Verdict — Raising Standards
Unlike many traditional clamshells in the market, the Lenovo Pro 9 16 G11 Aura comes with no less than a Core Ultra 9 CPU, GeForce RTX GPU, and an OLED touchscreen for a premier user experience no matter the configuration level. It offers one of the brightest touchscreens in its size class and seemingly checks off all the boxes you could ask for from a multimedia powerhouse including an integrated card reader, healthy selection of ports, great audio, and support for multiple internal SSDs. We can't say the same about the new Dell XPS 16 which has omitted some of these features for its latest redesign.
While we appreciate that the 2026 model is slightly thinner and lighter than the 2025 model, it otherwise doesn't offer many performance improvements as the new Core Ultra 9 386H performs almost the same as last year's Core Ultra 9 285H. Both GPU and display options remain the same for no improvements to the user experience, either. Dropping the numpad in favor of larger speaker grilles may also impact certain usage scenarios that depend on it.
The most notable drawbacks to the model are its fan noise when in Performance mode and both heavier weight and shorter battery life relative to competitors in spite of the battery capacity upgrade. Cramming so many features and ports evidently has its consequences when it comes to portability. Users who can get by without discrete graphics or a fancy OLED screen will find the Panther Lake XPS 16 or MSI Prestige 16 to be much quieter, sleeker and more travel-friendly alternatives. On the other hand, if you really need discrete graphics, then this do-it-all Lenovo is still one of our favorite 16-inch multimedia machines available two years running.
Pros
Cons
Price and Availability
The Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 is now shipping starting at $2800 for the base 1800p RTX 5050 configuration up to over $3100 for the 2000p RTX 5060 configuration as reviewed.
The Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (marketed as the Lenovo Pro 9i Aura Edition 16 G11) directly succeeds last year's Yoga Pro 9i 16IAH G10 Aura. The manufacturer has both dropped the Yoga name while refreshing the external design.
Our test unit is the top configuration equipped with the 100 W GeForce RTX 5060 GPU and 3200 x 2000 Tandem OLED touchscreen for approximately $3100. Lower-end SKUs come with the RTX 5050 or 2880 x 1800 OLED instead, but all options ship with the same Core Ultra 9 386H Panther Lake CPU.
This flagship Lenovo model competes directly with other high-end 16-inch multimedia machines including the MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo, Asus ZenBook 16 series, and the new Dell XPS 16.
More Lenovo reviews:
Specifications
Case
Lenovo has made several external changes from last year's design. The most notable is the removal of the numpad in favor of larger upfiring speaker grilles along the sides of the keyboard. Additionally, the bottom D cover is no longer completely flat as the ventilation grilles are now slightly raised. The laser-etched "Yoga" label that was so prominent on last year's model has also been removed as Lenovo wants to emphasize the "Pro" naming instead.
The new model is slightly thinner, smaller, and lighter than the previous generation but with otherwise the same anodized aluminum materials for a similar level of quality.
Connectivity
Despite all the physical changes mentioned above, the ports remain the same as before.
SD Card Reader
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Communication
Webcam
Maintenance
The internals have undergone minor changes. The most notable is the slightly larger battery capacity (84 Wh to 93 Wh), but SSD upgrade options are otherwise the same as before.
Sustainability
Lenovo does not provide any details on recycled materials used during manufacturing. The packaging is otherwise free of plastics and fully recyclable.
Input Devices
Key font and printing have changed from last year's model to be larger, centered, and generally easier to see. The feel of the keys are otherwise the same including the 1.5 mm travel and relatively crisp feedback for a similar typing experience despite the lack of a numpad.
Display
The two touchscreen options remain the same as before:
- 2880 x 1800, OLED, 500 nits SDR (1100 nits HDR), 100% DCI-P3, 120 Hz, Gorilla Glass 3
- 3200 x 2000, Tandem OLED, 1000 nits SDR (1600 nits HDR), 100% DCI-P3, 120 Hz, Gorilla Glass 3
The tandem OLED display on our unit is the exact same Samsung ATNA60KA04-0 panel as found on the 2025 Yoga Pro 9i 16 for the same viewing experience. Our own measurements reveal a maximum center brightness of 931 nits on SDR mode and 1480 nits on HDR mode to make this one of the brightest displays on any 16-inch laptop.
Keep in mind that while Advanced Optimus is supported, G-Sync continues to be omitted since the Pro 9 series is not primarily for gaming.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 930.9 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 3.51 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.73}
calibrated: 1.55
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 1.6 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.97}
95.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 3D)
98.8% Display P3 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.34
CCT: 6398 K
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Samsung ATNA60KA04-0, Tandem OLED, 3200x2000, 16", 120 Hz | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 ATNA60HR04-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 16", 120 Hz | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H LG Philips 160WV1, OLED, 3200x2000, 16", 120 Hz | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG B160QAN03_R, IPS, 2560x1600, 16", 60 Hz | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng ATNA60DL02-0 (SDC41A4), OLED, 2560x1600, 16", 240 Hz | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP ATNA60CL10-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 16", 120 Hz | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 1% | -5% | 1% | -2% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage (%) | 98.8 | 99.5 1% | 96.4 -2% | 99.8 1% | 99.5 1% | |
| sRGB Coverage (%) | 100 | 100 0% | 99.7 0% | 100 0% | 100 0% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage (%) | 95.7 | 96.5 1% | 84.3 -12% | 97 1% | 89.5 -6% | |
| Response Times | -131% | -39% | -5878% | 71% | -17% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * (ms) | 0.58 ? | 0.65 ? -12% | 51.5 ? -8779% | 0.2 ? 66% | 0.63 ? -9% | |
| Response Time Black / White * (ms) | 0.79 ? | 0.87 ? -10% | 24.3 ? -2976% | 0.2 ? 75% | 0.63 ? 20% | |
| PWM Frequency (Hz) | 1173.2 | 1200 | 240.2 ? | 120 ? | 480 ? | |
| PWM Amplitude * (%) | 16 | 37 -131% | 31 -94% | 26 -63% | ||
| Screen | -26% | -15% | -92% | -29% | 8% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 930.9 | 471.7 -49% | 395.4 -58% | 471 -49% | 390 -58% | 362 -61% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 947 | 474 -50% | 392 -59% | 455 -52% | 392 -59% | 363 -62% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 94 | 98 4% | 95 1% | 92 -2% | 98 4% | 99 5% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | 0.2 | 0.02 | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.51 | 3.53 -1% | 3.69 -5% | 5.8 -65% | 1.94 45% | 0.8 77% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.48 | 6.31 3% | 7.94 -23% | 10.8 -67% | 4.26 34% | 1.8 72% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.55 | 0.68 56% | 1.9 -23% | 4.21 -172% | ||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.6 | 2.6 -63% | 1.9 -19% | 7.8 -388% | 1.5 6% | 1.3 19% |
| Gamma | 2.34 94% | 2.24 98% | 2.28 96% | 2.07 106% | 2.221 99% | 2.2 100% |
| CCT | 6398 102% | 6292 103% | 6274 104% | 7262 90% | 6395 102% | 6741 96% |
| Contrast (:1) | 2355 | 19500 | ||||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -79% /
-41% | -18% /
-17% | -1992% /
-1035% | 14% /
-5% | -4% /
-1% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 0.79 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.37 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.42 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (19.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 0.58 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.28 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (31.1 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 1173.2 Hz Amplitude: 16 % |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 1173.2 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 1173.2 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7810 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Performance
Testing Conditions
We set Windows to Performance mode and discrete graphics mode prior to running the benchmarks below.
Processor
The new Core Ultra 9 386H unfortunately provides little to no performance advantages over the previous generation Core Ultra 9 285H as shown by our comparison charts below. In fact, the new CPU even features less L2 and L3 cache than its predecessor. However, it makes up for this with improved manufacturing efficiency (1.8 nm vs. 5 nm) and faster integrated NPU performance (50 vs. 13 TOPS).
Cinebench R15 Multi Loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 6.6: Multi-Core | Single-Core
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx | CPU CheckMate
| Performance rating | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP -1! | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 -1! | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 -1! | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng -1! | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H -1! | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H -1! | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG -1! | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (10001 - 21727, n=6) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (53370 - 113595, n=6) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (2776 - 5604, n=6) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (5314 - 7332, n=6) | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (28414 - 61578, n=6) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (46362 - 72112, n=6) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (669 - 1271, n=6) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (5138 - 11627, n=6) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (54042 - 89891, n=6) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 (v6.92.6600) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG (v6.92.6600) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng (v6.92.6600) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP (v6.92.6600) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU CheckMate | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 (v8.20.8100) | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (4051 - 4826, n=5) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H (v8.20.8100) | |
System Performance
PCMark 10: Score | Essentials | Productivity | Digital Content Creation
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
WebXPRT 3: Overall
WebXPRT 4: Overall
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Total
Geekbench AI: Half Precision GPU 1.7 | Single Precision GPU 1.7 | Quantized GPU 1.7
| Performance rating | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG -3! | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP -3! | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng -8! | |
| PCMark 10 / Score | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (9465 - 9484, n=2) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (10759 - 10841, n=2) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (15199 - 15447, n=2) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (13928 - 13963, n=2) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| CrossMark / Overall | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (2108 - 2164, n=2) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| CrossMark / Productivity | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (1917 - 1973, n=2) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| CrossMark / Creativity | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (2442 - 2500, n=2) | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (1682 - 1988, n=2) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| WebXPRT 3 / Overall | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (310 - 326, n=2) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| WebXPRT 4 / Overall | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (298 - 302, n=2) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 / Total | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (442 - 446, n=2) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Geekbench AI / Half Precision GPU 1.7 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (n=1) | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Geekbench AI / Single Precision GPU 1.7 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (n=1) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Geekbench AI / Quantized GPU 1.7 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (n=1) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
* ... smaller is better
| PCMark 10 Score | 9484 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (75437 - 129946, n=6) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (81021 - 118858, n=6) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (75959 - 135096, n=6) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (87.2 - 116.9, n=6) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC Latency
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
* ... smaller is better
Storage Devices
The system supports up to two PCIe4 x4 NVMe SSDs with no throttling issues. Note that PCIe5 SSD speeds are unsupported and that one of the two M.2 SSDs must be of the shorter 2242 variety.
| Drive Performance rating - Percent | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
* ... smaller is better
Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
GPU Performance
The mobile GeForce RTX 5060 is performing where we expect it to be relative to other laptops with the same GPU. Raw graphics performance is slightly behind the gaming-optimized Legion 7 16 AGP11 equipped with the same RTX 5060 by just a few percentage points.
Running the system on Balanced mode instead of Performance mode would impact graphics performance by up to 10 percent as shown by our Time Spy results table below.
Downgrading to the RTX 5050 configuration from our RTX 5060 is expected to reduce graphics performance by as much as 20 to 25 percent.
| Power Profile | Graphics Score | Physics Score | Combined Score |
| Performance Mode | 11755 | 14935 | 12142 |
| Balanced Mode | 10676 (-9%) | 15025 (-0%) | 11160 (-8%) |
| Battery Power | 9886 (-16%) | 12811 (-14%) | 10236 (-16%) |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 33248 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 61799 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 28118 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 12142 points | |
| 3DMark Steel Nomad Score | 2646 points | |
Help | ||
* ... smaller is better
| Cyberpunk 2077 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset (FSR off) | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Baldur's Gate 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| X-Plane 11.11 - 1920x1080 high (fps_test=3) | |
| HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG | |
| Black Myth: Wukong | |
| 1920x1080 high TSR 100 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (48 - 58, n=3) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| 1920x1080 cinematic TSR 100 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (26 - 32, n=4) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| 2560x1440 cinematic TSR 100 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (19 - 23, n=4) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| 2560x1440 cinematic DLSS 68 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (30 - 36, n=3) | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| 2560x1440 cinematic RT: Very High DLSS 68 FG | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (29 - 37, n=3) | |
| F1 24 | |
| 1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Legion 7 16 AGP11 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (46.1 - 77.5, n=9) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H | |
| MSI Venture 16 AI A2HMTG | |
| 2560x1440 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x | |
| Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP | |
| Lenovo Legion 7 16 AGP11 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (29.8 - 49.1, n=9) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| 2560x1440 Ultra High Preset + Quality DLSS AF:16x | |
| Lenovo Legion 7 16 AGP11 | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (46 - 74.5, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 | |
| Monster Hunter Wilds | |
| 1920x1080 high, no upscaling | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (49.7 - 58.8, n=2) | |
| 1920x1080 ultra, RT: high, no upscaling | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (16.6 - 36.5, n=4) | |
| 2560x1440 ultra, RT: high, no upscaling | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop (13.9 - 20.9, n=3) | |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra FPS Chart
| low | med. | high | ultra | QHD DLSS | QHD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTA V (2015) | 185.8 | 183.5 | 179.4 | 133.6 | 110.7 | |
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 172.5 | 156.7 | 151.6 | 142.4 | ||
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 187.9 | 170.4 | 124.1 | 92.3 | ||
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 113 | 102.9 | ||||
| Strange Brigade (2018) | 482 | 314 | 214 | 217 | 125.5 | |
| Baldur's Gate 3 (2023) | 164.6 | 137.8 | 119.9 | 117.8 | 117.5 | 79.4 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 (2023) | 132.3 | 108.2 | 92.3 | 83.3 | 63.2 | 53.4 |
| F1 24 (2024) | 249 | 249 | 207 | 69.5 | 69.3 | 42.8 |
| Black Myth: Wukong (2024) | 85 | 64 | 50 | 28 | 32 | 21 |
| Monster Hunter Wilds (2025) | 74.2 | 63 | 58.8 | 34.8 | 20.9 |
Emissions
System Noise
Fan noise ceiling and behavior closely match last year's Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 since there are no major changes to the motherboard. Perhaps most importantly, fan noise when running Cyberpunk 2077 would hover around 41 dB(A) if on Balanced mode or 50 dB(A) if on Performance mode. The aforementioned 10 percent drop in graphics performance when gaming on Balanced mode may be a reasonable compromise for the much quieter fans.
Noise level
| Idle |
| 23.5 / 24 / 24 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 32.3 / 50.1 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 23 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Ultra 9 386H, GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 Ultra 9 285H, GeForce RTX 5050 Laptop | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG Ultra 9 285H, Arc 140T | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng i9-14900HX, GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | -5% | 0% | 1% | -19% | -16% | |
| off / environment * (dB) | 23 | 24.6 -7% | 23.3 -1% | 23.6 -3% | 24 -4% | 23.5 -2% |
| Idle Minimum * (dB) | 23.5 | 24.6 -5% | 23.4 -0% | 23.6 -0% | 29 -23% | 26.7 -14% |
| Idle Average * (dB) | 24 | 24.6 -3% | 23.4 2% | 23.6 2% | 30 -25% | 26.7 -11% |
| Idle Maximum * (dB) | 24 | 26.8 -12% | 25.8 -8% | 26.2 -9% | 31 -29% | 31.1 -30% |
| Load Average * (dB) | 32.3 | 32.8 -2% | 38 -18% | 37.1 -15% | 45 -39% | 44.8 -39% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * (dB) | 50.1 | 51.8 -3% | 38.1 24% | 42.1 16% | 53.7 -7% | |
| Load Maximum * (dB) | 50.1 | 51.8 -3% | 48.6 3% | 42.1 16% | 47 6% | 53.7 -7% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * (dB) | 44 |
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
Surface temperatures are noticeably cooler despite the smaller dimensions than the outgoing model. When running Cyberpunk 2077, for example, hot spots on our unit would top out at only 38 C and 41 C compared to 42 C and 49 C on the Yoga Pro 9i 16IAH G10 Aura with the same Nvidia GPU.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 36.8 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.2 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 39.1 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) 3: The average temperature for the upper side is 31.7 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 31.3 °C / 88 F for the class Multimedia.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29.4 °C / 84.9 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.7 °C / 83.7 F (-0.7 °C / -1.2 F).
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Ultra 9 386H, GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 Ultra 9 285H, GeForce RTX 5050 Laptop | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG Ultra 9 285H, Arc 140T | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng i9-14900HX, GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 1% | 9% | -7% | -22% | -5% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * (°C) | 37.8 | 34.4 9% | 40.6 -7% | 48.1 -27% | 49 -30% | 47 -24% |
| Maximum Bottom * (°C) | 38.2 | 41.4 -8% | 39.8 -4% | 51.6 -35% | 63 -65% | 47.4 -24% |
| Idle Upper Side * (°C) | 30.4 | 28.6 6% | 23.2 24% | 25.9 15% | 30 1% | 26.1 14% |
| Idle Bottom * (°C) | 31 | 31.8 -3% | 23.8 23% | 25.2 19% | 29 6% | 26.4 15% |
* ... smaller is better
Stress Test
The CPU would boost to 3.3 GHz, 98 C, and 86 W when initiating Prime95 stress before falling and stabilizing at 3.0 GHz, 90 C, and 62 W about 30 seconds later.
Core temperature and clock rates would change drastically between Balanced and Performance modes as shown by the screenshots below. When running Cyberpunk 2077, for example, the GPU would average 2647 MHz, 75 C, and 91 W if set to Performance mode or 2340 MHz, 68 C, and 67 W if set to Balanced mode. The overall slower performance on Balanced mode aligns with our Time SPy observations in the GPU section above.
| Average CPU Clock (GHz) | GPU Clock (MHz) | Average CPU Temperature (°C) | Average GPU Temperature (°C) | |
| System Idle | -- | 232 | 41 | 36 |
| Prime95 Stress | 3.0 | -- | 90 | 49 |
| Prime95 + FurMark Stress | 2.4 | 2115 | 77 | 72 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 Stress (Balanced mode) | 1.4 | 2340 | 67 | 68 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 Stress (Performance mode) | 1.7 | 2647 | 82 | 75 |
Speakers
Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 5.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (7.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 17%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2021 M1 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (4.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 17%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Energy Management
Power Consumption
The Lenovo system is a very demanding machine with a high minimum of 15 W even when on the dimmest brightness setting with Optimus active up to 46 W if on the brightest setting with the dGPU active. When running higher loads like games, our unit would consume just as much power as the Asus ProArt P16 equipped with the faster Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 CPU and RTX 5070 GPU.
| Off / Standby | 0.97 / 2.2 Watt |
| Idle | 15.1 / 30.4 / 46.2 Watt |
| Load |
79.5 / 231.4 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Ultra 9 386H, GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop, SK hynix PVC10 HFS001TEM4X182N, Tandem OLED, 3200x2000, 16" | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 Ultra 9 285H, GeForce RTX 5050 Laptop, WD PC SN7100S SDFPMSL-1T00-1101, OLED, 2880x1800, 16" | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, , OLED, 3200x2000, 16" | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG Ultra 9 285H, Arc 140T, Micron 2500 1TB MTFDKBA1T0QGN, IPS, 2560x1600, 16" | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng i9-14900HX, GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU, Kioxia XG8 KXG80ZNV1T02, OLED, 2560x1600, 16" | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop, WD PC SN740 SDDPNQE-2T00, OLED, 2880x1800, 16" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 25% | 66% | 58% | 8% | 20% | |
| Idle Minimum * (Watt) | 15.1 | 6.8 55% | 4 74% | 4.4 71% | 10 34% | 9.9 34% |
| Idle Average * (Watt) | 30.4 | 20.1 34% | 4.4 86% | 9.2 70% | 18 41% | 13.6 55% |
| Idle Maximum * (Watt) | 46.2 | 21.6 53% | 10.2 78% | 9.5 79% | 32 31% | 14 70% |
| Load Average * (Watt) | 79.5 | 87.6 -10% | 44.2 44% | 66.9 16% | 128 -61% | 93.8 -18% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * (Watt) | 161.2 | 148.2 8% | 62.6 61% | 68.8 57% | 162.1 -1% | |
| Cyberpunk 2077 ultra external monitor * (Watt) | 160.7 | 147.9 8% | 62.4 61% | 67.4 58% | 158.3 1% | |
| Load Maximum * (Watt) | 231.4 | 173.5 25% | 94.6 59% | 102.9 56% | 242 -5% | 229 1% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * (Watt) | 148.4 |
* ... smaller is better
Power Consumption Cyberpunk / Stress Test
Power Consumption external Monitor
Battery Life
Runtimes are relatively short even when set to Balanced mode with the iGPU active. The relatively large 93 Wh battery pack can only muster 5.5 hours of WLAN browsing before automatic shutdown which is several hours shorter than many other multimedia models including Lenovo's own Yoga Pro 9i 16IAH G10 Aura.
(May 3, 2026 update: WLAN battery life retested with display brightness set to 150 nits, 60 Hz fixed refresh rate, and Nvidia graphics set to Automatic for results that are closer to last year's Yoga Pro 9i 16IAH G10 Aura at ~10 hours. Final score has also been updated to reflect the longer runtime.)
| Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Ultra 9 386H, GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop, 92.5 Wh | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 Ultra 9 285H, GeForce RTX 5050 Laptop, 84 Wh | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 70 Wh | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG Ultra 9 285H, Arc 140T, 99.9 Wh | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng i9-14900HX, GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU, 97 Wh | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop, 90 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery runtime | 8% | 4% | 67% | -51% | -7% | |
| WiFi v1.3 (h) | 9.9 | 10.7 8% | 10.3 4% | 16.5 67% | 4.9 -51% | 9.2 -7% |
| H.264 (h) | 20.8 | |||||
| Load (h) | 2.4 |
Notebookcheck Rating
A high-end multimedia machine packed with lots of performance and a super-bright OLED touchscreen, but lacking in battery life.
Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11
- 05/03/2026 v8
Allen Ngo
Total Sustainability Score: Potential Competitors in Comparison
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Height | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 91%  | Lenovo Pro 9 16IPH11 Intel Core Ultra 9 386H ⎘ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: List Price: 3100 USD | 1.9 kg | 17.3 mm | 16.00" 3200x2000 236 PPI Tandem OLED |
2. 88.8%  | Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH10 RTX 5050 Intel Core Ultra 9 285H ⎘ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Laptop ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: List Price: 1800 USD | 2 kg | 17.9 mm | 16.00" 2880x1800 212 PPI OLED |
3. 87.2%  | Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H Intel Core Ultra X7 358H ⎘ Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU ⎘ 32 GB Memory | Amazon: 1. $2,499.99 Dell Premium 16 (XPS 16 2025... 2. $1,977.99 Dell Premium 16 (Previously ... 3. $2,599.00 Dell Premium 16 (XPS 16 2025... List Price: 2350 USD | 1.7 kg | 14.62 mm | 16.00" 3200x2000 236 PPI OLED |
4. 82.8%  | MSI Prestige 16 AI Evo B2HMG Intel Core Ultra 9 285H ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 140T ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $1,479.00 MSI Prestige 16 AI+ Evo 16" ... 2. $1,099.49 msi Prestige 13 AI Evo Lapto... 3. $1,470.00 msi Prestige A16 AI+ (2025) ... | 1.6 kg | 18.95 mm | 16.00" 2560x1600 189 PPI IPS |
5. 88.4% v7 (old)  | HP Omen Transcend 16-u1095ng Intel Core i9-14900HX ⎘ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: List Price: 3000 EUR | 2.3 kg | 20 mm | 16.00" 2560x1600 189 PPI OLED |
6. 89.1%  | Asus ProArt P16 H7606WP AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 ⎘ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop ⎘ 64 GB Memory, 2048 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $2,979.99 ASUS ProArt P16 Creator Lapt... 2. $2,799.00 HIDevolution [2025] ASUS Pro... 3. $4,924.00 HIDevolution [2025] ASUS Pro... List Price: 3399€ | 1.8 kg | 17.3 mm | 16.00" 2880x1800 212 PPI OLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Add as a preferred source on Google
