Notebookcheck

Lenovo ThinkPad T480s (i5-8250U, FHD) Laptop Review

Hard to beat. Not everyone needs an i7, dedicated GPU, and WQHD display. Even without those assets, the T480s is still a dependable office companion whose formidable performance exceeds that of many competitors. At around $1,600, is today’s Core i5-8250U + FHD configuration the one the majority would appreciate?

Today’s ThinkPad T480s is the third variation we’ve reviewed since our initial encounter back in February. We’ve previously evaluated configurations featuring everything from the WQHD display to the NVIDIA GeForce MX150 Max-Q graphics, both of which we determined to be valuable options for those who stand to benefit from them. Today, we dispense with the complications and dial it back to basics: a Core i5-8250U CPU, integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620, and a matte FHD display. Although this exact configuration doesn’t appear to be available currently, a close CTO option direct from Lenovo sells for around $1,600—which is anywhere from $400-$600 less than the previous two systems we tested.

Despite minor niggles (such as the poor speakers, high surface temperatures, weak webcam, and the questionable value of the i7 upgrade), we came away from both of our previous reviews with overwhelmingly positive conclusions. Can today’s configuration uphold the overall excellence of the previous candidates—and could it possibly resolve any of these other items?

Today’s review is an update to the previous two, since the fundamentals—case, connections, input devices, etc.—have not changed. As a result, we’ll be skipping those sections and jumping straight into what’s new. For much more detail on any of those items, please refer to our initial T480s full review.

Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS (ThinkPad T480s Series)
Graphics adapter
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 23.20.16.5018
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4-2400
Display
14 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 157 PPI, NV140FHM-N46, TFT-LCD, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Sunrise Point-LP
Storage
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, 256 GB 
Soundcard
Realtek High Definition Audio
Connections
2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo audio, Card Reader: SD (fully-sized), 1 SmartCard, 1 Fingerprint Reader
Networking
Intel Ethernet Connection I219-V (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 19 x 331 x 227 ( = 0.75 x 13.03 x 8.94 in)
Battery
57 Wh Lithium-Ion, 3-cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Primary Camera: 1 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, Keyboard: Chiclet AccuType, Keyboard Light: yes, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.39 kg ( = 49.03 oz / 3.06 pounds), Power Supply: 288 g ( = 10.16 oz / 0.63 pounds)

 

Display

As compared to the WQHD panels in our previous two units, the less expensive matte FHD (1920x1080) 14-inch display in today’s review configuration sacrifices a bit in terms of brightness and saturation. It’s hardly inappropriate for general office use, however, and despite these technical insufficiencies it should be fine for most businesses. Backlight bleed is only a very minor problem on the T480 (see pictured).

Subpixel array, T480s
Subpixel array, T480s
Very minor backlight bleed
Very minor backlight bleed
292.9
cd/m²
286.7
cd/m²
279.4
cd/m²
286.6
cd/m²
288.3
cd/m²
269.5
cd/m²
286.6
cd/m²
287.8
cd/m²
253.2
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Maximum: 292.9 cd/m² Average: 281.2 cd/m² Minimum: 4.37 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 288.3 cd/m²
Contrast: 1373:1 (Black: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.16 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 4.51
ΔE Greyscale 6.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
58.9% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 37.67% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.517
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
NV140FHM-N46, TFT-LCD, 14, 1920x1080
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
B140QAN02.0, IPS, 14, 2560x1440
Dell Latitude 7490
AUO503D (D04YD_B140HAN), IPS, 14, 1920x1080
Dell Latitude 7390
LGD059B, IPS, 13.3, 1920x1080
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
IVO M140NVF7 R0, IPS, 14, 1920x1080
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00
LP140QH2-SPB1, IPS, 14, 2560x1440
Response Times
-18%
6%
14%
88%
15%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
44 (26, 18)
59.2 (28.4, 30.8)
-35%
41.6 (22, 19.6)
5%
36.8 (18, 18.8)
16%
33 (15, 18)
25%
38.4 (19.6, 18.8)
13%
Response Time Black / White *
34 (18.8, 15.2)
34.4 (16.4, 18)
-1%
32 (16.4, 15.6)
6%
30.4 (18.8, 11.6)
11%
26 (15, 11)
24%
28.4 (15.6, 12.8)
16%
PWM Frequency
990.1
3125 (90)
216%
Screen
55%
20%
26%
34%
16%
Brightness middle
288.3
578
100%
308.6
7%
303.8
5%
655
127%
352
22%
Brightness
281
533
90%
294
5%
289
3%
630
124%
343
22%
Brightness Distribution
86
84
-2%
89
3%
86
0%
93
8%
91
6%
Black Level *
0.21
0.38
-81%
0.23
-10%
0.31
-48%
0.56
-167%
0.46
-119%
Contrast
1373
1521
11%
1342
-2%
980
-29%
1170
-15%
765
-44%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.16
1.9
69%
6.07
1%
2.9
53%
3.27
47%
3.3
46%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
18.99
3.8
80%
10.58
44%
5.79
70%
5.92
69%
7.3
62%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.51
0.8
82%
1.67
63%
1.72
62%
3.22
29%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.3
3
52%
7.3
-16%
3.7
41%
2.85
55%
5.3
16%
Gamma
2.517 95%
2.14 112%
2.061 116%
2.118 113%
2.45 98%
2.22 108%
CCT
6886 94%
6377 102%
7269 89%
6323 103%
6065 107%
6452 101%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
37.67
88.8
136%
62
65%
63
67%
57
51%
68.4
82%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
58.9
100
70%
97
65%
95
61%
88
49%
98
66%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
19% / 44%
13% / 18%
20% / 24%
61% / 46%
16% / 16%

* ... smaller is better

We measured an average brightness of 281 cd/m² with a distribution of 86%, 22% below the 343 cd/m² of the WQHD panel, and just a bit below the two Dell Latitude models in our comparison field. It’s also far below the premium panels in the X1 Carbon (533 cd/m²) and HP EliteBook (655 cd/m²). Contrast, on the other hand, is quite good with a measured 1373:1 beating every competitor apart from the stellar X1 Carbon (1521:1)—thanks to a black value of just 0.21 cd/m².

Apart from brightness, where the display truly falters, however, is in color coverage. The apparent lack of vibrancy exhibited by the display is corroborated by readings of just 58.9% and 37.67% of the sRGB / AdobeRGB spectrums, respectively—poor by any measure and far, far below every other machine we’re comparing against today. Despite their similarly middling brightness, the two Latitudes, for instance, still manage to cover nearly 100% of sRGB, which results in a palpably richer appearance.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. Lenovo X1 Carbon
vs. Lenovo X1 Carbon
vs. HP EliteBook 840 G5
vs. HP EliteBook 840 G5
vs. Dell Latitude 7390
vs. Dell Latitude 7390
vs. Dell Latitude 7490
vs. Dell Latitude 7490

Accuracy, likewise, leaves a lot to be desired, with ColorChecker / Greyscale DeltaE measurements of 6.16 / 6.3, and a maximum deviation of 18.99 (Blue). Post-calibration, things settle down to averages of 4.51 / 0.9 in these same tests (and the CCT Average and Gamma are both very close to ideal), but Blue remains highly deviant (17.77).

Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)

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
34 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 18.8 ms rise
↘ 15.2 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. » 88 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 26 ms rise
↘ 18 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. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41.3 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 990.1 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 990.1 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 990.1 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8813 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We measured PWM at all brightness levels below 100%, which is disappointing—but fortunately, the frequency of 990.1 Hz is relatively high, so it’s unlikely most sensitive users will find this bothersome. Viewing angles of the panel are comfortable and wide from all sides. Finally, outdoor use is possible in shaded areas, but more difficult in brighter light thanks to the low luminosity of the display.

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

Performance

The internal empty RAM slot awaits
The internal empty RAM slot awaits

The T480s is available in a wide range of configurations spanning CPU options from Core i5 up to Core i7 chips, up to 24 GB of RAM (with 4 or 8 GB soldered to the board), and either Intel UHD Graphics 620 or NVIDIA GeForce MX150 graphics. Today’s review unit features the same Core i5-8250U SoC that we reviewed back in February, so we should expect comparable performance to what we received from that model.

CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z Memory
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
JetStream
JetStream
Cinebench R15, first run
Cinebench R15, first run
LatencyMon
LatencyMon

Processor

Our initial run of Cinebench R15 produced a roughly 10% lower score than the previous Core i5-8250U review unit (possibly because we didn’t take steps to revoke any power limits during today’s review) but the discrepancy didn’t last, as we later witnessed a higher initial score in our Cinebench loop test which was closer to that of the original review (703, followed next by 707). These are good results at any rate when you take into account the average score for this CPU of 576 (as of this writing). Single-core performance, meanwhile, is right on the money at 142 points. As compared to other competitors, the T480s Core i5-8250U actually manages to decisively beat the Core i7-equipped HP EliteBook and Dell Latitude 7490, and it also edges out the Core i7 Latitude 7390 by some 5%. Accounting for the even higher (by approximately 50 points) initial score from the Cinebench loop test sees this margin widen even further. Needless to say, these results are impressive.

A second retest of Cinebench R15 within the usual scope of testing did repeatedly produce a higher score (716 in multi-core CPU). As a result, we’ve updated the score accordingly in our database for this notebook.

Stability of performance does suffer just a bit under sustained load, however. Following the first six runs of Cinebench R15 multi-CPU, scores begin fluctuating between values in the 635-660 range up to “normal” scores around 700, which translates to a lower average sustained performance score in this test of approximately 672. This is still well above the scores of similarly-equipped competitors, however, so we can hardly complain. For those interested, undervolting (as explained in our initial T480s review) does help to mitigate (and, in fact, all but eliminate) this inconsistency.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell Latitude 7390
Intel Core i7-8650U
176 Points ∼85% +23%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
Intel Core i7-8550U
170 Points ∼82% +19%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Intel Core i7-8550U
168 Points ∼81% +17%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
Intel Core i7-8550U
167 Points ∼81% +17%
Dell Latitude 7490
Intel Core i5-8350U
153 Points ∼74% +7%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel Core i5-8250U
143 Points ∼69%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U
  (81 - 147, n=72)
141 Points ∼68% -1%
Average of class Office
  (20 - 178, n=456)
107 Points ∼52% -25%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
Intel Core i7-8550U
723 Points ∼23% +1%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel Core i5-8250U
716 Points ∼23%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Intel Core i7-8550U
708 Points ∼23% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Intel Core i7-8550U
648 Points ∼21% -9%
Dell Latitude 7390
Intel Core i7-8650U
619 Points ∼20% -14%
Dell Latitude 7490
Intel Core i5-8350U
569 Points ∼18% -21%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U
  (320 - 730, n=75)
569 Points ∼18% -21%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
Intel Core i7-8550U
554 Points ∼18% -23%
Average of class Office
  (36 - 1050, n=460)
311 Points ∼10% -57%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
143 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
716 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
46.61 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.8 %
Help
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit

Quality journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible. We intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers.

System Performance

Although it ranks near the bottom of today’s comparison charts, the ThinkPad T480s is just a stone’s throw away from the category leaders at the top. Scores of 3672 in PCMark 8 Home and 3771 in PCMark 10 Overall aren’t bad results; they’re 8% and 7% below the top-ranked machines in those tests respectively, and just ever-so-slightly below the heavily-praised X1 Carbon. Perhaps more importantly, we witnessed no notable hiccups or other general performance detriments during our time with the machine.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated v2
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated v2
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
3966 Points ∼65% +8%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3886 Points ∼64% +6%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
3752 Points ∼62% +2%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
3723 Points ∼61% +1%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3672 Points ∼60%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (3076 - 4458, n=51)
3625 Points ∼59% -1%
Average of class Office
  (1169 - 4458, n=334)
2998 Points ∼49% -18%
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3082 Points ∼33%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3068 Points ∼33% 0%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
3062 Points ∼32% -1%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
2954 Points ∼31% -4%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
2911 Points ∼31% -6%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2006 - 3082, n=46)
2764 Points ∼29% -10%
Average of class Office
  (320 - 3447, n=76)
2523 Points ∼27% -18%
Productivity
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
7142 Points ∼75% +18%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
6727 Points ∼71% +11%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
6651 Points ∼70% +10%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
6053 Points ∼64%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (3851 - 6653, n=46)
5755 Points ∼61% -5%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
5721 Points ∼60% -5%
Average of class Office
  (1639 - 7142, n=76)
5472 Points ∼58% -10%
Essentials
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
8253 Points ∼82% +6%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
8236 Points ∼82% +6%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
7849 Points ∼78% +1%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
7805 Points ∼78%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
7376 Points ∼73% -5%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (5855 - 9289, n=46)
7330 Points ∼73% -6%
Average of class Office
  (2683 - 8562, n=76)
6855 Points ∼68% -12%
Score
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4053 Points ∼52% +7%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
3906 Points ∼50% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
3905 Points ∼50% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3771 Points ∼49%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
3564 Points ∼46% -5%
Average Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (2208 - 4081, n=46)
3309 Points ∼43% -12%
Average of class Office
  (803 - 4269, n=77)
3136 Points ∼40% -17%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3672 points
Help

Storage Devices

The PM961 can’t hold a candle to the PM981 found in the X1 Carbon review unit, of course, but it’s still no pushover. The capacity of ours today is 256 GB, and it posts favorable performance results in our storage tests, with 4K-64 read/write speeds of 1183.23 MB/s and 706.33 MB/s and sequential speeds within 17% of its PM981 superior. Interestingly, these scores are well above those we received during our tests of the Latitude 7390, which featured the same SSD.

CrystalDiskMark
CrystalDiskMark
AS SSD
AS SSD
The internal NVMe SSD
The internal NVMe SSD
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Dell Latitude 7490
Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
Dell Latitude 7390
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Average Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
 
AS SSD
32%
-64%
-16%
-12%
32%
-127%
Copy Game MB/s
1107.45
352.02
904.88
1109.59
529 (225 - 1115, n=34)
Copy Program MB/s
460.17
247.36
326.2
387.45
332 (75 - 780, n=34)
Copy ISO MB/s
1246.8
818.25
1687.75
1412.3
998 (420 - 1912, n=34)
Score Total
3048
3529
16%
947
-69%
2215
-27%
2630
-14%
4115
35%
2543 (35 - 4653, n=55)
-17%
Score Write
921
1801
96%
357
-61%
501
-46%
1084
18%
1708
85%
566 (48 - 1029, n=55)
-39%
Score Read
1435
1168
-19%
391
-73%
1158
-19%
1070
-25%
1623
13%
1382 (363 - 2545, n=55)
-4%
Access Time Write *
0.038
0.027
29%
0.056
-47%
0.032
16%
0.055
-45%
0.033
13%
0.51 (0.023 - 4.15, n=55)
-1242%
Access Time Read *
0.055
0.029
47%
0.112
-104%
0.063
-15%
0.059
-7%
0.045
18%
0.0691 (0.04 - 0.49, n=55)
-26%
4K-64 Write
706.33
1529.32
117%
248.06
-65%
302.35
-57%
908.09
29%
1455.69
106%
402 (15.3 - 1652, n=55)
-43%
4K-64 Read
1183.23
876.34
-26%
316.06
-73%
932.15
-21%
813.03
-31%
1329.09
12%
1114 (199 - 2280, n=55)
-6%
4K Write
97.85
134.3
37%
79.15
-19%
115.21
18%
89.99
-8%
114.44
17%
91.3 (1.16 - 161, n=55)
-7%
4K Read
42.09
52.4
24%
26.66
-37%
49.43
17%
26.75
-36%
49.81
18%
45.4 (20.7 - 54.1, n=55)
8%
Seq Write
1172.23
1376.19
17%
294.93
-75%
830.13
-29%
856.31
-27%
1382.19
18%
946 (223 - 1392, n=55)
-19%
Seq Read
2093.95
2395.87
14%
486.16
-77%
1760.62
-16%
2299.63
10%
2439.86
17%
2030 (768 - 2834, n=55)
-3%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3303 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1267 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 304.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 219.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1065 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1204 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 40.79 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 105.8 MB/s

GPU Performance

3DMark 11
3DMark 11

Unlike the GeForce MX150-equipped variation of the T480s, today’s more conventional review unit features merely integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620. As usual, that renders the machine fully incapable of handling any sort of moderately heavy graphical endeavors, but for the average office worker, this is probably not a problem.

3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3547 Points ∼20% +161%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8550U
1891 Points ∼11% +39%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8550U
1880 Points ∼11% +38%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (959 - 1891, n=83)
1459 Points ∼8% +7%
Dell Latitude 7390
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8650U
1390 Points ∼8% +2%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1360 Points ∼8%
Dell Latitude 7490
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8350U
1313 Points ∼7% -3%
Average of class Office
  (169 - 4566, n=580)
1104 Points ∼6% -19%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3551 Points ∼7% +108%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8550U
1901 Points ∼4% +12%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8550U
1849 Points ∼4% +9%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1704 Points ∼3%
Dell Latitude 7390
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8650U
1697 Points ∼3% 0%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (1235 - 1915, n=83)
1650 Points ∼3% -3%
Dell Latitude 7490
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8350U
1648 Points ∼3% -3%
Average of class Office
  (185 - 4967, n=581)
1195 Points ∼2% -30%
3DMark 11 Performance
1862 points
Help
BioShock Infinite
1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
8 fps ∼3%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
10.4 fps ∼4% +30%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
8 fps ∼3% 0%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
8 fps ∼3% 0%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
11 fps ∼4% +38%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
28.89 fps ∼11% +261%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (6.2 - 11, n=68)
8.6 fps ∼3% +8%
Average of class Office
  (5.3 - 39.6, n=195)
9.84 fps ∼4% +23%
1366x768 High Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
24 fps ∼8%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
30.4 fps ∼10% +27%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
24 fps ∼8% 0%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
24 fps ∼8% 0%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
34.3 fps ∼11% +43%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
77.02 fps ∼25% +221%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (15.6 - 34.3, n=74)
25.3 fps ∼8% +5%
Average of class Office
  (22 - 107, n=289)
25 fps ∼8% +4%
1366x768 Medium Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
30 fps ∼9%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
36.2 fps ∼10% +21%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
35 fps ∼10% +17%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
30 fps ∼9% 0%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
40.4 fps ∼12% +35%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
86.98 fps ∼25% +190%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (18.3 - 40.4, n=74)
30.3 fps ∼9% +1%
Average of class Office
  (27 - 119, n=309)
28.9 fps ∼8% -4%
1280x720 Very Low Preset (sort by value)
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
55 fps ∼14%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
56.9 fps ∼14% +3%
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
52 fps ∼13% -5%
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
56 fps ∼14% +2%
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
80.3 fps ∼20% +46%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
158.27 fps ∼40% +188%
Average Intel UHD Graphics 620
  (32.6 - 80.3, n=74)
56.1 fps ∼14% +2%
Average of class Office
  (12.2 - 185, n=306)
51.1 fps ∼13% -7%
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 5530248fps

Stress Test

Despite being a very quiet machine (as we’ll see in the next section), the T480s has no problems maintaining high Turbo clock rates across all four cores in our full CPU stress test over sustained periods. Even after several minutes, the machine’s temperatures remain stable at (high) values of 97 °C to 98 °C, with frequencies shuffling between 3.3 and 3.4 GHz, the max turbo values possible. Full GPU stress, likewise, achieves a full 1100 MHz stable clock rate with temperatures of just 78 °C.

Full CPU + GPU combined stress at first produces max clock rates across both CPU and GPU of 3.4 GHz/1100 MHz, but after a few minutes, the GPU clock rate subsides to 1 GHz and the CPU clock rate plummets to just 1.3 GHz. Core temperatures at this point stabilize at around 78 °C, but performance never recovers to Turbo frequency levels even after thermals are stable again.

Full CPU stress
Full CPU stress
Full GPU stress
Full GPU stress
Combined CPU + GPU stress
Combined CPU + GPU stress
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 3.3 - 98 -
FurMark Stress - 1100 - 78
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 1.3 1000 78 78

Emissions

System Noise

The internal cooling fan
The internal cooling fan

As before, the T480s fulfills its cardinal obligations as an acceptable office companion by avoiding obtrusive fan noise under nearly all circumstances. While idling, the fan is completely off (and the notebook is thus silent, devoid also of any detectable electrical noise). Under load, the average is still just 35.5 dB(A), with a maximum reading of 41.5 dB(A). None of these readings is troubling in the least.

Noise Level

Idle
28.1 / 28.1 / 28.1 dB(A)
Load
35.5 / 41.5 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 28.1 dB(A)
Fan noise profile
Fan noise profile
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Dell Latitude 7490
UHD Graphics 620, 8350U, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G
Dell Latitude 7390
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7
Noise
-2%
3%
1%
-1%
-1%
off / environment *
28.1
28.9
-3%
28.2
-0%
28.2
-0%
30.3
-8%
29
-3%
Idle Minimum *
28.1
28.9
-3%
28.2
-0%
28.2
-0%
30.3
-8%
29
-3%
Idle Average *
28.1
28.9
-3%
28.2
-0%
28.2
-0%
30.3
-8%
29
-3%
Idle Maximum *
28.1
32.5
-16%
28.7
-2%
28.2
-0%
30.3
-8%
29
-3%
Load Average *
35.5
35.1
1%
29.9
16%
31.5
11%
33.8
5%
36.5
-3%
Load Maximum *
41.5
35.1
15%
40.2
3%
42.7
-3%
33.8
19%
38.2
8%
Witcher 3 ultra *
32.8

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

The cooling system does a fine job.
The cooling system does a fine job.

What about thermals then? While idling, the machine does gather a bit of warmth, which could prove irritating to some users: we measured an average of 29 °C on the underside, which is 9 °C above room temperatures (the top side is a bit cooler). However, Lenovo’s Power Manager can be employed to adjust parameters as desired and help reduce the temperatures somewhat. Under full stress, we see absolutely no reasons for concern, with averages of just 31 °C / 34.7 °C on top/bottom and a hot spot of 41 °C in the center of the underside—not really problematic.

One likely reason for these positive thermal results is the presence of the extra heat pipe within the T480s which is presumably designed for units featuring MX150 graphics. By leaving the extra pipe in configurations powering integrated graphics, Lenovo manages uncommonly effective heat dissipation even under heavy processing loads.

Max. Load
 28.4 °C
83 F
36.6 °C
98 F
38.6 °C
101 F
 
 27 °C
81 F
36.4 °C
98 F
31.8 °C
89 F
 
 26 °C
79 F
28 °C
82 F
26.2 °C
79 F
 
Maximum: 38.6 °C = 101 F
Average: 31 °C = 88 F
36.8 °C
98 F
41 °C
106 F
36.4 °C
98 F
34.4 °C
94 F
39.4 °C
103 F
33.4 °C
92 F
29.4 °C
85 F
31.2 °C
88 F
30.2 °C
86 F
Maximum: 39.4 °C = 103 F
Average: 34.7 °C = 94 F
Power Supply (max.)  33 °C = 91 F | Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
Thermal profile, top of base unit (idle)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (idle)
Thermal profile, underside (idle)
Thermal profile, underside (idle)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (max load)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (max load)
Thermal profile, side (max load)
Thermal profile, side (max load)
Thermal profile, underside (max load)
Thermal profile, underside (max load)

Speakers

One of the few complaints we fielded regarding the previous two T480s review units was with regard to the poor speakers, and of course, nothing has changed with today’s configuration. The speakers not only struggle to produce anything beyond moderate volume levels, but they also suffer from a complete lack of bass and churn out tinny audio that is truly only appropriate for basic voice conferencing and the like. Headphones or external speakers are recommended for any other form of audio playback.

Speaker audio analysis
Speaker audio analysis
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.138.140.12538.933.538.9313634364036.83536.85034.432.734.4633334.1338034.231.534.210030.430.930.412530.63030.616033.128.833.120037.92937.925044.727.744.731549.527.549.540050.926.650.950054.826.154.863057.425.557.480063.124.863.1100063.924.863.9125058.424.158.4160062.124.262.1200062.32462.3250057.42457.431505724.157400059.924.359.9500055.424.355.4630056.624.456.6800058.424.858.41000060.124.960.11250057.225.257.21600049.225.749.2SPL71.836.871.8N28.92.828.9median 57Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUSmedian 24.9median 57Delta5.41.75.436.241.636.234.73734.734.633.634.634.434.234.433.233.533.23234.13232.233.932.240.130.440.144.229.244.247.729.447.749.427.649.454.227.454.256.226.856.256.725.856.757.425.757.459.925.159.964.824.564.868.324.468.362.724.262.767246766.923.966.968.924.168.964.42464.458.623.858.665.223.665.263.823.563.866.223.566.265.323.465.357.723.457.762.223.562.277.336.377.340.52.740.5median 62.2Dell Latitude 7490median 24.2median 62.25.81.45.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.77 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 70% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Dell Latitude 7490 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.31 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 21% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Power consumption, Prime95 load
Power consumption, Prime95 load

Power consumption remains well within normal ranges, averaging below every other machine in our comparison field apart from the Latitude 7490—which benefits from lower idle values. Still, today’s T480s idle average consumption of 6.4 W is perfectly appropriate given the hardware, and the load average of 29.8 W is below what we might have expected given its similarly-equipped competitors. Here, we also witness the tangible differences introduced by the MX150 dedicated graphics and WQHD display while under load; although the machine is far more powerful graphically, the load average of 55.4 W is also nearly double that of today’s configuration.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.32 / 0.54 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.1 / 6.4 / 9.4 Watt
Load midlight 29.8 / 31.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, TFT-LCD, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7, IPS, 2560x1440, 14
Dell Latitude 7490
8350U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KSG60ZMV256G, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Dell Latitude 7390
8650U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
8550U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KXG50ZNV1T02, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ-000L7, IPS LED, 2560x1440, 14
Power Consumption
-43%
9%
-11%
-21%
-51%
Idle Minimum *
3.1
3.8
-23%
2
35%
3.3
-6%
3.8
-23%
3.4
-10%
Idle Average *
6.4
8.9
-39%
4.7
27%
5.9
8%
8.3
-30%
7.5
-17%
Idle Maximum *
9.4
11.9
-27%
5.7
39%
6.2
34%
10.7
-14%
10.8
-15%
Load Average *
29.8
47.5
-59%
38.4
-29%
43.2
-45%
35.5
-19%
55.4
-86%
Load Maximum *
31.2
52.5
-68%
38.9
-25%
45.2
-45%
37
-19%
70.3
-125%
Witcher 3 ultra *
34

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The internal 57 Wh Li-Ion battery
The internal 57 Wh Li-Ion battery

How do these results affect battery life? In fact, not much under normal use if our test results are any indication. We recorded 9 hours and 1 minute of operation before the machine eventually shut down during our standardized web-surfing battery test. That’s a good achievement—essentially equivalent with the results we received from the Latitude 7490 and previous T480s—and it beats the X1 Carbon and especially the HP EliteBook 840 G5. However, the Latitude 7390 easily takes the crown here with a life of over 11 hours.

As a final note, like most of its competitors, the T480s features rapid charge capability.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 01min
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018-20KGS03900
8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 57 Wh
Dell Latitude 7490
8350U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh
Dell Latitude 7390
8650U, UHD Graphics 620, 60 Wh
HP EliteBook 840 G5-3JX61EA
8550U, UHD Graphics 620, 50 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
8550U, GeForce MX150, 57 Wh
Battery Runtime
-4%
1%
23%
-18%
-2%
Reader / Idle
1328
1366
WiFi v1.3
541
519
-4%
548
1%
664
23%
444
-18%
530
-2%
Load
106
76

Pros

+ strong, well-constructed case
+ terrific CPU performance at Turbo clock rates, even under sustained load
+ stable GPU performance, also at highest Turbo frequencies
+ class-leading keyboard and good touchpad
+ good port selection and organization
+ reasonable temperatures
+ relatively low system noise under load
+ long battery life
+ robust security features

Cons

- dull colors from FHD display due to lack of saturation and suboptimal factory calibration
- relatively weak display brightness compared with WQHD screen
- rubber feet lack grip on hard surfaces
- clickpad integrated buttons are less precise than the separate physical buttons of competitors
- poor speakers
- only a 1-year depot warranty standard

Verdict

In review: Lenovo ThinkPad T480s
In review: Lenovo ThinkPad T480s

Like any good ThinkPad (or, more broadly, any successful business machine), it’s the fundamentals which are the bedrock of the T480s’ success. Still present in today’s configuration, of course, are all the basics we applauded during our last two reviews: rock-solid CFRP Hybrid/magnesium construction, top-quality input devices, plenty of ports, and robust security options. The T480s is indeed one of the premier office laptops currently available, rivaled by few in it class.

But for those who might have previously found a nearly $2,000 price tag difficult to swallow, today’s (roughly) $1,600 configuration only sees minor sacrifices in terms of general performance. The Core i5-8250U CPU ranks above most identically-equipped competitors, and the still-NVMe SSD—while below the level of the ultra-fast PM981—remains very fast nonetheless. The MX150 GPU option does make sense for those interested in faster graphical performance, the Core i7 does provide marginally better performance (both single- and multi-core), and—perhaps most significantly—the WQHD display is leagues ahead of today’s FHD panel, which severely lacks in color saturation and manages only middling brightness. But for a basic, very fast, reliable office laptop, today’s T480s configuration fits the profile perfectly.

The T480s is indeed one of the premier office laptops currently available, rivaled by few in it class. And for those who might have previously found a nearly $2,000 price tag difficult to swallow, today’s (roughly) $1,600 configuration only sees minor sacrifices in terms of general performance.

Competitors such as Dell’s venerable Latitude 7000 series machines (specifically in this case the 7490 and 7390), the HP EliteBook 840 G5, and Lenovo’s own terrific X1 Carbon all offer their own unique sets of benefits—not to mention standard 3-year on-site warranties versus the one-year depot warranty of the T480s—but few can match the performance of the T480s. From our tests, a T480s equipped with a Core i5 can be as capable as (or more capable than) a Dell Latitude 7000 or HP EliteBook 840 equipped with an i7. It’s hard to go wrong with any of these devices, but with the T480s, Lenovo clearly has a winner on their hands.

Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L7002AUS - 07/07/2018 v6
Steve Schardein

Chassis
94 / 98 → 96%
Keyboard
94%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
63 / 80 → 78%
Weight
70 / 20-67 → 100%
Battery
91%
Display
85%
Games Performance
56 / 68 → 83%
Application Performance
91 / 92 → 98%
Temperature
92%
Noise
94%
Audio
68%
Camera
46 / 85 → 54%
Average
79%
90%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Lenovo ThinkPad T480s (i5-8250U, FHD) Laptop Review
Steve Schardein, 2018-07- 9 (Update: 2018-07- 9)
Steve Schardein
Steve Schardein - Review Editor - @othersteve
In grade school, my first computer—an Apple IIGS—started it all for me. Later, in the nineties, if I wasn’t repairing computers for family and friends, I was busy cooking up nifty Visual Basic projects and playing PC games like Command & Conquer and Heroes of Might and Magic. Soon, much of my free time was spent moderating popular gaming forums and covering the industry for various websites. All the while, I never stopped repairing computers, and in 2006, I started a technology consulting company in Louisville, KY—Triple-S Computers—which I have been fortunate to nurture to great success by specializing in not only repairs, but also new machine consultations and purchasing, data recovery, and malware/security. And since 2012, I have proudly contributed many dozens of reviews to Notebookcheck, a site which I have long considered to be the ultimate authority on laptops and related technology. Today, I am truly living my dream: still a child at heart, ever-curious, constantly learning, and thankful to you, our readers.