Notebookcheck

Dynabook Tecra X50 Laptop Review: A light Ultrabook with light endurance

Dynamic do-over. The Tecra is back under a new name. The Dynabook Tecra X50 retains much of the Tecra flair for thinness but ultimately falls flat. While the X50 is a competent machine overall, it is priced far too high for what it offers.

The Toshiba Tecra is back, though it is under new management. Sporting the new Dynabook branding, the Tecra X50 is a competent thin-and-light Ultrabook targeted at office employees in need of a highly portable machine. While the main draw of the Tecra X50 is its thin profile, the machine has a few tricks up its sleeve. We will see how our configuration of the Tecra X50 (Core i7-8665U, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD, ~US $2400) compares to other thin-and-light business notebooks like the Lenovo ThinkPad T490s, Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon, Acer Swift 5, and the Microsoft Surface Laptop 3.

A quick note before we begin: we are currently upgrading our WiFi testing hardware and thus cannot provide pinpoint wireless transfer speeds at the moment. However, speaking from personal use, the Tecra X50's wireless performance is perfectly satisfactory for general office and home use. We experienced no dropped connections or odd behavior during our time with the device.

Case and Connectivity

The Dynabook Tecra X50 is a beautiful machine. It's dark brushed metal chassis looks gorgeous. It will remain so, as the case is resistant to fingerprints and smudges. The bright metal accents complement the dark blue color well. The only plastic on the machine is the display bezel (which is reasonably thin for a 15.6-inch screen), the keycaps, and the dedicated buttons for the pointing stick.

The case is well-built, although there is some flex. In particular, the keyboard deck bends slightly under normal use. The display can also be twisted under direct pressure. The hinges of the machine are firm and hold the screen in place during normal use. The display bobbles a bit when touch input is used. The hinges are too stiff for one-handed opening. Lastly, there are no unsightly gaps around the chassis, and the case does not creak when squeezed.

Perhaps the defining feature of the Tecra X50 (like the Tecra X40 before it) is how thin the machine is. The X50 is highly portable and could be carried in a hand all day without trouble. Port selection is good for such a thin machine, although we would prefer a full-sized SD card reader to the microSD card reader. The inclusion of two Thunderbolt 3 ports is very nice and opens several possibilities for docking and display hookups.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Dynabook included a Toshiba Thunderbolt 3 dock with the Tecra X50. The dock greatly expands connectivity options, adding 4 more USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-A ports, two more USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-C ports, a full-size Ethernet jack, and hookups for two monitors (one via HDMI or DisplayPort, the other via HDMI, mini DisplayPort, or VGA.) The dock also charges the Tecra X50 at the same rate as the included 45 Watt USB-C power adapter. The Toshiba Thunderbolt 3 dock is available from Dynabook for US $299.99.

Size Comparison

359 mm / 14.1 inch 250 mm / 9.84 inch 17.6 mm / 0.693 inch 1.4 kg3.13 lbs358 mm / 14.1 inch 230 mm / 9.06 inch 15.9 mm / 0.626 inch 999 g2.2 lbs349.3 mm / 13.8 inch 240.7 mm / 9.48 inch 15.5 mm / 0.61 inch 1.8 kg4.03 lbs339.5 mm / 13.4 inch 244 mm / 9.61 inch 14.7 mm / 0.579 inch 1.5 kg3.4 lbs332 mm / 13.1 inch 228.9 mm / 9.01 inch 16.9 mm / 0.665 inch 1.3 kg2.76 lbs329 mm / 13 inch 225.8 mm / 8.89 inch 16.1 mm / 0.634 inch 1.3 kg2.8 lbs323.5 mm / 12.7 inch 217.1 mm / 8.55 inch 14.9 mm / 0.587 inch 1.1 kg2.45 lbs

Connectivity

Left: Kensington lock, 2x USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-A, headset jack
Left: Kensington lock, 2x USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-A, headset jack
Right: SmartCard reader, microSD, 2x Thunderbolt 3 (w/ power delivery), HDMI
Right: SmartCard reader, microSD, 2x Thunderbolt 3 (w/ power delivery), HDMI
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
 
72.57 MB/s ∼100%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
68.3 MB/s ∼94% -6%
Average of class Office
  (10.2 - 191, n=280)
62.8 MB/s ∼87% -13%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
62 MB/s ∼85% -15%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
87.8 MB/s ∼100% +6%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
86.5 MB/s ∼99% +5%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
 
82.71 MB/s ∼94%
Average of class Office
  (9.5 - 255, n=255)
79.4 MB/s ∼90% -4%

Input Devices and Security

The plastic keyboard feels crisp underhand. The plastic keycaps have a firm body and springy feedback, and travel is adequate. The keys are well-sized and well-spaced. Clatter is noticeable but not offensive. Our primary complaints lie with the small arrow keys and the odd placement of special functions (e.g., screen brightness controls, volume controls). The single-stage white backlight is a bit dim but usable. However, the special function markers are not lit by the backlight, making them difficult to find in dark environments. This can be frustrating.

The trackpad feels smooth but is small. Additionally, the integrated fingerprint reader that occupies the upper-left corner of the trackpad often gets in the way, further reducing usable space. The clicking mechanism feels solid, and its click is quiet. The pointing stick in the middle of the keyboard is a fair bit worse than Lenovo's TrackPoint. Dynabook's implementation is usable but feels slippery and isn't as responsive as the TrackPoint on Lenovo's business laptops. Hence, most users will opt for the compact trackpad. The pointing stick's buttons (located above the trackpad) are excellent, offering firm feedback, good travel, and a quiet yet strong click.

Dynabook offers a touchscreen option, which our unit has. Touch input is reliable, although there is a slight delay before the laptop registers an actual input.

The Tecra X50 includes a fingerprint scanner that registers about 75% of the time. The camera can be configured with a Windows Hello-capable IR sensor. This sensor is reliable and allows for immediate logins, even in dark environments.

Display

Subpixel matrix
Subpixel matrix

The FullHD touch display is a bit below average. The Tecra X50 uses the same Toshiba panel as the older Tecra X40, albeit at 15.6 inches rather than 14. The impression is largely the same as that left by its older brother. Contrast is decent (986:1), but the backlight is too dim for our tastes. Average brightness across the panel is 270 nits. Competitors in this price range routinely shoot past 300 nits and are better options. The Tecra X50's display is fine for office use but can be difficult to read next to a window. Outdoor is almost impossible.

On the plus side, response times for the IGZO panel are excellent, and PWM is not a problem. At this price point, we would expect that to be the case, so the Tecra X50 earns full marks here. Additionally, there is minimal backlight bleed. The matte finish across the touchscreen helps to kill glare indoors.

261.8
cd/m²
283.5
cd/m²
262
cd/m²
262.6
cd/m²
295.9
cd/m²
264
cd/m²
258
cd/m²
287.4
cd/m²
255.9
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
Toshiba TOS508F
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 295.9 cd/m² Average: 270.1 cd/m² Minimum: 15.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 295.9 cd/m²
Contrast: 986:1 (Black: 0.3 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.55 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 5.73
ΔE Greyscale 4.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
54% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 35% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.475
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Toshiba TOS508F, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Toshiba TOS508F, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
B140HAN05.7, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
LP140QH2-SPD1, , 2560x1440, 14
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
LG Philips LP156WFA-SPG2, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
Sharp LQ150P1JX51, , 2496x1664, 15
Response Times
28%
-57%
9%
1%
-34%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
38 (21.6, 16.4)
22 (12, 10)
42%
61.6 (30.8, 30.8)
-62%
33.6 (16.4, 17.2)
12%
38 (19, 19)
-0%
47.2 (23.2, 24)
-24%
Response Time Black / White *
25.6 (15.6, 10)
22 (12, 10)
14%
38.8 (21.2, 17.6)
-52%
24 (12.4, 11.6)
6%
25 (14, 11)
2%
36.8 (20.4, 16.4)
-44%
PWM Frequency
21000 (90)
21370 (51)
Screen
17%
49%
25%
44%
45%
Brightness middle
295.9
266
-10%
391
32%
338
14%
341
15%
416.9
41%
Brightness
270
244
-10%
389
44%
315
17%
319
18%
389
44%
Brightness Distribution
86
86
0%
87
1%
88
2%
87
1%
86
0%
Black Level *
0.3
0.2
33%
0.23
23%
0.43
-43%
0.31
-3%
0.4
-33%
Contrast
986
1330
35%
1700
72%
786
-20%
1100
12%
1042
6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.55
4.61
30%
3.4
48%
4
39%
2.01
69%
2.75
58%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
21.52
7.46
65%
4.7
78%
7.9
63%
4.74
78%
6.64
69%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
5.73
1.1
81%
1.7
70%
1.11
81%
0.71
88%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.3
4.31
-0%
4
7%
6.2
-44%
2.01
53%
1.8
58%
Gamma
2.475 89%
2.54 87%
2.49 88%
2.13 103%
2.52 87%
2.09 105%
CCT
7002 93%
6848 95%
6809 95%
6787 96%
6704 97%
6646 98%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
35
39
11%
62.4
78%
68.1
95%
63
80%
63.4
81%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
54
61
13%
97.4
80%
97.8
81%
98
81%
99.4
84%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
23% / 19%
-4% / 33%
17% / 22%
23% / 37%
6% / 33%

* ... smaller is better

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
25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15.6 ms rise
↘ 10 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 45 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21.6 ms rise
↘ 16.4 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. » 37 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.6 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 not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9266 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Color reproduction is well below expectations for a $2000+ laptop. The panel's DeltaE2000 score for colors averaged 6.55 with a spike up to 21.52 in blue wavelengths. Considering competitors like the Lenovo ThinkPad T490s feature much more color accurate displays, this is disappointing. Even the older Tecra X40 has more accurate colors. Grays and color temperature are similarly off-kilter and trail behind other business Ultrabooks. Calibration helps a bit, but the Tecra X50's screen isn't great out of the box. Your mileage may vary.

ColorChecker
ColorChecker
Grayscale
Grayscale
Saturation Sweeps
Saturation Sweeps
ColorChecker (calibrated)
ColorChecker (calibrated)
Grayscale (calibrated)
Grayscale (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
vs sRGB: 54%
vs sRGB: 54%
vs AdobeRGB: 36%
vs AdobeRGB: 36%

Performance

The Tecra X50 is meant for "road warriors" and professionals on the go. To that end, performance needs to balance productivity against battery life. On the performance end of the scale, the Tecra X50 is adequate for office tasks. However, the machine falls far behind competitors with regard to battery life.

Despite its thin profile, the Tecra X50 allows for some user maintenance. The bottom panel easily lifts off, and end users have access to the wireless card, both RAM slots, and the cooling system. The storage drive is located on the other side of the mainboard, requiring further disassembly.

Processor

The Intel Core i7-8665U is getting a bit long in the tooth but is still a capable ULV processor. Based on Intel's Whiskey Lake architecture, we've seen the CPU in many other laptops, and it typically shows itself to be up to most office tasks. The quad-core Hyperthreaded chip should make short work of most workplace workloads and be perfectly adequate for on-the-go professionals. As an added bonus, the Core i7-8665U shouldn't suck too much juice, which helps with battery life.

Compared to similarly-priced competitors, the Dynabook X50 performs adequately. Interestingly, the X50 isn't too much of an improvement over the Core i5-equipped Tecra X40 we reviewed last year. In fact, the Tecra X50 performs about 20% worse than the average Core i7-8665U laptop.

Long-term performance, as measured by 30 consecutive runs of Cinebench R15, is stable. For this price range, the scores we observe are disappointing.

Dynabook also offers SKUs with either the Core i5-8265U, Core i5-8365U with vPro, or Core i7-8565U.

Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710Tooltip
Dynabook Tecra X50-F Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel Core i7-8665U: Ø491 (471.7-499.81)
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00 Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel Core i5-8265U: Ø584 (566.02-686.12)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel Core i7-8665U: Ø632 (574.56-701.36)
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U AMD Ryzen 5 3580U, AMD Ryzen 5 3580U: Ø662 (563.52-691.26)
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6 Intel Core i7-8565U, Intel Core i7-8565U: Ø441 (424.51-542.46)
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U: Ø475 (472.17-500.76)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
180 Points ∼83% +26%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U
  (143 - 199, n=6)
177 Points ∼81% +24%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
Intel Core i7-8565U
173 Points ∼79% +21%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
Intel Core i5-8265U
162 Points ∼74% +13%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
156 Points ∼72% +9%
Razer Blade Stealth i7-1065G7 Iris Plus
Intel Core i7-1065G7
149 Points ∼68% +4%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Intel Core i5-8250U
144 Points ∼66% +1%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Intel Core i7-8665U
143 Points ∼66%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
AMD Ryzen 5 3580U
139 Points ∼64% -3%
Average of class Office
  (20 - 199, n=538)
112 Points ∼51% -22%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
1051 Points ∼24% +112%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
AMD Ryzen 5 3580U
693 Points ∼16% +40%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
Intel Core i5-8265U
686 (min: 566.02, max: 686.12) Points ∼16% +38%
Razer Blade Stealth i7-1065G7 Iris Plus
Intel Core i7-1065G7
676 Points ∼15% +36%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U
  (496 - 701, n=6)
602 Points ∼14% +21%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
Intel Core i7-8565U
543 Points ∼12% +9%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Intel Core i5-8250U
501 Points ∼11% +1%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Intel Core i7-8665U
496 Points ∼11%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
494 Points ∼11% 0%
Average of class Office
  (36 - 1103, n=545)
346 Points ∼8% -30%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
143 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
496 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
46.34 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Help

System Performance

Overall system performance is good, if a bit below average. The Tecra X50 comes in about 6-8% the average Core i7-8665U laptop. While there are better options, the Tecra X50 offers adequate all-around performance.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
Vega 9, 3580U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDGTNG
3778 Points ∼32% +33%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10710U, SK Hynix PC601 NVMe 512 GB
3671 Points ∼31% +29%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, Intel SSD Pro 7600p SSDPEKKF512G8L
3210 Points ∼27% +13%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
3111 Points ∼26% +9%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2847 - 3506, n=6)
3073 Points ∼26% +8%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
UHD Graphics 620, 8565U, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG
2915 Points ∼24% +2%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
2847 Points ∼24%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
2788 Points ∼23% -2%
Average of class Office
  (320 - 5520, n=155)
2673 Points ∼22% -6%
Productivity
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
UHD Graphics 620, 8565U, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG
7050 Points ∼73% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (6506 - 7281, n=6)
6988 Points ∼72% +7%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
6870 Points ∼71% +6%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
6506 Points ∼67%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, Intel SSD Pro 7600p SSDPEKKF512G8L
6441 Points ∼66% -1%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
Vega 9, 3580U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDGTNG
6102 Points ∼63% -6%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5927 Points ∼61% -9%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10710U, SK Hynix PC601 NVMe 512 GB
5816 Points ∼60% -11%
Average of class Office
  (1266 - 7964, n=155)
5488 Points ∼57% -16%
Essentials
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10710U, SK Hynix PC601 NVMe 512 GB
9160 Points ∼83% +10%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (8199 - 9790, n=6)
8872 Points ∼81% +6%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
UHD Graphics 620, 8565U, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG
8493 Points ∼77% +2%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, Intel SSD Pro 7600p SSDPEKKF512G8L
8361 Points ∼76% 0%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
8343 Points ∼76%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
8199 Points ∼75% -2%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
Vega 9, 3580U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDGTNG
7861 Points ∼71% -6%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
7504 Points ∼68% -10%
Average of class Office
  (2683 - 9790, n=155)
6984 Points ∼64% -16%
Score
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10710U, SK Hynix PC601 NVMe 512 GB
4161 Points ∼54% +8%
Average Intel Core i7-8665U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (3847 - 4515, n=6)
4122 Points ∼53% +7%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
Vega 9, 3580U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDGTNG
4056 Points ∼52% +5%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
UHD Graphics 620, 8565U, SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG
4006 Points ∼52% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
4005 Points ∼52% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, Intel SSD Pro 7600p SSDPEKKF512G8L
3985 Points ∼51% +4%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
UHD Graphics 620, 8665U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
3847 Points ∼50%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3574 Points ∼46% -7%
Average of class Office
  (803 - 5009, n=156)
3282 Points ∼42% -15%

Storage Devices

The 512 GB Samsung PM981 PCIe NVMe SSD used in the Tecra X50 is snappy and responsive. The PM981 is common for high-end laptops, and with good reason; it offers fast read speeds and quick access times. The storage is not readily available to end users, so drive swaps are tricky.

CrystalDiskMark 6.0.1
CrystalDiskMark 6.0.1
AS SSD
AS SSD
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
Intel SSD Pro 7600p SSDPEKKF512G8L
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
SK Hynix BC501 HFM512GDJTNG
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDGTNG
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
SK Hynix PC601 NVMe 512 GB
Average Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
 
Average of class Office
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
-3%
6%
60%
-3%
-11%
30%
27%
-16%
Write 4K
100.1
100.1
0%
122.03
22%
196.91
97%
109.6
9%
99.04
-1%
134
34%
124 (90.4 - 174, n=53)
24%
95.4 (0.217 - 204, n=159)
-5%
Read 4K
42.4
40.03
-6%
45.56
7%
51.33
21%
41.15
-3%
35.63
-16%
42.91
1%
43.3 (28 - 61.3, n=52)
2%
33.6 (0.176 - 166, n=159)
-21%
Write Seq
1259
1497.34
1714.6
746.8
706.2
1841
1558 (112 - 2714, n=52)
706 (21.4 - 2714, n=158)
Read Seq
1296
2385.23
2464.05
1134
1044
1707
1695 (501 - 2665, n=52)
996 (74 - 2827, n=158)
Write 4K Q32T1
245.9
228.1
-7%
240.94
-2%
429.09
74%
321.5
31%
326.6
33%
394.7
61%
410 (198 - 1707, n=53)
67%
268 (0.222 - 701, n=160)
9%
Read 4K Q32T1
230.3
292.9
27%
338.03
47%
542.46
136%
354
54%
270
17%
398.5
73%
411 (230 - 1015, n=53)
78%
287 (0.647 - 773, n=160)
25%
Write Seq Q32T1
1910.2
1286
-33%
1528.4
-20%
2520.8
32%
871.8
-54%
819.6
-57%
2250
18%
1983 (1714 - 2994, n=53)
4%
900 (56.5 - 3280, n=160)
-53%
Read Seq Q32T1
3454.3
3411
-1%
2915
-16%
3481.3
1%
1639
-53%
2028
-41%
3265
-5%
3058 (1772 - 3562, n=53)
-11%
1621 (78.6 - 3561, n=160)
-53%
AS SSD
1%
23%
58%
-5%
-54%
-13%
19%
-620%
Copy Game MB/s
460.02
699.9
387.44
1210.98
1003 (547 - 1584, n=37)
311 (17.5 - 1424, n=241)
Copy Program MB/s
281.89
327.12
200.49
534.87
436 (206 - 713, n=37)
183 (12.8 - 609, n=241)
Copy ISO MB/s
739.34
955.16
827.96
1515.14
1699 (917 - 3259, n=37)
498 (21.1 - 2830, n=241)
Score Total
2521
2404
-5%
2831
12%
3874
54%
2384
-5%
1434
-43%
2608
3%
3922 (2348 - 5316, n=51)
56%
1365 (21 - 5169, n=366)
-46%
Score Write
1391
500
-64%
1226
-12%
1553
12%
932
-33%
488
-65%
947
-32%
1752 (147 - 2992, n=51)
26%
460 (8 - 2668, n=366)
-67%
Score Read
752
1292
72%
1092
45%
1554
107%
977
30%
639
-15%
1119
49%
1441 (752 - 2125, n=51)
92%
605 (6 - 2251, n=366)
-20%
Access Time Write *
0.032
0.038
-19%
0.039
-22%
0.023
28%
0.033
-3%
0.11
-244%
0.095
-197%
0.0892 (0.026 - 2.52, n=51)
-179%
1.066 (0.021 - 34.1, n=394)
-3231%
Access Time Read *
0.045
0.062
-38%
0.033
27%
0.056
-24%
0.044
2%
0.05 (0.029 - 0.082, n=51)
-11%
1.481 (0.025 - 32, n=391)
-3191%
4K-64 Write
1161.84
277.67
-76%
927.31
-20%
1148.49
-1%
736.88
-37%
339.93
-71%
731.77
-37%
1484 (96.2 - 2716, n=51)
28%
305 (0.23 - 2280, n=395)
-74%
4K-64 Read
559.54
1005.05
80%
760.86
36%
1209.22
116%
788.31
41%
492.01
-12%
893.39
60%
1197 (530 - 1823, n=51)
114%
451 (0.34 - 2072, n=395)
-19%
4K Write
125.54
98.43
-22%
164.45
31%
175.63
40%
124.83
-1%
96.76
-23%
115.01
-8%
110 (1.76 - 142, n=51)
-12%
74.7 (0.21 - 182, n=395)
-40%
4K Read
45.98
47.68
4%
65.58
43%
47.39
3%
44.27
-4%
34.98
-24%
45.1
-2%
50 (31.7 - 61, n=51)
9%
30.1 (0.4 - 112, n=395)
-35%
Seq Write
1039.41
1240.76
19%
1341
29%
2287
120%
707.74
-32%
514.48
-51%
1000.27
-4%
1591 (487 - 2330, n=51)
53%
504 (41.5 - 2531, n=396)
-52%
Seq Read
1461.21
2390
64%
2654
82%
2978
104%
1446.39
-1%
1122.12
-23%
1804.31
23%
1936 (1030 - 2806, n=51)
32%
839 (42.5 - 2978, n=396)
-43%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-1% / -0%
15% / 17%
59% / 59%
-4% / -4%
-33% / -39%
9% / 2%
23% / 22%
-318% / -407%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3454.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1910.2 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 230.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 245.9 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 42.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 100.1 MB/s

GPU Performance

The integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620 GPU offers little graphical power, but the chip performs within expectations for an iGPU. The Tecra X50 scores in line with similarly-specced laptops and should be adequate for simple photo and video editing. Those that need more power in a thin chassis should look at the Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15; its Vega 9 GPU hits about 1.5 times the graphical performance.

Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Ice Storm Extreme
Ice Storm Extreme
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Asus VivoBook 15 X512FL-EJ205T
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
3321 Points ∼100% +201%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
AMD Radeon RX Vega 9, AMD Ryzen 5 3580U
2789 Points ∼84% +153%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-8665U
1357 Points ∼41% +23%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-10710U
1339 Points ∼40% +21%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (557 - 1401, n=142)
1127 Points ∼34% +2%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-8665U
1103 Points ∼33%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1059 Points ∼32% -4%
Average of class Office
  (138 - 7774, n=480)
1028 Points ∼31% -7%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Asus VivoBook 15 X512FL-EJ205T
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, Intel Core i7-8565U
20961 Points ∼100% +145%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
AMD Radeon RX Vega 9, AMD Ryzen 5 3580U
19255 Points ∼92% +125%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-8665U
10656 Points ∼51% +25%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-10710U
9882 Points ∼47% +15%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (6910 - 11436, n=160)
9138 Points ∼44% +7%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-8665U
8559 Points ∼41%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
8226 Points ∼39% -4%
Average of class Office
  (1208 - 27117, n=526)
7059 Points ∼34% -18%
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
7500 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
1017 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Because of its integrated GPU, the Tecra X50 is not well-suited to AAA games. Older or lighter titles can be played, albeit at 720p with Low/Medium settings. Games like Stardew Valley run flawlessly on the Tecra X50, but heavier titles may be out of reach.

low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 58 36 28 11 fps
Rocket League (2017) 95 43 21 fps

Emissions & Energy Management

System Noise

Fan noise profile
Fan noise profile

Fan noise is well-controlled. The single fan remains off under lighter loads (e.g., web browsing). Heavier work causes the fan to steadily ramp up. At full tilt, the fan stays under 40 dB(A), and its lower pitch makes it blend into normal office noise. The Tecra X50 remains innocuous under most workloads. There is minimal coil whine that can only be heard directly next to the chassis.

Noise Level

Idle
30.2 / 30.2 / 30.2 dB(A)
Load
33.4 / 39 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: 30.2 dB(A)

Temperature

Prime95 + FurMark stress test
Prime95 + FurMark stress test

External temperature causes no complaint. Under load, there is a hot spot directly above the CPU, but even this does not grow uncomfortably hot. The rest of the chassis remains fairly cool to the touch. The Tecra X50 can be comfortably used in a lap during most workloads.

Stressing the machine with Prime 95 and FurMark causes the CPU to heavily throttle down to about 1.1 GHz. This throttling is aggressive, as CPU temperatures remain around 68° C throughout the test.

Max. Load
 27 °C
81 F
40.2 °C
104 F
33.4 °C
92 F
 
 24.6 °C
76 F
33.8 °C
93 F
26.6 °C
80 F
 
 23.6 °C
74 F
24.4 °C
76 F
24 °C
75 F
 
Maximum: 40.2 °C = 104 F
Average: 28.6 °C = 83 F
30.6 °C
87 F
40 °C
104 F
29.2 °C
85 F
27 °C
81 F
33.2 °C
92 F
27 °C
81 F
25.6 °C
78 F
26.4 °C
80 F
25.8 °C
78 F
Maximum: 40 °C = 104 F
Average: 29.4 °C = 85 F
Power Supply (max.)  36 °C = 97 F | Room Temperature 21 °C = 70 F | Fluke 62 Mini
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 28.6 °C / 83 F, compared to the average of 29.5 °C / 85 F for the devices in the class Office.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.2 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 36.5 °C / 98 F
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 24.4 °C / 75.9 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 (+3.7 °C / 6.7 F).
Keyboard, idle
Keyboard, idle
Bottom, idle
Bottom, idle
Keyboard, load
Keyboard, load
Bottom, load
Bottom, load

Speakers and Camera

The dual front-facing speakers are loud and clear. Bass is too low to be heard, making thumps sound more like slaps, but mids and highs are loud and level. There is no rattle at full volume, and the speakers remain clear and crisp. 

The HD camera looks awful. Even in well-lit conditions, visual noise spoils the picture. The dual microphones are excellent and capture high-quality voice recordings.

Speaker profile
Speaker profile
Camera sample. Lots of noise, particularly in skin tones.
Camera sample. Lots of noise, particularly in skin tones.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.5442538.342.23138.638.94038.940.85037.739.86336.536.98035.236.710035.235.712534.135.91603347.820035.557.525033.163.331532.267.240031.269.15003168.263029.672.480028.873100028.869.5125028.470160027.870.8200027.872.9250027.674.3315027.272.7400027.374500027.472.1630027.171.880002772.9100002770.1125002766.81600027.266.1SPL40.484.1N463.1median 28.4median 70Delta2.76.135.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseDynabook Tecra X50-FApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Dynabook Tecra X50-F audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (74.25 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% 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, 80% 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, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Consumption

Load
Load

Power draw is within expectation. Under load, the Tecra X50 spikes to 55 Watts briefly before falling back to about 30 Watts. The included power adapter is rated for 45 Watts, which is more than enough for even heavy workloads.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.31 / 0.51 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.9 / 7 / 7.3 Watt
Load midlight 32.7 / 57.8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy

Battery Life

Dynabook proudly proclaims the i7 variant of the Tecra X50 can last over 10 hours on a full charge. In real-world use, the machine gets nowhere near this estimate. Even under very light loads (e.g., Battery Eater's Reader test), the Tecra X50 dies in less than 6 hours. Users should expect about 4-5 hours of regular use (web browsing, word processing, etc.). The X50 should survive a morning meeting but will need to be plugged in soon after. Third-party USB Type-C chargers can be used to recharge the laptop, though we recommend one with a 45 Watt rating. 

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing 1.3
Lenovo ThinkPad T490s-20NYS02A00
8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh
607 min ∼23% +118%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 Ryzen 5 3580U
3580U, Vega 9, 45 Wh
546 min ∼21% +96%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
i7-10710U, UHD Graphics 620, 52 Wh
501 min ∼19% +80%
Toshiba Tecra X40-E-10W
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 48 Wh
498 min ∼19% +79%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2019-20QE000VGE
8665U, UHD Graphics 620, 51 Wh
493 min ∼19% +77%
Acer Swift 5 SF515-51T-76B6
8565U, UHD Graphics 620, 53.9 Wh
430 min ∼16% +55%
Average of class Office
  (105 - 1104, n=356)
417 min ∼16% +50%
Dynabook Tecra X50-F
8665U, UHD Graphics 620, 48 Wh
278 min ∼11%
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
5h 49min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 38min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 44min

Pros

+ beautiful design
+ highly portable 15.6-inch laptop
+ crisp keyboard
+ low fan noise
+ low external heat
+ 2x Thunderbolt 3 ports

Cons

- dim backlight
- below-average CPU performance
- middling battery life
- expensive

Verdict

In review: Dynabook Tecra X50. Review unit courtesy of Dynabook.
In review: Dynabook Tecra X50. Review unit courtesy of Dynabook.

The Dynabook Tecra X50 continues Toshiba's ethos of laptop design. There's quite a bit to like about the device. For one, it is one of the thinnest and lightest 15.6-inch business laptops we have seen. Portability is its defining feature, though there are some high points.

The Tecra X50 has a crisp, responsive keyboard and excellent speakers. It looks and feels premium. It has some room for upgradeability despite the thin profile. Other than these factors, the Tecra X50 does little to stand out.

The machine uses the same Whiskey Lake Core i7-8665U as many other business laptops, but its performance is noticeably below that of rival machines. Additionally, the battery dies far too soon given its target audience. Those that value the portability of the machine will find fault in its lackluster endurance.

Overall performance is perfectly fine for general office work, but there are much better laptops for less money. In particular, Lenovo's ThinkPad T490s and X1 Carbon (2019) are cheaper, lighter, and more powerful. These options also last significantly longer on a charge.

Ultimately, the Dynabook Tecra X50 is all looks with little substance. If you're in the market for a beautiful thin-and-light, the Dynabook certainly checks that box. Otherwise, it is difficult to justify the high price.

Dynabook Tecra X50-F - 11/04/2019 v7
Sam Medley

Chassis
89 / 98 → 90%
Keyboard
78%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
65 / 80 → 81%
Weight
70 / 20-75 → 91%
Battery
61%
Display
81%
Games Performance
51 / 78 → 65%
Application Performance
84 / 95 → 88%
Temperature
91%
Noise
96%
Audio
69%
Camera
24 / 85 → 28%
Average
73%
83%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 4 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 > Dynabook Tecra X50 Laptop Review: A light Ultrabook with light endurance
Sam Medley, 2019-11- 5 (Update: 2019-11- 5)
Sam Medley
Sam Medley - Review Editor - @samuel_medley
I've been a "tech-head" my entire life. After graduating college with a degree in Mathematics, I worked in finance and banking a few years before taking a job as a Systems Analyst for my local school district. I started working with Notebookcheck in October of 2016 and have enjoyed writing news articles and notebook reviews. My areas of interest include the business side of technology, retro gaming, Linux, and innovative gadgets. When I'm not hunched over an electronic device or writing code for a new database, I'm either outside with my family, playing a decade-old video game, or sitting behind a drum set.