Notebookcheck

Lenovo ThinkPad E495 Laptop Review: Inexpensive office device with a lot of power, but without keyboard illumination

Andreas Osthoff, 👁 Andreas Osthoff (translated by Todor Gerganov), 09/19/2019

The AMD ThinkPad is slowed down in terms of equipment. The ThinkPad E495 offers more power than the Intel equivalent with its AMD Ryzen SoC, but the low-priced laptop is unnecessarily slowed down by the manufacturer in terms of equipment.

In Lenovo's online shop, the starting price for the ThinkPad E495 is almost 100 Euros (~$110) higher than the E490 with an Intel processor, but its features are also worse. By contrast, a comparable model is around 40 Euros (~$44) more expensive. Our test model with the model number 20NE000JGE is relatively well equipped for 659 Euros (~$725), because instead of the 1-TB HDD (online store), there is a 256 GB NVMe SSD, which significantly speeds up the daily work. Those eligible for the corresponding campus model (20N000AGE, without Windows) only have to pay 529 Euros (~$582). 

Basically, the case of the ThinkPad E495 corresponds to the Intel model E490, which is why we refer to our review of the ThinkPad E490 and the direct predecessor E485 for more information on the case, the equipment, the input devices and the speakers. 

Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4-2666 limited at 2400, 2 slots, max. 64 GB
Display
14 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 157 PPI, N140HCA-EAC, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
AMD CZ FCH
Storage
SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG,  GB 
, 213 GB free
Soundcard
AMD Raven - Audio Processor - HD Audio Controller
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm stereo jack, Card Reader: microSD
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 19.9 x 329 x 242 ( = 0.78 x 12.95 x 9.53 in)
Battery
45 Wh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2x 1.5W stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: no, 65W USB-C power adapter, Lenovo Vantage, McAfee, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.787 kg ( = 63.03 oz / 3.94 pounds), Power Supply: 345 g ( = 12.17 oz / 0.76 pounds)
Price
660 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

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

ThinkPad E490 & E495 Differences

ThinkPad E495 (on the left) vs. E490 (on the right)
ThinkPad E495 (on the left) vs. E490 (on the right)

Unfortunately, with the low-priced ThinkPad E-series, customers will have to make some sacrifices if they opt for the AMD-based model. The first difference, which one notices immediately, is the top surface of the base unit. It consists of much rougher and therefore cheaper-looking plastic. However, fingerprints are not as noticeable as with the "smoother" ThinkPad E490. The rest of the materials are identical.

Since the ThinkPad E495 is also a bit cheaper, you can certainly live with this difference. Nevertheless, what we cannot understand at all is the abandonment of a backlit keyboard; in contrast to the Intel model, this is not even available at extra cost. By the way, this also applies to the fingerprint scanner.

Furthermore, one would also have to forgo the advantages which the AMD SoC otherwise would offer, such as HDMI 2.0 and FreeSync.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
78.8 MB/s ∼100%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
78.3 MB/s ∼99% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
74.8 MB/s ∼95% -5%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73.8 MB/s ∼94% -6%
Average of class Office
  (10.2 - 191, n=277)
62.4 MB/s ∼79% -21%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
90.3 MB/s ∼100% +3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
87.7 MB/s ∼97%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
85.4 MB/s ∼95% -3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
82.8 MB/s ∼92% -6%
Average of class Office
  (9.5 - 255, n=252)
78.9 MB/s ∼87% -10%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
648 MBit/s ∼100%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
626 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
580 MBit/s ∼90% -10%
Average of class Office
  (5 - 688, n=223)
469 MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
304 MBit/s ∼47% -53%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
681 MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
652 MBit/s ∼96% +5%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
621 MBit/s ∼91%
Average of class Office
  (34 - 688, n=223)
445 MBit/s ∼65% -28%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
332 MBit/s ∼49% -47%

Display – ThinkPad E495 with Matte IPS Panel

Pixel grid
Pixel grid

The ThinkPad E495 is offered in Germany only with a matte Full HD panel, which is based on the IPS technology. According to the data sheet, there is still an HD-TN display offered in other markets. However, one should avoid it in any case. Lenovo also uses panels from various suppliers (Innolux, BOE and AU-Optronics) in the production of the ThinkPad E495.

The manufacturer claims a brightness of 250 nits for our 1080p panel from Innolux (N140HCA-NCE), which we can confirm only at two measurement points. On average, there are only 230 nits. Thus, the AUO and BOE models in the E490 or last year's E485 perform better. The subjective impression is nevertheless good, because the contrast ratio is excellent at almost 1500:1. Screen bleeding is minimal at the bottom, which is only noticeable if the picture is completely black and has high brightness settings. This is not a problem in everyday office use.

253
cd/m²
255
cd/m²
247
cd/m²
215
cd/m²
241
cd/m²
225
cd/m²
191
cd/m²
230
cd/m²
213
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
N140HCA-EAC
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 255 cd/m² Average: 230 cd/m² Minimum: 2.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 75 %
Center on Battery: 244 cd/m²
Contrast: 1418:1 (Black: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.7 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 4.2
ΔE Greyscale 2.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
63.3% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 40.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.12
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
N140HCA-EAC, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
N140HCG-GQ2, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
B140HAN04.2, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
Lenovo NV140FHM-N49, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
B140HAN04.2, , 1920x1080, 14
Response Times
25%
-3%
-46%
-10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
40.8 (22, 18.8)
32.4 (16.4, 16)
21%
44 (22, 22)
-8%
48.4 (25.2, 23.2)
-19%
44.8 (20.4, 24.4)
-10%
Response Time Black / White *
30.8 (17.6, 13.2)
15.2 (6.8, 8.4)
51%
30 (17.2, 12.8)
3%
38.4 (21.2, 17.2)
-25%
33.6 (18, 15.6)
-9%
PWM Frequency
25000 (40)
26040 (50)
4%
1250 (99)
-95%
Screen
35%
-0%
0%
-1%
Brightness middle
241
420
74%
278
15%
305
27%
289
20%
Brightness
230
391
70%
257
12%
295
28%
271
18%
Brightness Distribution
75
88
17%
85
13%
90
20%
87
16%
Black Level *
0.17
0.29
-71%
0.19
-12%
0.23
-35%
0.19
-12%
Contrast
1418
1448
2%
1463
3%
1326
-6%
1521
7%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.7
2.1
55%
5.1
-9%
5.3
-13%
5.6
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
19.7
5.5
72%
19.3
2%
18.9
4%
20.8
-6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.2
0.7
83%
4.5
-7%
5
-19%
4.7
-12%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.6
3.4
-31%
2.7
-4%
2.3
12%
2.7
-4%
Gamma
2.12 104%
2.22 99%
2.21 100%
2.09 105%
1.96 112%
CCT
6507 100%
7168 91%
6685 97%
6246 104%
6506 100%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
40.3
63.5
58%
37.1
-8%
37.7
-6%
37.2
-8%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
63.3
98.6
56%
58.4
-8%
58.2
-8%
58.5
-8%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
30% / 33%
-2% / -1%
-23% / -10%
-6% / -2%

* ... smaller is better

CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Color Saturation
CalMAN Color Saturation
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Color Accuracy
CalMAN Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN Color Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN Color Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN Color Accuracy (calibrated)
CalMAN Color Accuracy (calibrated)

Ex-factory, the display is already set pretty well, because there is no color cast and the color temperature is fine. In terms of color accuracy, however, the cheap IPS display can be obvious. Many colors are very inaccurate and exceed the target value (3) significantly, which cannot be corrected even with a calibration. In addition, the values for the color space coverage are low. This is certainly enough for the office, but the panel is not suitable for image editing.

Lenovo ThinkPad E495 vs. sRGB: 63.3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495 vs. sRGB: 63.3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495 vs. AdobeRGB: 40.3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495 vs. AdobeRGB: 40.3%

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
30.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17.6 ms rise
↘ 13.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 78 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
40.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22 ms rise
↘ 18.8 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 (39.7 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 25000 Hz ≤ 40 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 25000 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 40 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 25000 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9352 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

In the sun
In the sun
In the sun
In the sun
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance – AMD ThinkPad Is Faster Than Intel Equivalent

Lenovo Vantage
Lenovo Vantage

The review unit came with a single-channel RAM configuration, so we test it that way. With another RAM module, however, the graphics performance of the Vega 8 can be increased even more. To compare with, we have included the ThinkPad T495, which comes with dual-channel RAM. 

To take advantage of the full power, you have to disable Lenovo's "intelligent cooling" in the Vantage app, otherwise the power consumption of the processor is limited to 12 watts. The only advantage of this setting is that the fan does not start and the case temperatures remain very low. Our subsequent benchmarks were performed with this option disabled, thus representing the maximum performance of the ThinkPad E495.

 

Processor – ThinkPad with Ryzen 5 3500U

In the ThinkPad E series Lenovo relies on the "normal" Ryzen processors; Pro models are reserved for the more expensive ThinkPad T series. Our Ryzen 5 3500U is the direct competitor to the Intel Core i5-8265U, which is also used in the ThinkPad E490. For more technical details on the Ryzen SoC, please refer to our own CPU page.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
Intel Core i5-8265U
160 Points ∼100% +14%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
144 Points ∼90% +3%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
  (137 - 143, n=6)
141 Points ∼88% +1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
140 Points ∼88%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
139.52 Points ∼87% 0%
Average of class Office
  (20 - 199, n=534)
112 Points ∼70% -20%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
658 (min: 656.79, max: 659.13) Points ∼100%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
  (642 - 665, n=6)
654 Points ∼99% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
618 (min: 591.81, max: 618.71) Points ∼94% -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
611 Points ∼93% -7%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
Intel Core i5-8265U
509 Points ∼77% -23%
Average of class Office
  (36 - 1050, n=541)
344 Points ∼52% -48%

The Intel CPUs are still ahead in terms of single-core performance, but as soon as you need multiple cores, the ThinkPad E495 is well ahead of the Core i5 in the ThinkPad E490. For the sake of a fair comparison, however, it should be noted that Lenovo allows a higher power consumption with the AMD processor. The customer has no influence on that though, and in the end you get more power with the E495 than with the E490. The 25W can also be managed by the cooling of the E495, which explains the good and consistent result in our Cinebench multi-loop. On battery power, the performance is not reduced.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660Tooltip
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, AMD Ryzen 5 3500U: Ø658 (656.79-659.13)
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00 AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U: Ø576 (569.82-610.73)
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel Core i5-8265U: Ø487 (483.41-509.01)
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE AMD Ryzen 5 2500U, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U: Ø598 (591.81-618.71)
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
658 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
39.8 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
98 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
140 Points
Help

System Performance – E495 with NVMe SSD

Thanks to the SSD and the fast processor, the subjective operating speed of the ThinkPad E495 is very high and we did not notice any problems during the test. However, you should pay particular attention when configuring the device in Lenovo's online shop, because the entry-level configurations are equipped with conventional HDDs. Although these offer more storage space, they slow down the machine noticeably.

PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Vega 8, PRO 3500U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
3392 Points ∼100% +13%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (2989 - 3466, n=5)
3270 Points ∼96% +9%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Vega 8, 2500U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3014 Points ∼89% +1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Vega 8, 3500U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
2989 Points ∼88%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT512G
2892 Points ∼85% -3%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
2693 Points ∼79% -10%
Average of class Office
  (320 - 3884, n=151)
2650 Points ∼78% -11%
Productivity
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
6339 Points ∼100% +16%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Vega 8, PRO 3500U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5896 Points ∼93% +7%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (5456 - 5921, n=5)
5722 Points ∼90% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Vega 8, 3500U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
5485 Points ∼87%
Average of class Office
  (1266 - 7964, n=151)
5468 Points ∼86% 0%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Vega 8, 2500U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4964 Points ∼78% -9%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT512G
3747 Points ∼59% -32%
Essentials
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Vega 8, PRO 3500U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7556 Points ∼100% +8%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
7529 Points ∼100% +7%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (7008 - 8300, n=5)
7495 Points ∼99% +7%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Vega 8, 3500U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
7008 Points ∼93%
Average of class Office
  (2683 - 9790, n=151)
6954 Points ∼92% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Vega 8, 2500U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
6646 Points ∼88% -5%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT512G
5776 Points ∼76% -18%
Score
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
Vega 8, PRO 3500U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
3818 Points ∼100% +10%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3500U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (3485 - 3972, n=5)
3723 Points ∼98% +7%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
UHD Graphics 620, 8265U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
3617 Points ∼95% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Vega 8, 3500U, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
3485 Points ∼91%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
Vega 8, 2500U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3321 Points ∼87% -5%
Average of class Office
  (803 - 4597, n=152)
3262 Points ∼85% -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), 8565U, Toshiba KBG30ZMT512G
2846 Points ∼75% -18%

» No benchmarks for this notebook found!

SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 1645.9 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 819.2 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 334.6 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 266.97 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1098.1 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 813.77 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 41.24 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 121.3 MB/s

GPU Performance

GPU-Z Vega 8
GPU-Z Vega 8

With the Vega 8, the AMD Ryzen SoC offers a powerful integrated graphics unit, which is perfectly adequate for normal multimedia applications, including the playback of high-definition videos. Even Intel's integrated UHD Graphics 620 is clearly outperformed. To unlock the full potential of the Vega 8, however, another RAM module should be installed. The Vega 8 in the ThinkPad T495 (dual-channel RAM) is around 20-30% faster, depending on the benchmark. The fact that Lenovo does not include another RAM module is certainly due to the low price. 

Also interesting is the comparison with the dedicated Radeon RX 550X, which is available for the ThinkPad E490 as well. It is about twice as fast, especially if you want to play games with the ThinkPad and is thus the better choice. With the Vega 8 you have to limit yourself to older or undemanding e-sports titles.

In the Fire Strike stress test of the current 3DMark, the ThinkPad E495 achieves 98%. Even under load for a prolonged period of time, the machine does not show any drops in performance. On battery power, GPU performance is not reduced.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8565U
5107 Points ∼100% +74%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
3535 Points ∼69% +20%
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (1668 - 4317, n=26)
3311 Points ∼65% +13%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
2940 Points ∼58%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
2757 Points ∼54% -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8265U
1666 Points ∼33% -43%
Average of class Office
  (185 - 5332, n=658)
1315 Points ∼26% -55%
3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
AMD Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8565U
3586 Points ∼100% +96%
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U
2344 Points ∼65% +28%
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (1095 - 2901, n=23)
2098 Points ∼59% +14%
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
1834 Points ∼51%
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
1647 Points ∼46% -10%
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8265U
1071 Points ∼30% -42%
Average of class Office
  (138 - 4109, n=476)
1010 Points ∼28% -45%
3DMark 11 Performance
3013 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
1639 points
Help
The Witcher 3
1366x768 The Witcher 3 medium
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (16.4 - 24, n=4)
20 fps ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (5.8 - 50.3, n=57)
18.2 fps ∼91%
1920x1080 The Witcher 3 high
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (9.2 - 14, n=6)
11.4 fps ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (3.1 - 31.7, n=48)
11 fps ∼96%
1920x1080 The Witcher 3 ultra
Average of class Office
  (1.9 - 16.4, n=28)
7.28 fps ∼100%
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (6.3 - 6.9, n=2)
6.6 fps ∼91%
3840x2160 The Witcher 3 4K
1024x768 The Witcher 3 low
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (22 - 42.3, n=8)
33.1 fps ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (8.3 - 81.7, n=89)
24 fps ∼73%
3840x2160 The Witcher 3 4K ultra
1280x800 Lightsmark - 1280x800
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (122 - 122, n=26)
122 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (122 - 122, n=1029)
122 ∼100%
1280x800 Lightsmark - 1280x800
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (123 - 123, n=26)
123 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (123 - 123, n=1029)
123 ∼100%
1280x720 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x720
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (148 - 148, n=26)
148 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (148 - 148, n=1029)
148 ∼100%
1280x768 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x768
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (149 - 149, n=26)
149 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (149 - 149, n=1029)
149 ∼100%
1366x768 3DMark 06 - Standard 1366x768
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (229 - 229, n=26)
229 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (229 - 229, n=1029)
229 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis CPU - 1600x900 High
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (230 - 230, n=26)
230 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (230 - 230, n=1029)
230 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis CPU - 1600x900 Med
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (231 - 231, n=26)
231 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (231 - 231, n=1029)
231 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis CPU - 1600x900 Low
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (232 - 232, n=26)
232 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (232 - 232, n=1029)
232 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis GPU - 1600x900 High
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (233 - 233, n=26)
233 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (233 - 233, n=1029)
233 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis GPU - 1600x900 Med
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (234 - 234, n=26)
234 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (234 - 234, n=1029)
234 ∼100%
1600x900 Crysis GPU - 1600x900 Low
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
  (235 - 235, n=26)
235 ∼100%
Average of class Office
  (235 - 235, n=1029)
235 ∼100%
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 81.914.3fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 6454.528.327.2fps
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 23.817.315.2fps

Emissions

System Noise

All in all, the ThinkPad E495 is very quiet. When the load is low, the fan remains usually disabled. Even under load, only a quiet noise can be noticed. If you want to have the quietest possible laptop, you should enable Lenovo's "intelligent cooling". The performance is then reduced, but it is still enough for many normal operations. In this case the fan usually does not start at all. We were not able to hear any other disturbing noises (electronic noises, coil whine).

Noise Level

Idle
29.3 / 29.3 / 29.3 dB(A)
Load
32.8 / 34.5 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: 29.3 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.427.728.531.62526.425.624.926.93128.226.828.430.74026.228.526.427.75025.624.422.925.1632426.123.527.58023.523.522.327.210024.623.323.424.212523.622.423.522.516022.921.321.622.120022.722.220.822.125022.52121.221.831522.220.820.72240021.320.419.623.450022.620.119.523.463022.620.619.323.480021.620.618.523.1100020.319.317.922125020.719.617.423.2160021.118.61723.2200021.518.416.723.4250021.718.816.723.9315020.118.715.922.6400019.817.415.822.1500022.116.415.923630018.115.61621800016.315.616.417.91000015.715.415.316.21250015.21515.215.51600014.914.91515SPL32.830.629.334.5N1.81.41.22.1median 21.5median 19.3median 17.4median 22.5Delta1.51.82.11.2hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseLenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE

Temperature

Stress test
Stress test

At low load levels, the bottom of the ThinkPad gets comparatively warm with values of more than 30 °C (86 °F), which is also due to the defensive fan control. However, this is not alarming or even annoying. In the stress test, we then measure temperatures of 43-44 °C (109.4-111.2 °F) on the top of the base unit and a maximum of 47-48 °C (116.6-118.4 °F) on the bottom. These values are not low for an office laptop, but the performance remains constant in this scenario as well. A 3DMark 11 run right after the stress test did not show any performance deficit.

Max. Load
 44.4 °C
112 F
43.2 °C
110 F
41.6 °C
107 F
 
 40.2 °C
104 F
40.3 °C
105 F
38.7 °C
102 F
 
 28.7 °C
84 F
29.4 °C
85 F
29.3 °C
85 F
 
Maximum: 44.4 °C = 112 F
Average: 37.3 °C = 99 F
42.8 °C
109 F
48.9 °C
120 F
46.4 °C
116 F
40.6 °C
105 F
47.7 °C
118 F
47.2 °C
117 F
26.8 °C
80 F
28.2 °C
83 F
27.6 °C
82 F
Maximum: 48.9 °C = 120 F
Average: 39.6 °C = 103 F
Power Supply (max.)  38.7 °C = 102 F | Room Temperature 22.8 °C = 73 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.3 °C / 99 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 44.4 °C / 112 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 48.9 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 36.4 °C / 98 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.3 °C / 76 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 29.4 °C / 84.9 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.1 °C / 82.6 F (-1.3 °C / -2.3 F).
Heat map of the top of the device (stress test)
Heat map of the top of the device (stress test)
Heat map of the bottom of the device (stress test)
Heat map of the bottom of the device (stress test)

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.527.92524.926.83128.429.94026.4305022.927.26323.531.58022.325.210023.426.112523.528.616021.637.720020.844.425021.248.731520.751.940019.655.850019.559.763019.360.980018.564.3100017.962.9125017.457.416001755.7200016.754.5250016.755.5315015.957.7400015.859.4500015.956.763001652800016.4561000015.353.41250015.254.4160001544.5SPL29.370.4N1.227.2median 17.4median 55.5Delta2.15.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseLenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (70.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

Especially in comparison with the predecessor ThinkPad E485 one can clearly see the efficiency improvement at low load levels. Here, the new ThinkPad E495 is much closer to the Intel based E490. In the stress test, we measured a maximum of 50 watts, which settles down in the course of the test at 41-42 watts and then remains stable. The included 65-watt power supply (USB-C, 345 grams/~12.2 oz) does not show any problems and has enough capacity to charge the battery under load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.41 / 0.54 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 4.1 / 5.86 / 6.36 Watt
Load midlight 30.4 / 50 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
3500U, Vega 8, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
PRO 3500U, Vega 8, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
8565U, Radeon RX 550X (Laptop), Toshiba KBG30ZMT512G, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
8265U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix BC501 HFM256GDHTNG, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
2500U, Vega 8, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Average AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
 
Average of class Office
 
Power Consumption
-25%
-67%
10%
-33%
-26%
-62%
Idle Minimum *
4.1
5.1
-24%
6.8
-66%
2.76
33%
6.2
-51%
5.24 (3.7 - 7.6, n=25)
-28%
7.57 (2.34 - 32, n=969)
-85%
Idle Average *
5.86
7.7
-31%
9.4
-60%
5.96
-2%
8.6
-47%
8.16 (5.86 - 12.9, n=25)
-39%
11.4 (4.2 - 42, n=969)
-95%
Idle Maximum *
6.36
10.7
-68%
12.4
-95%
6.57
-3%
9.7
-53%
9.76 (6.36 - 13.7, n=25)
-53%
13.8 (5 - 67, n=969)
-117%
Load Average *
30.4
35.8
-18%
57.2
-88%
28.2
7%
37.4
-23%
36.9 (24.1 - 45.7, n=25)
-21%
37.2 (7.43 - 99.3, n=954)
-22%
Load Maximum *
50
43.2
14%
63.1
-26%
43.6
13%
44.8
10%
43.7 (26.5 - 57.1, n=25)
13%
46 (12.2 - 129, n=956)
8%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

A major weakness of the old ThinkPad E485 was the battery life, which was significantly shorter than the Intel models. However, that changes with the new E495, because with the integrated 45 Wh battery, the AMD ThinkPad achieves realistic runtimes (WLAN, video) of around 8 hours. In the Wi-Fi test, it is thus on the level of the ThinkPad E490. Only in the video test was the Intel ThinkPad somewhat more endurable.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Edge 44.17763.1.0)
8h 17min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
7h 52min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 33min
Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE
3500U, Vega 8, 45 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad T495-20NKS01Y00
PRO 3500U, Vega 8, 50 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N90004GE
8565U, Radeon RX 550X (Laptop),  Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad E490-20N8000RGE
8265U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad E485-20KU000NGE
2500U, Vega 8, 45 Wh
Average of class Office
 
Battery Runtime
30%
-6%
22%
-32%
-12%
H.264
472
708
50%
492
4%
687
46%
341
-28%
437 (139 - 862, n=183)
-7%
WiFi v1.3
497
544
9%
419
-16%
485
-2%
323
-35%
417 (105 - 1104, n=352)
-16%

Pros

+ matte, high-contrast IPS display
+ stable case
+ excellent keyboard
+ good mouse replacement
+ good performance; faster than Intel E490
+ NVMe SSD
+ slot for a 2.5-inch hard drive
+ good battery life
+ low energy requirement
+ works very quietly

Cons

- quite dark display
- high color deviations and low color space coverage
- no HDMI 2.0
- no keyboard illumination or fingerprint scanner, not even at extra cost
- only 12 months of warranty

Verdict

In review: Lenovo ThinkPad E495. Test model provided by
In review: Lenovo ThinkPad E495. Test model provided by

The Lenovo ThinkPad E495 is a rock solid office laptop for little money. For under 700 Euros (~$770) you get a stable case, great input devices, a lot of power and a decent battery life. The comparison with the Intel model also shows that Lenovo artificially limits the E495 a bit. The plastic on the surface of the base unit looks much cheaper with its rough coating and we do not understand why there is no keyboard illumination or a fingerprint scanner not even at extra cost.

The performance of the Ryzen SoC is very good and both CPU and GPU score better than the Intel Core i5. However, the (optional) dedicated Radeon RX 550X in the ThinkPad E490 offers noticeably more graphics power and is therefore recommended if you also want to use the ThinkPad for gaming. Neither the E490 nor the E495 offer Thunderbolt 3, so connecting an eGPU is not possible. To exploit the full potential of the AMD SoC, you also need another RAM module.

Good value for money: The ThinkPad E495 offers more power than the slightly more expensive Intel model and has no longer any disadvantages in terms of battery life. However, one should be able to accept the lack of features (especially the keyboard illumination) and the cheaper plastic.

Please note: Since the review of the ThinkPad E490, we have updated our scoring system to version 7 (see here). This reduces the rating of the E490 from 89% to 86%. The ThinkPad E485 achieves 84%. The discrepancy, as we have listed in this article, results from the differences in the equipment and the case material.

Lenovo ThinkPad E495-20NE000JGE - 09/16/2019 v7
Andreas Osthoff

Chassis
83 / 98 → 85%
Keyboard
88%
Pointing Device
88%
Connectivity
61 / 80 → 76%
Weight
66 / 20-75 → 83%
Battery
77%
Display
81%
Games Performance
55 / 78 → 70%
Application Performance
79 / 95 → 83%
Temperature
89%
Noise
97%
Audio
61%
Camera
42 / 85 → 49%
Average
74%
84%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 5 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 > Lenovo ThinkPad E495 Laptop Review: Inexpensive office device with a lot of power, but without keyboard illumination
Andreas Osthoff, 2019-09-19 (Update: 2019-09-19)