联想 Yoga Pro 7 14 G8 笔记本电脑评测--AMD Zen4 并非自动更好
我们已经测试过目前的第八代 Yoga Pro 7 14（在不少市场上也被称为 Yoga Slim Pro 7）的几种不同配置--从配备 iGPU 和 2.5K 显示屏的 AMD 处理器（Zen3+），到配备英特尔 CPU、GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑和可选 3K 面板的顶级型号。所有版本的子笔记本电脑或多媒体笔记本电脑都取得了不错的成绩，联想现在还提供配备 AMD 最新 Zen4 CPU 的版本。
我们的测试设备是 Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8（82Y80020GE），配备 Ryzen 7 7840HS，包括 Radeon 780M iGPU、32 GB 内存、1 TB SSD 和 2.5K 雾面面板。该配置的价格约为 1300 美元，校园机型则为 1200 美元。您还可以选择购买新的 Zen4 芯片、GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑 和 3K 面板，价格约为 1,650 美元（校园机型：1,500 美元），但只能配备 16 GB 内存。
在本次评测中，我们将主要关注新处理器的性能，以及笔记本电脑的排放和运行时间。有关其外壳、连接性、输入设备和扬声器的更多信息，请查看我们之前的评测：
- 联想 Yoga Pro 7 14 G8(AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS、Radeon 680M、2.5K IPS 显示屏）
- 联想 Yoga Pro 7 14 G8(英特尔酷睿 i7-13700H、GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑、3K IPS 显示屏)
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 88.6 % v7 (old) | 01 / 2024 | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 R7 7840HS, Radeon 780M | 1.5 kg | 15.6 mm | 14.50" | 2560x1600 | |
| 89 % v7 (old) | 04 / 2023 | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 R7 7735HS, Radeon 680M | 1.5 kg | 15.6 mm | 14.50" | 2560x1600 | |
v (old) | 12 / 2023 | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core | 1.3 kg | 14.9 mm | 14.00" | 2880x1800 | |
| 88.9 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2023 | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 i7-13700H, Iris Xe G7 96EUs | 1.3 kg | 16.6 mm | 14.00" | 2880x1800 | |
| 88.2 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2023 | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 R7 7840S, Radeon 780M | 1.3 kg | 13.9 mm | 14.50" | 2944x1840 | |
| 87.8 % v7 (old) | 11 / 2023 | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl R7 7840U, Radeon 780M | 1.4 kg | 18.8 mm | 14.00" | 2880x1800 |
| Networking | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
显示屏 - 雾面 90-Hz IPS 面板
这款笔记本电脑的哑光 IPS 显示屏宽高比为 16:10，分辨率为 2,560 x 1,600 像素。主观而言，这块 90-Hz 面板的画质依然非常出色，内容显示清晰，即使是浅色区域也不会出现颗粒感。此外，它的反应速度也不错，而且没有使用 PWM。
在亮度方面，本测试设备的表现稍差，平均亮度为 348 cd/m²。反过来，其 0.22 的黑色值稍好一些，从而获得了更好的最大对比度。但原则上，这些微小的偏差都属于批量生产的正常范围。
我们使用专业的 CalMAN 软件（X-Rite i1 Pro2）对面板进行了测量，显示屏在出厂状态下就已经很不错了。虽然我们注意到蓝色色调极少，色温也略微偏冷，但这只能用肉眼直接与校准过的显示器进行比较才能看出。不过，与 sRGB 参考值相比，它的色彩偏差已经非常小了，只有 100 % 红色超过了 3 的重要偏差。
通过我们自己的校准（可在下面的显示框中免费下载配置文件），我们能够从整体上改善这些值，并纠正其轻微的色调，但红色偏差仍然存在。得益于其完整的 sRGB 覆盖范围，该面板仍然适用于编辑图像/视频。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 357 cd/m²
Contrast: 1623:1 (Black: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 1.2
ΔE Greyscale 2.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
73.4% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.7% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
72.3% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.15
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 LEN145WQXGA, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5" | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 LEN145WQXGA, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5" | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 ATNA40YK11-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 CSOT T3 MNE007ZA1-3, IPS, 2880x1800, 14" | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 LEN145WQ+, OLED, 2944x1840, 14.5" | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl Samsung SDC4197, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -1% | 24% | 2% | 17% | 23% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 72.3 | 71.8 -1% | 99.75 38% | 74.7 3% | 97.1 34% | 99.8 38% |
| sRGB Coverage | 99.7 | 99.2 -1% | 99.99 0% | 99.6 0% | 100 0% | 100 0% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 73.4 | 73.1 0% | 98.56 34% | 75.8 3% | 86.5 18% | 95.8 31% |
| Response Times | 5% | 75% | 36% | 98% | 98% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 43.6 ? | 43.2 ? 1% | 2.2 ? 95% | 32.2 ? 26% | 0.77 ? 98% | 0.82 ? 98% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 28.2 ? | 25.9 ? 8% | 12.8 ? 55% | 15.4 ? 45% | 0.83 ? 97% | 0.95 ? 97% |
| PWM Frequency | 300 | 360 ? | 504.7 ? | |||
| Screen | -41% | -5% | 1% | 25% | -5% | |
| Brightness middle | 357 | 386 8% | 388 9% | 402 13% | 387 8% | 384 8% |
| Brightness | 348 | 366 5% | 391 12% | 371 7% | 388 11% | 386 11% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 91 3% | 98 11% | 86 -2% | 98 11% | 98 11% |
| Black Level * | 0.22 | 0.26 -18% | 0.0411 81% | 0.27 -23% | ||
| Contrast | 1623 | 1485 -9% | 9440 482% | 1489 -8% | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2 | 3.8 -90% | 6.32 -216% | 1.8 10% | 1.3 35% | 4.06 -103% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.8 | 9.1 -139% | 8.82 -132% | 3.6 5% | 2.6 32% | 6.73 -77% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.2 | 1.2 -0% | 4.79 -299% | 1.5 -25% | 0.49 59% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.7 | 6.2 -130% | 2.61 3% | 1.8 33% | 1.3 52% | 1.1 59% |
| Gamma | 2.15 102% | 2.09 105% | 1.772 124% | 2.27 97% | 2.24 98% | 2.26 97% |
| CCT | 6929 94% | 6618 98% | 6202 105% | 6695 97% | 6360 102% | 6331 103% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -12% /
-26% | 31% /
12% | 13% /
6% | 47% /
36% | 39% /
19% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 73 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 43.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 22.6 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 70 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
在室外，磨砂显示屏给人留下了不错的印象--只有阳光直射时，笔记本电脑的最大亮度无法达到，屏幕无法保持清晰。IPS 面板的视角稳定性不错。
性能 - AMD Zen 4 和 32 GB 内存
联想为其 Yoga Pro 7 14 G8 配备了英特尔最新的 Zen4 CPU，与旧型号相比，其 Ryzen 7 7840HS现在已与专用的 GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑- 而在过去，这只是英特尔版本的专利。在内存方面，这款机型继续受到不必要的限制：我们的 iGPU 测试设备配备了 32 GB 内存，而配备GeForce GPU 的机型仍然只有 16 GB。
测试条件
在预装的 Vantage 应用程序中，联想提供了不同的性能模式，可通过组合键 "Fn+Q "轻松选择。正如在前代机型上已经看到的，在配备 iGPU 的机型上使用 "最高性能"（64/60 瓦）模式意义不大，因为由此带来的性能提升非常低，而风扇只会转得更响。在执行简单任务时，可以放心使用省电模式（28/25 瓦）。我们使用 "智能冷却 "模式（28/25 瓦）进行了以下基准测试和测量。总的来说，我们注意到功率限制比其 前代与 Ryzen 7 7735HS.
处理器 - Ryzen 7 7840HS
AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS配备 8 个现代 Zen4 内核，可同时处理 16 个线程，最高主频可达 5.1 GHz。与 Ryzen 7735HS 相比，它的总体性能非常出色（这也要归功于其更高的功耗限制），在多核测试中速度提高了 20%，在单核测试中速度提高了 12%。 Ryzen 7 7735HS相比，它在多核测试中的速度提高了 20%，在单核测试中的速度提高了 12%。它的多核性能也超越了采用英特尔 CPU 的竞争对手（即使是新的 Meteor Lake 酷睿至尊 7 155H)，而在单核测试中，英特尔芯片的速度稍快。
它的 CPU 性能在长期负载和电池使用情况下保持完全稳定。更多 CPU 基准测试结果，请访问技术版块。
Cinebench R15 Multi continuous test
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 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
| CPU Performance Rating | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook | |
| Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (15515 - 17214, n=17) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (1555 - 21812, n=61, last 2 years) | |
| Cinebench R23 / Single Core | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (1718 - 1812, n=17) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (358 - 2001, n=61, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (6061 - 6744, n=17) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (579 - 8541, n=57, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (661 - 705, n=17) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (128 - 790, n=57, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (2473 - 2729, n=17) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (327 - 3345, n=63, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (270 - 286, n=17) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (72.4 - 307, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (159 - 2271, n=61, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (185 - 229, n=18) | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (59538 - 73035, n=18) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (11775 - 77867, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (6049 - 6754, n=18) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (2669 - 6403, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (8446 - 12339, n=20) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (2557 - 14728, n=57, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (1837 - 2017, n=20) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (621 - 2350, n=57, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (11.7 - 21.8, n=18) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (0.97 - 25.1, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (38.5 - 220, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (38.3 - 68.3, n=18) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (0.413 - 1.456, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (0.4184 - 0.4739, n=18) | |
* ... 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
| Performance Rating | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (24712 - 28921, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (1141 - 32888, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (103755 - 123167, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (6838 - 123315, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (4293 - 5155, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (444 - 5287, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (105028 - 125820, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (11579 - 115682, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (13857 - 15525, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (744 - 18418, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (55540 - 65812, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (3366 - 65433, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (67389 - 177158, n=19) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (638 - 161430, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (949 - 1123, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (166.9 - 1379, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (13100 - 15599, n=19) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (610 - 17495, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (6569 - 53954, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (17615 - 41516, n=19) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
系统性能
在日常使用中，配备 Zen4 处理器的 Yoga Pro 7 14 反应迅速，其合成基准测试结果令人印象深刻。在测试过程中，我们没有发现该设备存在任何问题。
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
| PCMark 10 / Score | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (7039 - 7651, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (4993 - 7788, n=49, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (10519 - 11214, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (9476 - 11331, n=49, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (9075 - 10970, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (6440 - 10623, n=49, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (9052 - 9987, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (5305 - 10983, n=49, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| CrossMark / Overall | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (1566 - 1891, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (365 - 1971, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| CrossMark / Productivity | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (1535 - 1823, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (364 - 1875, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| CrossMark / Creativity | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (1556 - 2040, n=8) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (385 - 2210, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M (1293 - 1749, n=8) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (312 - 1899, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 7039 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (14916 - 108756, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (30937 - 72158, n=19) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (15948 - 122210, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (30497 - 62147, n=19) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (34590 - 93323, n=19) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (16513 - 112837, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (7.4 - 187.8, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS (85.1 - 112, n=19) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC 延迟
在我们的标准化延迟测试中（网上冲浪、4K YouTube 播放、CPU 负载），测试设备在重要的 "中断到进程延迟 "值方面没有出现任何问题，只有一个驱动程序出现了一些问题。因此，该设备非常适合实时音频用途。
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
* ... smaller is better
存储设备
1 TB 版本的三星 PM9A1 安装在我们的测试设备中，首次启动设备后，用户有 892 GB 的可用空间。PCIe-4.0 硬盘的速度非常快，最大传输速率超过 7 GB/s，但在长期负载的情况下，其性能并不稳定，会导致 50% 的损耗。3 GB/秒以上的性能仍然足以满足日常使用，没有任何限制。更多固态硬盘基准测试 这里。
* ... smaller is better
Reading continuous performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
图形卡
Yoga Pro 的显卡是 Radeon 780M在这种情况下，它得益于双通道配置的快速 LPDDR5x-6400 内存，是我们迄今测试过的速度最快的 Radeon 780M 之一。iGPU 的速度比 Radeon 680M快约 11%，但在合成测试中被新的 英特尔弧 GPU(8核）击败。不过，两者之间 6% 的差距并不算太大。
iGPU 适合日常使用，包括播放高分辨率视频，其性能甚至足以应付一两款零星的游戏--不过，你通常不得不放弃玩最新的游戏。不过，在要求不高的游戏中，你通常可以使用中高分辨率进行游戏。在实际游戏测试中，Radeon 780M 也领先于新的英特尔 Arc GPU，尽管我们还没有该机型的基准测试结果。如果你有更大的游戏野心，你应该选择配备了 GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑不过，您将不得不放弃 32 GB 内存。
在持续负载下，笔记本电脑的图形性能完全稳定，在电池模式下也是如此。更多 GPU 基准测试 这里.
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 13131 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 7385 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 3146 points | |
Help | ||
| Blender / v3.3 Classroom HIP/AMD | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (302 - 548, n=4, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Blender / v3.3 Classroom CPU | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (241 - 1127, n=58, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Average AMD Radeon 780M (300 - 664, n=52) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
* ... smaller is better
| The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (8.5 - 43.7, n=53, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (7.81 - 53, n=53, last 2 years) | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (11.9 - 44.2, n=59, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking | |
| Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 | |
| Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 | |
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 | |
| Average of class Subnotebook (13 - 99.5, n=61, last 2 years) | |
| HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl | |
| SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 | |
Witcher 3 FPS diagram
| low | med. | high | ultra | QHD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTA V (2015) | 145.3 | 133.2 | 66.1 | 26.5 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 157 | 48 | 30 | ||
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 131 | 108.1 | 75 | 70.1 | |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 78.3 | 37.6 | 28.3 | 20.3 | |
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 47.9 | 35.8 | 29 | ||
| Far Cry 5 (2018) | 77 | 48 | 44 | 41 | |
| Strange Brigade (2018) | 166.4 | 64.4 | 55.7 | 47.7 | |
| F1 2021 (2021) | 204 | 104.9 | 80.9 | 34.4 | |
| F1 22 (2022) | 92.5 | 80.7 | 62.3 | 16.9 | |
| F1 23 (2023) | 90.3 | 80.3 | 57.6 | 13.6 |
排放与动力
噪音排放
总的来说，使用 Zen4 处理器后，Yoga 的声音变得有点大，这也是由于其功率限制提高了。在日常使用中，风扇的启动速度也比前一代机型更快一些。如果你不需要 CPU 的全部性能，我们建议你在日常使用中使用省电模式。在低负载情况下，Zen4 和 Zen4 的噪音值仍不相上下，但在游戏和压力测试中，Zen4 的噪音略大于 Zen4。在最高性能模式下，我们测得的最大噪音为 47.7 分贝（A）。测试设备没有发出其他电子噪音。
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 24.3 / 24.3 / 27.9 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 36.7 / 44.2 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 24.3 dB(A) | ||
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 Radeon 780M, R7 7840HS, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 Radeon 680M, R7 7735HS, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Arc 8-Core, Ultra 7 155H, SK hynix HFS001TEJ9X110NA | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 Iris Xe G7 96EUs, i7-13700H, Samsung 990 Pro 1 TB | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 Radeon 780M, R7 7840S, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl Radeon 780M, R7 7840U, WDC PC SN810 1TB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 5% | -1% | -2% | -5% | 7% | |
| off / environment * | 24.3 | 24.2 -0% | 25 -3% | 24.5 -1% | 24.5 -1% | 23.4 4% |
| Idle Minimum * | 24.3 | 24.2 -0% | 25 -3% | 24.5 -1% | 24.5 -1% | 24.1 1% |
| Idle Average * | 24.3 | 24.2 -0% | 25 -3% | 24.5 -1% | 24.5 -1% | 24.1 1% |
| Idle Maximum * | 27.9 | 24.2 13% | 26.2 6% | 30.4 -9% | 27.7 1% | 25.3 9% |
| Load Average * | 36.7 | 36.2 1% | 35.7 3% | 39.5 -8% | 45.5 -24% | 33.4 9% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 44.2 | 42.7 3% | 41.7 6% | 45.5 -3% | 39.4 11% | |
| Load Maximum * | 44.2 | 36.2 18% | 45.5 -3% | 44.9 -2% | 45.5 -3% | 39.4 11% |
* ... smaller is better
温度
在空闲模式和低负载情况下，笔记本电脑的表面温度完全没有问题。不过，在负载情况下，底座底部会明显发热，我们在后部中央区域测得的最高温度略低于 50 °C。因此，应避免皮肤接触该区域。底座顶部的温度明显较低，最高温度为 42 °C，但在这里打字时手指也会变热。在压力测试中，Ryzen 处理器的功耗稳定在 50 瓦以下。
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.1 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49.7 °C / 121 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.8 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.2 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28.1 °C / 82.6 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (+0.2 °C / 0.3 F).
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, AMD Radeon 780M | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon 680M | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 Intel Core i7-13700H, Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 AMD Ryzen 7 7840S, AMD Radeon 780M | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl AMD Ryzen 7 7840U, AMD Radeon 780M | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 5% | -4% | 0% | -3% | 11% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 42.1 | 39.2 7% | 36.5 13% | 45.8 -9% | 43.8 -4% | 39 7% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 49.7 | 49.8 -0% | 49.5 -0% | 42 15% | 56 -13% | 35.8 28% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 25.7 | 24.2 6% | 25.5 1% | 27.5 -7% | 25.3 2% | 25.2 2% |
| Idle Bottom * | 27.3 | 25.1 8% | 35 -28% | 27.1 1% | 26.7 2% | 25.6 6% |
* ... smaller is better
发言人
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 21% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 13% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 2.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 6% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
耗电量
Zen4 Yoga 在空闲模式和负载状态下的功耗都有所增加，导致其在短时间内达到了 100 瓦电源的极限。在压力测试中，它的耗电量又迅速下降了一些，但留给电池充电的空间并不大。
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 Radeon 780M, R7 7840HS, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 Radeon 680M, R7 7735HS, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Arc 8-Core, Ultra 7 155H, SK hynix HFS001TEJ9X110NA | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 Iris Xe G7 96EUs, i7-13700H, Samsung 990 Pro 1 TB | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 Radeon 780M, R7 7840S, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl Radeon 780M, R7 7840U, WDC PC SN810 1TB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 11% | -1% | 23% | -12% | 14% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 5.6 | 4.1 27% | 5.5 2% | 4.2 25% | 8.7 -55% | 6 -7% |
| Idle Average * | 8.8 | 7.7 12% | 10.1 -15% | 7.4 16% | 11.3 -28% | 6.5 26% |
| Idle Maximum * | 9 | 7.9 12% | 11.2 -24% | 8 11% | 12 -33% | 13.9 -54% |
| Load Average * | 58.5 | 66.2 -13% | 45.9 22% | 42.8 27% | 58.6 -0% | 41.9 28% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 71 | 61.5 13% | 60.9 14% | 47.9 33% | 61.6 13% | 43.9 38% |
| Load Maximum * | 100.6 | 84.3 16% | 104.1 -3% | 76 24% | 66.2 34% | 50.8 50% |
* ... smaller is better
| Off / Standby | 0.34 / 0.7 Watt |
| Idle | 5.6 / 8.8 / 9 Watt |
| Load |
58.5 / 100.6 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
Power consumption Witcher 3 / stress test
Power consumption with external monitor
运行时间
该设备的 73 Wh 电池容量没有变化，但由于能耗要求较高，其运行时间比上一代 AMD Yoga 差。在亮度为 150 cd/m²、刷新率为 60 Hz 的 WLAN 测试中，我们测得的运行时间为 10:18 小时（90 Hz 时为 09:25 小时），全亮度时为 07:56 小时（90 Hz 时为 07:39 小时）。在视频测试中，我们测得的时长为 12:17，总体上比配备 Zen3 处理器的 Yoga 短。 配备 Zen3+ 处理器的 Yoga.
| Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8 R7 7840HS, Radeon 780M, 73 Wh | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ARP G8 R7 7735HS, Radeon 680M, 73 Wh | Acer Swift Go 14 SFG14-72 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core, 65 Wh | SCHENKER Vision 14 2023 i7-13700H, Iris Xe G7 96EUs, 99 Wh | Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 14APU G8 R7 7840S, Radeon 780M, 70 Wh | HP Pavilion Plus 14-ey0095cl R7 7840U, Radeon 780M, 68 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 17% | -18% | 33% | -13% | 13% | 25% | |
| H.264 | 737 | 903 23% | 690 -6% | 896 ? 22% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 618 | 783 27% | 479 -22% | 823 33% | 571 -8% | 510 -17% | 719 ? 16% |
| Load | 86 | 86 0% | 74 -14% | 64 -26% | 122 42% | 116.6 ? 36% |
Pros
Cons
结论：Zen4 Yoga 性能更强，但电池续航时间较短
即使在换用 AMD Zen4 处理器之后，Yoga Pro 7 14 G8 依然是一款出色的多媒体笔记本电脑，在许多方面（机箱、连接、输入设备、显示屏）都没有任何改变。从 AMD Zen3+ 到 Zen4 处理器带来了更高的性能（CPU 和 iGPU），但代价是更高的功耗限制。
在日常使用中，这会导致更高的风扇活动，而这并不是完全必要的。在这里，联想本可以更清晰地划分其性能模式，因为使用智能冷却模式和最高性能模式时的性能值几乎完全相同。笔记本电脑的功耗也略高，这反过来又损害了它的运行时间。
AMD 的 Zen4 处理器可能会提供更高的性能，但其结果是，Yoga Pro 7 14 G8 的噪音变得更大，运行时间也没有那么好。
如果你不需要更高的性能，并且可以使用 16GB 内存，那么毫无疑问，你也可以选择 Ryzen 7 7735HS此外，你还能省下一笔钱。无论如何，Zen4 处理器现在还可以与专用的 GeForce RTX 4050 笔记本电脑但遗憾的是，在这种情况下，联想将最大内存配置限制在 16 GB，这根本说不通。
价格和供应情况
Yoga Pro 7 14 G8 的售价约为 1,300 美元。虽然在亚马逊上找不到配备 AMD 处理器的版本，但配备英特尔处理器的版本售价为1,299 美元。
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14APH G8
- 12/27/2023 v7 (old)
Andreas Osthoff
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. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. 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.
Price comparison
