Adobe RGB Accuracy

Up until recently, the de-facto wide gamut mode for displays was Adobe RGB. This makes sense when you consider that many cameras either let you capture in sRGB or Adobe RGB, and Adobe RGB actually covers the color space of a CMYK printer quite well, which makes it a good fit for editing photos for print. Keeping with that tradition, the Lenovo X1 Yoga OLED has a photo color mode which uses the Adobe RGB gamut, a 2.2 gamma, and a white target of D65. 

Greyscale accuracy in the Adobe RGB mode is not as good as the sRGB mode. The gamma does look straighter, but since this is a 21 point test I can't say that for certain. what is clear is that it's not as far off of the desired 2.2 target as the standard mode, which is a good sign. However, the greyscale presents a problem, with shades being shifted toward red even more strongly than in the sRGB mode, causing generally higher levels of error. Again, these results definitely do not match the advertised 2.2 gamma and white point of D65, and even though the error isn't incredibly severe, it's disappointing from the perspective of not getting what was advertised to you. The error is also high enough to pose a problem with color-critical work.

At first glance, it looks like the X1 Yoga OLED is actually more accurate in Adobe RGB mode than sRGB. While this is possible, I want to stress the fact that a 20% saturation sweep is not comparable to a 4 bit step sweep which tests 64 points. It could be that the Adobe RGB mode is more accurate, or it could just be that errors between these measurements points caused by irregular gamma are being missed. In any case, it does appear that the general accuray in the Adobe RGB mode is quite good, and there are only a few shades that have an error greater than three. Curiously, the green primary shows one of the largest errors, likely due to some issue with the color transform caused by the batch calibration profile not being a true characterization of this exact display. However, the overall accuracy is perfectly suitable for your average photographer or artist.

Accuracy in the GretagMacbeth ColorChecker test is actually better than in the sRGB mode. This result is comparable between the two tests because I used the same pattern set. The fact that it's significantly more accurate is just an artifact of the fact that the accuracy of your color transform is limited when you don't have a device profile that specifically characterizes the display, leading to different errors depending on which smaller gamut you constrain the display to. In any case, the biggest error contribution comes from the grey shades, and the accuracy of colors is quite good.

Adobe RGB Calibration

The X1 Yoga OLED's Adobe RGB calibration is alreaady quite good for color, but the greyscale accuracy could definitely use some work. While I was at it, I decided to try a display calibration with an Adobe RGB target to see how accurate I could get it.

After calibration the greyscale performance in the Adobe RGB mode is outstanding. There's no way to totally fix the errors at the brightest levels because there's limited room to adjust the RGB components, but the general accuracy is very high. The gamma is now straight, and there's a good RGB balance for each shade of grey up until 85% where it is still slightly red-shifted. 

Saturation accuracy is also outstanding after calibration. The only issue is the green primary, which was an issue prior to calibration and isn't really something that can be fixed with a greyscale calibration. Apart from that, and a slightly higher than average error in 100% cyan, every other color has an error value below one, meaning you cannot distinguish it from the actual reference color.

With great greyscale and saturation accuracy comes great accuracy for color mixtures. Only a few shades in the Gretag-Macbeth ColorChecker test can even be distinguished from the reference color once the display has been calibrated. The only issue that stands out is white, which I already discussed in the greyscale section. After calibration, this is truly a display that can be used for professional-grade color-critical work.

Custom P3 Mode Accuracy

For my final test I decided to try defining a custom color mode. This is honestly the most interesting feature on the X1 Yoga OLED, and I've never seen anything like it in another product. Some monitors let you choose a color gamut and a gamma target, but seldom allow for this level of control over the white point as well. Something that bothered me was the fact that the X1 Yoga OLED's movie mode uses the actual DCI-P3 standard, including the non-standard white point of D63 and a gamma of 2.6, neither of which are acceptable for a laptop's viewing conditions/ For this test I defined a target using the DCI-P3 gamut, but with a gamma of 2.2 and a white point of D65, which should maintain the rendition of greyscale shades that a user would be used to in sRGB.

Greyscale accuracy in my custom P3 mode has the highest error of the modes that I've tested. Again, Lenovo advertises that you have a power 2.2 gamma and a white point of D65, and it's not even close. The gamma would actually be decent if it weren't for the huge ramp at the start, but even in the areas where the gamma value is close to what it should be the severe imbalance between red and blue in the greyscale poses a big problem. The funny thing is, Lenovo's color modes should have absolutely no greyscale variance for a given gamma and white point, because greyscale rendering is independent of the color gamut chosen. This again suggests problems relating to the core device profile only being an approximation of the display's true output characteristics.

Saturation accuracy is good, although there are some significant errors with the lowest saturation levels tested. Yellow seems to have the highest degree of error overall, while red has the lowest. The result certainly isn't bad, but I just find myself wishing Lenovo had taken the extra step to factory calibrate each laptop individually, which would have enabled extremely high levels of accuracy in every color mode. The current accuracy isn't bad at all, but there's so much being left on the table on the hardware side, even though all the necessary software is in place.

Color accuracy in the Gretag-Macbeth ColorChecker test is not near as good as the Adobe RGB mode. The increased greyscale errors certainly play a part, but when looking at the specific color patterns the general trend is an error value around three, while in Adobe RGB mode it's close to two. 

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to perform a calibration for the custom display mode that I set. I've never run into this before, but I suspect that something related to the custom nature of the display mode was causing changes that prevented calman from properly calibrating the greyscale. Without knowing how Lenovo's underlying implementation works I can't really say anything for certain, but the issue only cropped up when using a custom color mode, while the pre-defined standard and photo modes that correspond to sRGB and Adobe RGB worked perfectly well.

Lenovo's color modes on the X1 Yoga OLED are very ambitious, and it's possibly the best color system I've ever seen on a Windows device. While having system-wide color management is more optimal, Lenovo's software team has put a ton of effort into making software to ease the pains of lacking color management on Windows. Unfortunately, their hardware and product teams haven't gone to those same lengths by doing the per-unit calibration that is required to pull these features off. If you don't have a profile that perfectly characterizes the output of the display, you cannot hope to apply a transformation matrix to convert that display's output to another color space, especially aribitrary ones defined by the user. Lenovo's software team has put all the necessary building blocks in place to pull it off, and in the future the product team needs to follow through on their side by individually calibrating and profiling each display.

OLED Display Analysis: sRGB Analysis and Calibration Battery Life and Charge Time
Comments Locked

84 Comments

View All Comments

  • overzealot - Wednesday, October 5, 2016 - link

    Awesome, thanks Brett!
  • ikjadoon - Friday, September 30, 2016 - link

    I think there's a little error on battery capacity. IIRC, the OLED version actually uses a 56Wh battery, while the LCD uses 52Wh.

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-X1-Yo...

    So, then, the battery life for the OLED is actually even worse. :(
  • Lolimaster - Friday, September 30, 2016 - link

    Not even my 7 years old Cowon S9 pmp shows that type of ghosting on his amoled display (pretty much zero ghosting).
  • FXi - Saturday, October 1, 2016 - link

    Interesting cross product implications from this review. Btw a very detailed review which is needed in this new type of product, kudos for not just glossing through the details but taking it head on.
    I note that power draw (with light screens which we knew about but good to note) being so much higher may well be a challenge to Apple going OLED. That may well cause them to implement a dark interface.
    I bet Windows 10 with it's continuous approach to a dark interface may be ready for the move to OLED in more device types - though even using it you still had a severe drop in battery life.
    If the gamut (which is going to be a big deal moving forward a couple years as 4k content all goes to wide gamut) had been wide on the LCD too, it would have been a fairer contrast. Wide gamut backlights on LCD's draw more power so then the comparison would have been more like to like in capability.
    Often overlooked is that Nvidia (and possibly others but NV is the ones who discussed it) has for years made 10 bit wide gamut color accessible through DirectX which has supported wide gamut where the receiver (panel) could understand it. Now that would then need another culling of any actual games that have a wide gamut setting (even if invisible to the user) that activates on a wide gamut monitor, but be aware that taking advantage of wide gamut may not be restricted to just Adobe type programs. In fact the Nvidia driver has a checkbox for outputting 10 bit by force. This isn't color managed, but it begins to bridge the gap in the triple match you need of software/interface/hardware that would need to be aligned for high gamut impact.
    If you'd tried a 4k HDR stream play on these devices I suspect you'd be pretty impressed at the differences.
    Awesome job detecting the blur. That relates the the draw and hold driving of current panels that creates blur from the driving circuit in spite of OLED pixel draws. Yes it needs both hardware and driver level software to fix. Black frame insertion is the way to trick the brain and represents one first approach to curing this artifact. But it will come as no shock to you that the driver circuits in small devices are weak vs desktop or TV, but also that any special way of doing things now new to OLED and different from LCD is the weakest area of all. Very few houses make these kinds of chips needed for TV, fewer that can then be integrated for desktop and for mobile of laptop size, almost none. So it's going to take time and expansion of the entire market to drive new solutions as available.
    Well done :)
  • cditty - Tuesday, October 4, 2016 - link

    Easier for Apple to do OLED on the smaller screen. I'm really glad I read this article. The ghosting would have driven me crazy. I've used the FHD version of this laptop and liked it a lot (fingerprint login in particular). Makes sense to me why Apple is supposedly only using OLED on the Macbook Pro for a smaller touchpad. They won't trade off battery life. With processor and SSD technology constant now, it seems like the display (on a laptop) is the next battle point. I'm still relatively happy on a 5.5 inch phone with a 1080 screen. It's worth the extra battery life to me. A killer, accurate 1080 screen is better (to me) than a Q or UHD screen that kills the battery.

    I apologize for my 'all over the place' intermingling of phone and laptop discussion.
  • Erin Adreno - Sunday, October 2, 2016 - link

    The nvme ssd speed doesn't seem right. That speed should come from a 950 pro instead of pm951.
  • cptcolo - Saturday, November 12, 2016 - link

    I am pretty sure it is a PM961 not a PM951
  • cptcolo - Saturday, November 12, 2016 - link

    I took apart mine, it indeed has a Samsung PM961 1TB SSD. I ordered mine back in June 2016.
  • Ro_Ja - Monday, October 3, 2016 - link

    It's also a good thing this laptop has the RAM in dual-channel mode. It greatly affects performance for onboard GPUs.
  • amosbatto - Wednesday, October 5, 2016 - link

    Let's talk about the longevity of this device. How hard is it to open the case and replace the parts? You didn't even bother to mention in the review that the battery is sealed in the case, which is very important when it dies after 2 years of use. Is it soldered or glued inside, or is it designed to be replaced? Is the keyboard a user replaceable part? Is the RAM soldered on the motherboard? Does the SSD use a standard connector? This is the essential information that determines whether a laptop lasts 5 years or 2 years and it is never included in any review.

    I just bought a Thinkpad T450s and I replaced the screen and added more RAM. The lid of the T450s is too thin to protect the screen in a fall in my opinion. The case is extremely hard to open without a plastic spudger and I marred the plastic because I only had a flat-head screw driver. Reviews used to open up laptops, but now we seem to live in a world where every device is designed for planned obsolescence.

    These are important questions because the fabrication of a new laptop emits between 200 and 400 kg of CO2-equivalent. Between 60%-80% of the total energy of a laptop lies in its initial fabrication and the majority of its greenhouse gas emissions and other types of pollution are also caused by the fabrication. The best way to reduce the environmental impact is to use a device as long as possible and avoid new fabrication. I would appreciate reviews which at least give me some idea of the longevity of a device.

    Another think that I would appreciate is some mention of the environmental hazards of its contents. Does it use PVC plastic and phthalates? Does it contain brominated flame retardants in the casing and motherboard? Does the screen contain arsenic? Does the manufacturer have a take-back policy, so the device can be easily recycled? For me, these are far more important questions when I buy a laptop than whether this device scores 5% better on some CPU test. I will never notice the incremental difference in the speed of the CPU, but I care whether I am being exposed to chemicals that may effect my hormones and could give my child a birth defect. Why do review sites like Anandtech never talk about whether the power cord on a laptop contains phthalates or not?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now