the same price segment. Due to a lack of selection and for size comparison purposes, we have also included a 14-inch office/business laptop in the lineup. Joining the Dell on the start line are:

Dell Latitude 3590
Graphics adapter
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Core: 300 - 1100 MHz, Shared Memory, 23.20.16.4973
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4, 2400 MHz, single channel, 1 of 2 slots occupied
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, BOE0802 / NT15N41 / Dell: M9P74, TN LED, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Kaby Lake-U iHDCP 2.2 Premium PCH
Storage
Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ, 256 GB 
Soundcard
Intel Kaby Lake-U/Y PCH - High Definition Audio
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 VGA, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: Audio in/out combined, 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: SD/SDHC/SDXC, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 22 x 380 x 258 ( = 0.87 x 14.96 x 10.16 in)
Battery
56 Wh Lithium-Ion, 2 cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD (0.9 MP)
Additional features
Speakers: stereo, front bottom, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.07 kg ( = 73.02 oz / 4.56 pounds), Power Supply: 221 g ( = 7.8 oz / 0.49 pounds)
Price
899 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case - Some Minor Issues

The housing is comprised completely of black and grippy plastic whose matte surface is quite fingerprint-prone. Design accents are absent apart from the silver logo on the lid - simple is the design language here.

With a little applied force, the base does flex, but only very slightly, and exhibits very little in the way of creaking or cracking noises. Below the screen, the laptop case can be pushed slightly inwards but overall gives a very solid, if not particularly premium, impression. In terms of workmanship, aside from a few areas where panels do not always line up precisely, there are no issues with overhangs or sharp edges. Not so nice: The gap between base and top panel of the main unit goes around the entirety of the device and is so wide in areas, that dirt could accumulate in it.

The screen bezel, relatively wide by today's standards, means that the Latitude 3590 is not a compact 15-inch device. The display portion of the laptop is also not particularly solid and is easily twisted to the degree that distortion on the screen is visible. It also only requires light force pressing on the rear of the display to result in the same distortion. We would have expected more solidity in this area. Opening the laptop with one hand is not possible as this will raise the base along with the display. If bumped, the display will also sway back and forth for a couple of seconds.

Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590
Dell Latitude 3590

As alluded to above, the Dell 3590 is a relatively bulky and not particularly light 15.6-incher whose measurements are almost identical to the Toshiba Tecra A50. The Lenovo ThinkPad is somewhat slimmer, lighter and narrower whilst the single 14-inch model in the comparison, the Dell Latitude 14 5495, has around 33% less footprint whilst being around the same height at 22.5mm (~0.9 in).

Size Comparison

380 mm / 15 inch 258 mm / 10.2 inch 22 mm / 0.866 inch 2.1 kg4.56 lbs379 mm / 14.9 inch 258 mm / 10.2 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2 kg4.41 lbs369 mm / 14.5 inch 253 mm / 9.96 inch 19.9 mm / 0.783 inch 1.9 kg4.27 lbs333.4 mm / 13.1 inch 228.9 mm / 9.01 inch 22.45 mm / 0.884 inch 1.7 kg3.73 lbs

Dell Laptop with Business Configuration

In terms of connectivity we would expect everything to be pretty much included, as required by its target market. Of the three USB 3 ports, one is a type-C and offers a DisplayPort option alongside HDMI 1.4 and the venerable VGA port, often included on business laptops for connecting to projectors in meeting rooms. For permanent desk usage, a flip-down Ethernet port is present.

Whilst the ports on the left side of the device are in the middle to the rear of the device, a USB 2.0 port, most likely destined to be used for connecting an external mouse, is located on the front right of the laptop - a double faux-pas, given its old and slow technology, and the likelihood that it will get in the way of other cables and USB sticks etc.  For this reason, the ports do have a good distance between them.

Left side: power, USB 3.1 type C, HDMI 1.4, Ethernet (flip-down), USB 3.0, Headphone/Microphone
Left side: power, USB 3.1 type C, HDMI 1.4, Ethernet (flip-down), USB 3.0, Headphone/Microphone
Right side: SD card reader, USB 2.0, VGA, lock
Right side: SD card reader, USB 2.0, VGA, lock

SD Card Reader

Using our reference SD card, a Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II, the card readers of the Dell as well as the Toshiba Tecra are not able to exceed the poor transfer speed limitations of USB 2.0. Photographers who frequently transfer large image files from SD cards to their laptop should give these devices a wide berth - however, as will become clear in the display section below, that is far from the biggest reason why they should avoid this model. To see how an SD card reader can be done properly we need only look so far as the smaller Latitude model, which achieves 5 to 8 times faster data transfers.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell Latitude 14 5495
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
116.6 MB/s ∼100% +435%
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73.9 MB/s ∼63% +239%
Average of class Office
  (10.2 - 191, n=267)
60.7 MB/s ∼52% +178%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
23.9 MB/s ∼20% +10%
Dell Latitude 3590
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
21.8 MB/s ∼19%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell Latitude 14 5495
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
203.2 MB/s ∼100% +703%
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
85.8 MB/s ∼42% +239%
Average of class Office
  (9.5 - 255, n=242)
77 MB/s ∼38% +204%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.6 MB/s ∼13% +5%
Dell Latitude 3590
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
25.3 MB/s ∼12%

Communication

Taking care of communications is the Qualcomm/Atheros QCA6174 (Dualband, 802.11ac, MU-MIMO 2x2, max. 867 MBit/s) module with Bluetooth 4.2 - also included in the smaller Latitude 14 5495. In that model the module doesn't achieve more than an average of 452 MBit/s in best-case conditions, however the review laptop is even worse, only managing a woeful 292 MBit/s. The recently released Intel Wireless-AC 9260 module in the Lenovo ThinkPad 590 is able to score around 20% higher results compared to the rest of the field. When it comes to transmit speeds however, there is little difference.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
559 MBit/s ∼100% +91%
Average of class Office
  (5 - 688, n=210)
462 MBit/s ∼83% +58%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
452 (min: 329, max: 553) MBit/s ∼81% +55%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel 8265 Tri-Band WiFi (Oak Peak) Network Adapter
295 (min: 186, max: 388) MBit/s ∼53% +1%
Dell Latitude 3590
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
292 (min: 177, max: 317) MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
684 MBit/s ∼100% +18%
Dell Latitude 3590
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
580 (min: 483, max: 639) MBit/s ∼85%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel 8265 Tri-Band WiFi (Oak Peak) Network Adapter
568 (min: 553, max: 591) MBit/s ∼83% -2%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
541 (min: 318, max: 616) MBit/s ∼79% -7%
Average of class Office
  (34 - 688, n=210)
437 MBit/s ∼64% -25%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640Tooltip
Dell Latitude 3590 Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø292 (177-317)
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110 Intel 8265 Tri-Band WiFi (Oak Peak) Network Adapter; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø295 (186-388)
Dell Latitude 14 5495 Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø452 (329-553)
Dell Latitude 3590 Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø580 (483-639)
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110 Intel 8265 Tri-Band WiFi (Oak Peak) Network Adapter; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø568 (553-591)
Dell Latitude 14 5495 Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø541 (318-616)

Security

For mobile usage this model is equipped with a comprehensive package of security features. Along with the Trusted Platform Module version 2.0, there is a simple to use and good functioning fingerprint reader which in Windows 10 can also be used in conjunction with BitLocker drive encryption and the Dell Data Protection Suite.

Accessories

Alongside the usual power adaptor, there is only a quick start guide as well as a page with safety information in the plain box.

Self-Servicing

There is no flap to replace components, and no removable battery. The bottom panel can be removed with nine philips screws. However, as the panel wraps around to meet the top portion of the laptop, this makes removal a little trickier and as our review sample was a shop device, we decided not to attempt removal.

Guarantee

Dell includes a 1 year basic support - next working day plan, which offers onsite repairs. When purchased directly from Dell it is possible to purchase additional service and guarantee options such as longer guarantee windows, faster response times, or next-day replacement device, etc.

Input Devices - A Strength of The Latitude

Keyboard

Dell has used the available space well and equipped the 3590 with a chiclet keyboard, whose width is almost the same as a standard desktop keyboard. The number pad is also only a few millimeters narrower than standard. As the layout is also standard, it should not take long to get used to typing on this keyboard. The pause key however has been left out for space reasons.

The flat, simply-marked keys have very little travel with a tactile actuation point and a very hard stop. The key sizes and separation are generous.

The keyboard does not flex under normal and realistic usage. Although the smaller keys whilst typing are not particularly noticeable in terms of noise, with the larger keys you might want to be a bit more delicate in more noise-sensitive environments. We liked the two-stage, evenly lit and sufficiently bright backlighting on the keyboard.

Touchpad

Even for a 15-inch laptop the ClickPad, without separate physical buttons, offers plenty of room. In order to provide friction-free usage with dry and lightly damp fingers the ClickPad surface is only minimally textured. Even with very sweaty hands the drag effect is kept in check and only really causes problems with movements from bottom to top, which is very good. In terms of accuracy and responsiveness, the ClickPad is unremarkable. The mouse pointer can be moved pixel-by-pixel, and faster movements are accurately tracked.

The two mouse buttons are able to impress. For my personal preference, they offer perfect resistance, a good actuation point, sufficient travel as well as good haptic and audible feedback. Gestures with up to four fingers are 'only' able to be used when configured in the Windows configuration panel for touchpads, which in recent times has become quite feature-rich.

Display - Don't Expect Much

What does not count towards the strengths of the 3590 is, unfortunately, the 15.6-inch, matte, full HD TN Panel (all other laptops in this comparison have an IPS screen).  For instance, the brightness of the screen at 215 cd/ is not exactly up with the times for an office machine. However in an indoor environment it generally should not present any problems. The smaller Dell here is actually even worse, whilst the candidates from Lenovo and Toshiba achieve very good results. The backlight uniformity is somewhat above average, which the Tecra A50 has problems with.

Whether or not the screen has issues with backlight bleeding is somewhat hard to determine due to the issues with viewing angles - more on this later.

223
cd/m²
210
cd/m²
221
cd/m²
210
cd/m²
215
cd/m²
212
cd/m²
203
cd/m²
223
cd/m²
205
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 223 cd/m² Average: 213.6 cd/m² Minimum: 15 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 212 cd/m²
Contrast: 558:1 (Black: 0.385 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 10.31 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6.1, calibrated: 3.88
ΔE Greyscale 11.84 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
61% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 39% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.67
Dell Latitude 3590
BOE0802 / NT15N41 / Dell: M9P74, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Lenovo B156HAN02.1, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
TOS508F, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Dell Latitude 14 5495
CMN14C9, , 1920x1080, 14
Response Times
-94%
2581%
3250%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
41 (22, 19)
47.2 (23.6, 23.6)
-15%
44 (23, 21)
-7%
41 (24, 17)
-0%
Response Time Black / White *
12 (8, 4)
32.8 (19.6, 13.2)
-173%
30 (19, 11)
-150%
30 (19, 11)
-150%
PWM Frequency
250 (90)
20000 (90)
7900%
25000 (30)
9900%
Screen
33%
34%
29%
Brightness middle
215
284
32%
290
35%
212
-1%
Brightness
214
272
27%
249
16%
200
-7%
Brightness Distribution
91
92
1%
78
-14%
89
-2%
Black Level *
0.385
0.21
45%
0.38
1%
0.23
40%
Contrast
558
1352
142%
763
37%
922
65%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
10.31
5.3
49%
4.35
58%
4.34
58%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
20.44
18.9
8%
11.06
46%
9.01
56%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.88
4.4
-13%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
11.84
3.2
73%
3.01
75%
2.81
76%
Gamma
2.67 82%
2.41 91%
2.44 90%
2.22 99%
CCT
13398 49%
6736 96%
7198 90%
6286 103%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
39
37.9
-3%
56
44%
39
0%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
61
59.7
-2%
86
41%
61
0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-31% / 13%
1308% / 622%
1640% / 772%

* ... smaller is better

Due to a combination of a significantly high black level of almost 0.4 cd/ (average 0.23 cd/) and low brightness the Dell has a terrible contrast ratio of only 558:1. The opposite is true of the screen in the ThinkPad E590, which manages a very good 1,352:1. Due to the instability of viewing angles, it is not possible to subjectively rate whether the screen achieves good black saturation. 

Things look very bad with the factory settings in terms of colour space. As delivered, the Latitude 3590 has a significantly noticeable blue tint - the worst that this reviewer has ever encountered. The target value for colour temperature is around 6,500 K - this review sample measured an unbelievable 13,398 K - almost double what it should be. Through calibration and creating a profile (profile is linked below) we were able to bring the values back down to acceptable levels, so that no more blue tint was noticeable.

In terms of colour accuracy, the three IPS panels in the comparison also do not cover themselves with glory, however the Delta-E levels of the 3590, measured at 10 - 12, are two to three times higher and only encountered these days inc heap TN screens. This is exactly what we find built into the review device today.

To put paid to any notion of serious image editing, the laptop has a far too low a colour space coverage rating of only 61% of the already quite small sRGB space. It is worth noting though that none of the laptops in this test fulfil (semi)professional requirements.

CalMAN greytones (without profile)
CalMAN greytones (without profile)
CalMAN ColorChecker (without profile)
CalMAN ColorChecker (without profile)
CalMAN colour saturation (without profile)
CalMAN colour saturation (without profile)
CalMAN greytones (with profile)
CalMAN greytones (with profile)
CalMAN ColorChecker (with profile)
CalMAN ColorChecker (with profile)
CalMAN colour saturation (with profile)
CalMAN colour saturation (with profile)
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB

During the outdoor test it was overcast, so the matte but not particularly bright display of the review laptop was able to benefit from the conditions. In the left photo, we tried to tilt the screen to reflect the sky. You can see to the left the shadowing caused by the photographer and to the right the screen is covered in reflections. Had the sun been shining, it would not have been possible to make anything out. The photo on the right was taken under ideal conditions with a house entrance to our back. The poor reproductive qualities of the display are clearly visible here, since when taking the photo we were unable to find a suitable viewing angle. In good weather this photo would have looked similar.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
12 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8 ms rise
↘ 4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.1 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
41 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22 ms rise
↘ 19 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 50 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (40.2 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 250 Hz ≤ 90 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 90 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9429 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

As already stressed, this panel is hopeless in terms of viewing angles. Even when sitting directly in front of the screen, various portions of the screen will appear differently to the center. This means that with some elements on screen, colour and contrast will be presented incorrectly. When viewing from the side, the screen almost inverts to a negative image - even worse when viewing from below. As is usual with TN screens, viewing from above results in the picture appearing washed out and milky.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - Office and More

Thanks to its powerful quad core processor, RAM and SSD, the Dell 3590 is not only suitable for Office duties, but also more demanding software and multitasking will not overwhelm it. Software designed for multithreading such as video editing applications will benefit from the available eight threads - it is possible though that for these tasks the RAM configuration may prove to be a bottleneck, as it is in single-channel mode only (although it can be expanded). For games the Dell laptop is very limited, due to its lack of a dedicated GPU.

 

Processor

The Intel Core i5-8250U is a very popular ULV processor with four physical cores and Hyperthreading (8 threads), and a base clock of 1.6 GHz which can turbo boost up to 3.4 GHz. This CPU is part of the Kaby Lake refresh family from August 2017 and due to its TDP of only 15 watts, is suitable for slim and light subnotebooks and ultrabooks.


Compared to its predecessor, the i5-7200U (2 x 2.5 - 3.1 GHz, Hyperthreading, TDP 15 W), which only featured two physical cores, it is possible to realise performance increases in multi-threaded applications of up to 40%. Including on-die are a DDR4 memory controller and Intel's UHD Graphics 620 GPU. H.265 encoding and decoding is handled by the GPU in hardware.


Using our Cinebench R15 routine we test how the CPU performs in terms of clock rates with high, but realistic, load over time. With 565 points from its first run-through, the processor performed at expected levels for an i5-8250U. The second run-through resulted in the score already sinking down to 518 points and from this point through to 20 runs, the score bounced between this and 528 points. We observed during these runs that the clock rate generally sat at around 2.6 GHz.


So far, so good - but from run 21 the typical 3590 chaos started with wild swings in results between 375 and 571 points. We will address this behaviour in the temperature section later. Due to the extreme variation in results we ran the test multiple times - sometimes we saw massive score and clock rate swings as early as the 2nd run-through. It would be reasonable to assume that the chaotic swings in clock rate and performance would also be noticeable in daily use and provide a negative experience.


UPDATE 08.07.2019: After updating the BIOS to version 1.9.8 the frequency behaviour remains somewhat unusual - in the first benchmark runs the clock rates achieved are below what we would expect to see, and it's only the second run that they achieve the levels we saw before the update in the first run. From run 3 onward, the clock rates increase further, reaching levels that we previously didn't see before the BIOS update. This is no doubt due to better turbo boost behaviour as a result of changes to the cooling/fan profile. After this point, the clock rate behaviour is normal.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670Tooltip
Dell Latitude 3590 Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U: Ø513 (374.78-570.63)
Dell Latitude 3590 Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U; BIOS-Version 1.9.8: Ø531 (428.69-556.66)
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE Intel Core i7-8565U, Intel Core i7-8565U: Ø505 (501.3-526.77)
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110 Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U: Ø480 (477.83-508.65)
Dell Latitude 14 5495 AMD Ryzen 7 2700U, AMD Ryzen 7 2700U: Ø620 (605-670)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Core i7-8565U
181 Points ∼100% +26%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
148 Points ∼82% +3%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U
144 Points ∼80%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U
  (81 - 147, n=94)
141 Points ∼78% -2%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel Core i5-8250U
139 Points ∼77% -3%
Average of class Office
  (20 - 193, n=518)
111 Points ∼61% -23%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
670 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U
  (320 - 730, n=98)
568 Points ∼85% +1%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U
565 Points ∼84%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U
429 Points ∼64% -24%
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Core i7-8565U
527 Points ∼79% -7%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel Core i5-8250U
508 Points ∼76% -10%
Average of class Office
  (36 - 1050, n=526)
337 Points ∼50% -40%
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
429 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
144 Points
Help

System Performance

In terms of total, overall system performance, the Lenovo ThinkPad, with its newer and faster Core i7-8565U (Whiskey Lake, 4 x 1.8 - 4.6 GHz, Hyperthreading, TDP 15 watts), faster NVMe-SSD and dedicated GPU on board was able to take top place in the field. The two candidates that share the same hardware as the review candidate as well as the Toshiba Tecra are more or less at level pegging and deliver performance as expected, whereas the Dell Latitude 14 5495 with its significantly higher-end Ryzen 7 2700U continued to have problems with PCMark benchmarking.

Subjectively, performance seems to be absolutely fine. The OS and applications start quickly, and with multitasking this business laptop does not miss a step.

PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
3884 Points ∼100% +44%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
2778 Points ∼72% +3%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2688 - 3082, n=64)
2733 Points ∼70% +2%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
2688 Points ∼69%
Average of class Office
  (320 - 3884, n=136)
2603 Points ∼67% -3%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
2206 Points ∼57% -18%
Productivity
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
7964 Points ∼100% +40%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (3851 - 6653, n=64)
5730 Points ∼72% +1%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
5687 Points ∼71%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
5505 Points ∼69% -3%
Average of class Office
  (1266 - 7964, n=136)
5415 Points ∼68% -5%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
3571 Points ∼45% -37%
Essentials
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
8523 Points ∼100% +13%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
7529 Points ∼88%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (5855 - 9289, n=64)
7400 Points ∼87% -2%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
7021 Points ∼82% -7%
Average of class Office
  (2683 - 8992, n=136)
6875 Points ∼81% -9%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
5957 Points ∼70% -21%
Score
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
4597 Points ∼100% +32%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
3487 Points ∼76%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
3407 Points ∼74% -2%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (3407 - 4081, n=64)
3288 Points ∼72% -6%
Average of class Office
  (803 - 4597, n=137)
3214 Points ∼70% -8%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
2585 Points ∼56% -26%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
5389 Points ∼100% +14%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
4727 Points ∼88%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2699 - 5106, n=56)
4649 Points ∼86% -2%
Average of class Office
  (1226 - 5428, n=337)
4008 Points ∼74% -15%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
2438 Points ∼45% -48%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
4770 Points ∼100% +35%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2986 - 4458, n=67)
3598 Points ∼75% +2%
Dell Latitude 3590
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
3532 Points ∼74%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Vega 10, 2700U, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
3256 Points ∼68% -8%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
3113 Points ∼65% -12%
Average of class Office
  (1169 - 4770, n=393)
3046 Points ∼64% -14%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3532 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4727 points
Help

Storage

Dell has chosen to equip this laptop with a SATA III 256 GB SSD from Samsung. Its performance, considering its older interface, is subjectively good and lags behind the SSDs of the Toshiba Tecra and the smaller Dell 14-inch by 10 to 35%. The NVMe SSD in the Lenovo ThinkPad is of course in a different league.

Dell Latitude 3590
Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ
Dell Latitude 14 5495
Intel SSDSCKKF256G8
Average Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
61%
-4%
-21%
-7%
Write 4K
79.52
111.2
40%
80.14
1%
48.45
-39%
78.3 (77.1 - 79.5, n=2)
-2%
Read 4K
32.72
49.01
50%
32.05
-2%
25.11
-23%
32.4 (32 - 32.7, n=2)
-1%
Write Seq
472.5
585.8
24%
505.4
7%
341.2
-28%
480 (473 - 488, n=2)
2%
Read Seq
503.5
783.1
56%
527.9
5%
520.6
3%
510 (504 - 517, n=2)
1%
Write 4K Q32T1
322.6
263
-18%
204.9
-36%
202
-37%
227 (132 - 323, n=2)
-30%
Read 4K Q32T1
249.9
481.5
93%
226.6
-9%
243.5
-3%
197 (145 - 250, n=2)
-21%
Write Seq Q32T1
530.5
784.2
48%
532.7
0%
320.8
-40%
519 (507 - 531, n=2)
-2%
Read Seq Q32T1
544.3
1602
194%
550.7
1%
555.2
2%
542 (540 - 544, n=2)
0%
Write 4K Q8T8
247.5
Read 4K Q8T8
253.4
AS SSD
-2%
-15%
-45%
-17%
Copy Game MB/s
404.95
260.04
197
Copy Program MB/s
165.41
152.14
84.5
Copy ISO MB/s
532.41
441.25
272
Score Total
1060
1706
61%
971
-8%
751
-29%
844 (628 - 1060, n=2)
-20%
Score Write
364
478
31%
284
-22%
288
-21%
314 (264 - 364, n=2)
-14%
Score Read
457
822
80%
448
-2%
309
-32%
346 (234 - 457, n=2)
-24%
Access Time Write *
0.042
0.228
-443%
0.046
-10%
0.101
-140%
0.0595 (0.042 - 0.077, n=2)
-42%
Access Time Read *
0.06
0.162
-170%
0.129
-115%
0.128
-113%
0.0775 (0.06 - 0.095, n=2)
-29%
4K-64 Write
247.71
314.07
27%
156.1
-37%
225.18
-9%
202 (156 - 248, n=2)
-18%
4K-64 Read
372.48
642.76
73%
366.77
-2%
238.42
-36%
265 (157 - 372, n=2)
-29%
4K Write
79.85
90.27
13%
78.8
-1%
34.58
-57%
71.5 (63.2 - 79.9, n=2)
-10%
4K Read
34.65
47.61
37%
30.36
-12%
19.76
-43%
31.3 (28 - 34.7, n=2)
-10%
Seq Write
361.68
735.36
103%
493.27
36%
286.49
-21%
408 (362 - 455, n=2)
13%
Seq Read
498.72
1316
164%
512.88
3%
507.15
2%
496 (493 - 499, n=2)
-1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
30% / 24%
-10% / -11%
-33% / -35%
-12% / -12%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ
Sequential Read: 506 MB/s
Sequential Write: 473.5 MB/s
512K Read: 458.4 MB/s
512K Write: 382.3 MB/s
4K Read: 33.71 MB/s
4K Write: 71.14 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 262.3 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 257.7 MB/s

GPU

The Intel UHD Graphics 620 GPU is a basic integrated GPU intended for normal desktop usage from 2017 which shares main memory with the CPU. It benefits significantly from fast DDR4 RAM in dual-channel mode. DDR4 memory is available, but dual-channel is not.

It is no surprise therefore that in testing it comes in somewhat below average. The AMD GPU equipped CPU of the smaller Latitude is able to place far higher up the ladder, whilst the AMD Radeon RX 550X in the Lenovo E590, theoretically playing in a much higher league, is not able to fully realise its potential due to thermal issues. The 3DMark 11 scores remained the same whether on mains or battery power.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8565U
5332 Points ∼100% +221%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
3080 Points ∼58% +85%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (1235 - 1979, n=153)
1705 Points ∼32% +3%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1672 Points ∼31% +1%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1661 Points ∼31%
Average of class Office
  (185 - 5332, n=640)
1289 Points ∼24% -22%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8565U
3678 Points ∼100% +254%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
1835 Points ∼50% +77%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (557 - 1401, n=122)
1117 Points ∼30% +8%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1039 Points ∼28%
Average of class Office
  (138 - 4109, n=462)
997 Points ∼27% -4%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8565U
19931 Points ∼100% +137%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
10773 Points ∼54% +28%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (6910 - 11436, n=139)
9101 Points ∼46% +8%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
8411 Points ∼42%
Average of class Office
  (1208 - 27117, n=509)
6914 Points ∼35% -18%
3DMark 11 Performance
1778 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
6006 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
968 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Dusting off "BioShock Infinite" from 2013, the integrated GPU scores placed below average for UHD 620 results and was only able to drive the, still very attractive, 3D shooter with a resolution of 1,280x720 and low details at reasonable frame rates. With the current, not particularly demanding, "Farming Simulator 19" we find again that only with the lowest details preset and the same resolution is acceptable performance achieved. 

"Rise of the Tome Raider" (2016) acts as an example of the numerous 3D games which, with a UHD 620, can only be played at the very lowest detail settings and a pixelated 1,024x768 resolution. The GPU in this review device however does not even manage that. The majority of indie games run without issues, and games with an isometric view such as "Diablo III" and "Starcraft II" can in contrast be run with medium settings, depending on the game.

BioShock Infinite
1366x768 Medium Preset
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Core i7-8565U, AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop)
99.3 fps ∼100% +237%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (11.5 - 45.5, n=139)
32.1 fps ∼32% +9%
Average of class Office
  (7.18 - 145, n=355)
31.1 fps ∼31% +5%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
29.5 fps ∼30%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
11.5 fps ∼12% -61%
1280x720 Very Low Preset
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
Intel Core i7-8565U, AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop)
171.5 fps ∼100% +227%
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
85.7 fps ∼50% +64%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (18.3 - 83, n=139)
59.7 fps ∼35% +14%
Average of class Office
  (12.2 - 208, n=357)
55.3 fps ∼32% +6%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
52.4 fps ∼31%
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
18.3 fps ∼11% -65%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1024x768 Lowest Preset
Dell Latitude 14 5495
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
37.6 fps ∼100% +101%
Average of class Office
  (6.2 - 111, n=106)
27.2 fps ∼72% +45%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (10.4 - 111, n=70)
21.4 fps ∼57% +14%
Dell Latitude 3590
Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
18.7 fps ∼50%
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 52.429.5fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 18.7fps
Farming Simulator 19 (2018) 54.820.8fps

Emissions - Annoying Noise Profile

Noise Emissions

Clock rate trend
Clock rate trend

While idling, the fan of the laptop is switched off, but occasionally makes itself known by spinning up without there being an obvious reason for doing so. Whilst Windows updates were running we noticed this issue repeatedly, whereas whilst we were running two cycles of the Kraken 1.1 browser benchmark the issue did not occur consistently. At its lowest speed level, the fan is only audible from close up.

After starting our stress test (Prime95 and FurMark) we were surprised to see that the fan only ran at a very low speed - this resulted in immediate and severe throttling (more later) of the CPU. Only after a (temporary) return to good clock speeds did the fan then spin up to a higher level. The noise that resulted was mostly typical for a fan of this type, but in a quieter room it would definitely be noticeable from several meters away and is unfortunately accompanied by an annoying high-pitched whine.

UPDATE 08.07.2019: After upgrading the BIOS to version 1.9.8 the fan is not so quick to spin up whilst under load (or does not spin up at all). After starting Prime95 and FurMark, it took around 15 seconds before the fan started to spin up to higher speeds. Around one second later, these speeds also then began to decrease. Further increases in fan speed were more gradual and measured right up to its maximum level.

Noise Level

Idle
30.6 / 31.9 / 31.9 dB(A)
Load
39 / 39.1 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 30.6 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.530.530.3312527.726.724.625.13129.827.428.325.1402627.727.5255024.726.425.123.36326.229.825.223.18027.425.223.12410023.123.522.923.612522.121.321.722.616021.821.622.121.820022.422.72222.3250222221.321.731521.921.62122.740023.321.820.623.250023.321.920.2246302422.319.424.58002321.118.923.1100022.821.218.322.8125022.420.917.922.3160022.620.717.122.4200021.719.516.721.2250021.919.616.221315021.118.916.121.1400021.61915.821.3500022.419.615.622.3630019.617.515.419.3800017.816.915.517.11000016.916.115.4161250016.616.415.215.51600021.121.514.815.3SPL33.93229.433.7N21.71.22median 22median 21.1median 17.9median 22.3Delta0.81.62.51.73332.133.931.8333233.633.330.73233.733.232.832.933.733.130.331.730.233.129.63131.53029.628.226.929.927.828.227.227.627.827.427.226.126.326.326.526.126.726.325.725.826.724.425.423.925.324.424.324.323.322.724.323.122.222.522.723.122.721.322.22222.722.321.621.42122.320.620.320.320.120.620.220.120.119.820.219.919.519.518.919.920.619.920.518.320.621.319.3201821.320.819.719.718.120.819.618.918.917.919.618.918.318.318.118.918.518.318.318.118.518.418.518.318.318.418.718.618.618.418.718.818.618.618.618.818.918.818.918.818.91918.818.918.81918.918.718.918.618.919.618.920.218.719.631.931.431.530.931.91.51.41.41.31.5median 20.2median 19.5median 20median 18.8median 20.22.12.22.11.72.133.639.532.23133.433.634.235.534.331.432.134.241.735.338.836.432.941.737.136.334.730.632.137.132.434.23331.831.732.430.730.129.327.928.930.727.131.428.627.132.527.126.127.426.625.429.626.126.127.926.324.926.126.124.926.524.822.725.424.924.626.924.622.923.124.624.627.924.922.522.224.625.231.125.321.321.625.223.827.723.519.72123.824.329.323.819.82024.323.22823.31918.623.225.833.125.618.41825.827.435.627.218.217.827.424.432.624.118.217.624.423.630.823.317.917.523.623.631.623.917.917.323.623.630.123.717.917.923.622.331.622.218.31822.321.732.721.518.518.121.72129.120.818.718.32120.426.42018.918.520.420.325.719.619.118.720.320.123.819.619.118.820.120.12119.619.218.920.120.420.319.719.41920.435.543.135.330.830.635.52.14.12.11.31.32.1median 23.6median 28median 23.7median 19.1median 18.7median 23.61.92.51.91.621.9hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseLenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GEToshiba Tecra A50-E-110Dell Latitude 14 5495

Temperature

 The top side of the laptop has no issues with temperature. We measured a maximum of 26 °C (~79 °F) at idle, and 41 °C (~106 °F) under sustained load. The bottom of the laptop whilst being used on one's knees reached temperatures that may be an issue for more 'delicate' body parts.

As we mentioned whilst discussing noise emissions, and as can be seen in the leftmost screenshot, after starting our stress test there was no break in the CPU clock rate. They simply remained at idle levels and only after a few minutes had elapsed did they raise to a more constant, higher level. When this occurred, the fan also ramped up considerably.

The resulting clock rate behaviour can only be described as chaotic - this is easily seen in the two middle and right hand screenshots below. You will notice also that there were phases of abrupt swings in clock rate (saw-tooth) as well as phases with small swings in clock rate (hills/valleys) - this occurred during constant load. To date, the reviewer has not seen behaviour like this, and it is clear that there is a problem with the fan and cooling profile. We noticed on several occasions that the fan only span up to higher speeds after the CPU had already exceeded the 90 °C (~194 °F) mark.

The CPU during our testing was only once able to rise above the 2.7 GHz level. It more frequently operated at 700 or 800 MHz. In this, admittedly not real-world, scenario, there was massive throttling. The GPU did not have to contend with this issue, and its clockrate was able to almost constantly maintain a 1.1 GHz clock. The highest recorded core temperatures during the stress test runs was 85 °C (~185 °F).

UPDATE 08.07.2019: As can be seen in the screenshots below ("Stress test new BIOS"), frequency behaviour was also more normal with the new BIOS. After one minute the clock rate reduced to 2.3 GHz, and after a further minute was down to 1.3 to 1.4 GHz which was maintained to the end of the test. Throttling in this scenario is absolutely normal and seen with the new BIOS also.

Stress test start
Stress test start
Stress test 2
Stress test 2
Stress test 3
Stress test 3
Stress test finish
Stress test finish
Stress test new BIOS start
Stress test new BIOS start
Stress test new BIOS end
Stress test new BIOS end
 
 
 25.8 °C
78 F
25.6 °C
78 F
23 °C
73 F
 
 25.6 °C
78 F
26.3 °C
79 F
22.9 °C
73 F
 
 24.8 °C
77 F
23 °C
73 F
25.8 °C
78 F
 
Maximum: 26.3 °C = 79 F
Average: 24.8 °C = 77 F
22.1 °C
72 F
24.8 °C
77 F
25.2 °C
77 F
22 °C
72 F
24.9 °C
77 F
24.5 °C
76 F
21.9 °C
71 F
22.4 °C
72 F
23.1 °C
74 F
Maximum: 25.2 °C = 77 F
Average: 23.4 °C = 74 F
Power Supply (max.)  27.4 °C = 81 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | FIRT 550-Pocket
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.5 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 29.4 °C / 85 F for the devices in the class Office.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 37.5 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 36.4 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.8 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 29.4 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 27.7 °C / 81.9 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (+0.4 °C / 0.7 F).
Heat generation upper side (idle)
Heat generation upper side (idle)
Heat generation base (idle)
Heat generation base (idle)
Heat generation upper side (load)
Heat generation upper side (load)
Heat generation base (load)
Heat generation base (load)

Speakers

Pink Noise
Pink Noise

The two mini speakers, located towards the front and underneath, are lacking significantly in both bass and volume. They do however OK in terms of dynamics with more wide-ranging tracks. Filling a room with sound though is out of the question, as the maximum volume is just enough for a medium sized room.

With music titles that are somewhat heavier, with multiple loud instruments (metal, punk etc.) differentiation between instruments suffers immensely and the sound dynamics suffer, tending towards sounding like a shrill mess. There are also issues with significant volume shifts. Playing at reduced volume levels will generally result in a more pleasant experience.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2034.133.834.12533.834.333.83134.437.334.44030.633.430.6502933.2296332.629.832.68030.427.730.410028.525.728.512534.725.534.716035.224.935.220033.324.233.325045.223.345.231552.222.252.24005621.25650052.72052.763054.619.554.680063.918.763.9100072.518.372.5125069.71869.7160065.817.465.8200067.517.667.5250066.717.666.7315066.917.966.9400068.717.968.7500065.918.265.9630065.318.265.380005418.1541000057.618.257.61250062.418.262.41600062.718.262.7SPL78.830.678.8N391.339median 62.4median 18.2median 62.4Delta8.928.930.931.830.931.930.731.934.932.934.930.330.230.331.63031.628.127.828.127.727.427.725.826.525.825.725.825.725.325.325.323.922.723.923.222.723.227.32227.345214554.620.154.65519.85556.618.956.654.418.354.455.31855.371.718.171.771.817.971.86518.16565.618.165.662.518.362.558.218.458.255.518.655.560.318.860.358.918.858.955.618.655.651.418.751.477.430.977.430.71.330.7median 55.3median 18.8median 55.310.31.710.334.533.434.538.332.138.339.932.939.936.532.136.536.931.736.931.228.931.23232.53240.429.640.44526.14543.125.443.146.423.146.452.622.252.654.921.654.957.92157.964.52064.569.418.669.476.11876.172.317.872.367.817.667.868.817.568.868.217.368.265.917.965.968.61868.664.718.164.767.118.367.164.218.564.261.518.761.561.518.861.562.918.962.963.91963.980.630.680.644.91.344.9median 64.2median 18.7median 64.26.826.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseDell Latitude 3590Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110Dell Latitude 14 5495
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Dell Latitude 3590 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.46 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 67% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110 audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.1% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.8% higher than median
(-) | mids are not linear (16.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 94% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 3% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Dell Latitude 14 5495 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.07 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 18% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management - Efficient due to Throttling

Power Consumption

The power consumption of the Dell 3590 is typical for a system with these components and does not exceed expectations under any load conditions - with one exception: under maximum load the laptop consumes only 24 watts - a noticeably low level which is the result of its massive issues with throttling.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.27 / 0.75 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 4.3 / 7.2 / 9.8 Watt
Load midlight 38 / 24 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Dell Latitude 3590
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM871b MZ7LN256HAJQ, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
8565U, Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Toshiba KBG30ZMT256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM871b MZNLN256HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Dell Latitude 14 5495
2700U, Vega 10, Intel SSDSCKKF256G8, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 14
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
 
Average of class Office
 
Power Consumption
-43%
-3%
-4%
-11%
-53%
Idle Minimum *
4.3
3.48
19%
3.8
12%
4.3
-0%
3.9 (1 - 12.4, n=161)
9%
7.63 (2.34 - 32, n=953)
-77%
Idle Average *
7.2
7.2
-0%
7.7
-7%
6.6
8%
7.15 (4.3 - 15.5, n=161)
1%
11.4 (4.2 - 42, n=953)
-58%
Idle Maximum *
9.8
10.2
-4%
9.3
5%
7.7
21%
9 (5.2 - 16.6, n=161)
8%
13.9 (5 - 67, n=953)
-42%
Load Average *
38
59.6
-57%
31
18%
32
16%
35.3 (12.9 - 51.6, n=161)
7%
37.2 (7.43 - 99.3, n=938)
2%
Load Maximum *
24
65.1
-171%
34.6
-44%
40
-67%
43.6 (22 - 79, n=161)
-82%
45.8 (12.2 - 129, n=940)
-91%
Witcher 3 ultra *
49

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

And now we come to battery life, which is without doubt one of the few strong points of the Latitude 3590. With 56 Wh the battery has a relatively high capacity, which in combination with its sparing power consumption results in very good battery life and longevity. In our WLAN test, which aims to simulate real-world usage, at reduced brightness, the Dell Latitude lasted a good nine hours and should therefore last the entire day for most users.

The runtimes of the competition from Lenovo and Toshiba are, due to their smaller 45 Wh batteries and other hardware spec, not directly comparable. It is clear from first impressions however that the runtime of theTecra in our WLAN test was very week. Our AMD based Dell Latitude 5495 with its smaller screen and slightly larger battery produced a result comparable to our review laptop.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
20h 9min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 04min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
10h 18min
Load (maximum brightness)
2h 9min
Dell Latitude 3590
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 56 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad E590-20NB0012GE
8565U, Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 45 Wh
Toshiba Tecra A50-E-110
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh
Dell Latitude 14 5495
2700U, Vega 10, 61 Wh
Average of class Office
 
Battery Runtime
-15%
-47%
3%
-33%
Reader / Idle
1209
1133
-6%
1089
-10%
570 (101 - 1857, n=794)
-53%
H.264
618
541
-12%
708
15%
428 (139 - 834, n=175)
-31%
WiFi v1.3
544
423
-22%
291
-47%
562
3%
411 (105 - 964, n=335)
-24%
Load
129
105
-19%
136
5%
101 (37 - 259, n=743)
-22%

Pros

+ Solid and well-constructed chassis
+ Connectivity well suited to business use
+ Complete security suite
+ Very good keyboard
+ Better Touchpad
+ Very low power consumption
+ Long battery life

Cons

- Fingerprint-prone
- Screen too flexible
- Slow SD card reader
- WLAN receive performance far too low
- Service problematic
- Only 1 year guarantee
- Display poor in every aspect
- Fan buzzes and whines
- Chaotic clock and fan profiles
- Massive throttling with erratic performance
- Poorly performing speakers

Verdict

The Dell Latitude 3590 - provided for review by:
The Dell Latitude 3590 - provided for review by:

On the positive side of the pro/contra list for this failed attempt at an office notebook with business ambitions are the truly very good input devices, as well as very good battery life. In this sense, the Dell Latitude 15 3590 does deliver on its professional ambitions. This applies also to its included security package and its business-oriented connectivity options. The chassis also impresses.

What is absolutely unacceptable for an 800-Euro (~$912) device, however, is the display which in every conceivable discipline is absolutely terrible. It is a TN-type display with terrible viewing angles, miserable contrast, a severe blue tint from factory and very low colour range. Adding to this are the subpar card reader, significantly poor WLAN performance and the fan, which whines constantly in the background when the laptop is under any load at all. This is no doubt due to the unusable fan profile and control which results in an absolutely chaotic clock rate behaviour under load with occasionally massive throttling.

Lurking very much in the foreground with the issues this laptop presents is the fan profile, which results in absolutely chaotic frequency behaviour under load with occasionally massive throttling. We can only hope that a future BIOS update will improve upon these issues - until then, we cannot recommend this laptop.

UPDATE 08.07.2019: After installing the new BIOS version 1.9.8, fan and frequency behaviours are more normal and much improved, and we have increased our rating for this laptop as a result.

Dell Latitude 3590 - 07/08/2019 v6
Sven Kloevekorn

Chassis
76 / 98 → 78%
Keyboard
89%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
56 / 80 → 70%
Weight
63 / 20-67 → 90%
Battery
92%
Display
74%
Games Performance
48 / 68 → 70%
Application Performance
87 / 92 → 95%
Temperature
94%
Noise
79%
Audio
50%
Camera
40 / 85 → 46%
Add Points
-3%
Average
67%
80%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Dell Latitude 3590 review: Office laptop with major flaws
Sven Kloevekorn, 2019-06-21 (Update: 2019-07-11)