Battery Life

With a similar display and a smaller battery, Lenovo will need to have upped their overall system efficiency to come close to the Yoga 2 Pro. The Yoga 3 Pro has a 44 Wh battery, as compared to a 55 Wh in the Yoga 2 Pro. Core M is certainly going to be more efficient than Haswell-U, but it is still a big ask to drop the battery size by 20% and keep the battery life the same. As we saw with the XPS 13, high resolution displays are a big hindrance to overall battery life.

To test battery life, we set all of the displays to 200 nits, and the laptop is set to power saving mode. Our light test consists of web browsing, and for our heavy test we ramp up the number of pages loaded, add in a 1 MB/s file download, and play a movie.

Battery Life 2013 - Light

The Yoga 3 Pro manages 30 additional minutes over the Yoga 2 Pro on our light test, which is more of a test of display efficiency than CPU, since the CPU is not being worked very hard. It may seem like a poor score, but due to the smaller battery size in the Yoga 3 Pro, it is certainly an improvement. It will not give you the all-day battery life of the XPS 13 though. With the same resolution display, the XPS 13 gets an additional two hours of battery life, but it also has a 52 Wh battery.

Battery Life 2013 - Heavy

On our heavy test, the Yoga 3 Pro drops behind the Yoga 2 Pro in battery life, and falls well short of other Ultrabooks. The XPS 13, with the same resolution display, manages just over an hour more battery life in this test. We also like to look at a normalized score which takes the battery size out of the equation so we can look at overall efficiency of the system.

Battery Life 2013 - Light Normalized

Battery Life 2013 - Heavy Normalized

Here we can see how much progress Lenovo has made over the Yoga 2 Pro. On our light workload, the Yoga 3 Pro is much more efficient than the Yoga 2 Pro, and comes close to the competition. The XPS 13 is still a bit more efficient though with the 3200x1800 resolution, which is the main power draw in this test. On the heavy score, Lenovo is once again quite a bit higher than the Yoga 2 Pro, and is inching in on the MacBook Air and XPS 13. They are not quite there though, which makes the smaller battery choice have an even greater impact on the overall battery life.

Battery Charge Time

One aspect of mobility is battery life, but charge time can also play a factor. The Yoga 2 Pro had a larger battery, and also came with a larger charger.

Battery Charge Time

The Yoga 3 Pro charges roughly the same as the Yoga 2 Pro. It would have been nice to see a faster charge rate here though due to the smaller battery size, but that is not the case.

The Yoga 3 Pro does not spend very much time hovering around 99% like some devices do, and the charge rate is very linear until over 80%.

Wi-Fi

One of the pain points on the Yoga 2 Pro was the included single band Wi-Fi card. The maximum connection speed on the Yoga 2 Pro was only 300 Mbps, and sustained transfers are much lower. Lenovo did replace the single band card with the Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260 later in the model run, which improved matters quite a bit. For the Yoga 3 Pro, they have switched to a Broadcom 802.11ac solution, which offers connection speeds up to 866 Mbps.

WiFi Performance - TCP

On a $1000+ device, the Yoga 2 Pro had unacceptable wireless performance, but the Yoga 3 Pro suffers no such indignities. The Broadcom 802.11ac solution is one of the fastest we have tested on various platforms, and here again performance is very good with over 500 Mbps transfer rates.

Speakers

Lenovo has upgraded the speakers in the Yoga 3 Pro as well. JBL now provides the two speakers, and they are powered by a 1.5 watt x 2 amplifier. In addition, they have implemented WAVES MaxxAudio, which switches the speaker profiles depending on which mode the device is in. The Speakers are down-firing when in laptop mode, but fire up in Stand Mode, so they have a different equalizer mode for each orientation.

I tested the dB output in all four modes. The loudest was in laptop mode, where I hit about 80 dB playing music with the meter 1 inch over the touchpad. This is not a very strong result, and I would classify the Yoga 3 Pro as a device which cannot fill a room with music. The next loudest was tablet mode, at 76 dB, followed by tent mode at 73 dB and stand mode at only 67 dB.

Looking at the frequency response of the Yoga 3 Pro, we have not the best result either. The push to make devices thinner and thinner means that there is not a lot of room for quality speakers. The Yoga 3 Pro has almost no response at all below 200 Hz, and really there is not much response at all below 400 Hz. As great as the design of the Yoga 3 Pro can be for media consumption, the speakers leave a lot to be desired.

Noise

Even though the Core M can be put in a completely fanless device, Lenovo has included a fan to keep the temperatures down. On balanced or power saver configurations, the fan is normally either off, or on very little. During workloads, the fan can kick in, and for the most part it is fairly quiet. It is certainly audible though. The noise floor in my room is 35 dB, and at low loads, the fan would kick on around 36.3 dB. Heavier workloads would ramp up to 37 dB. So it is not overly loud, but you can hear it.

Software

Due to recent events, included software needs to be brought up. The Yoga 3 Pro that was sent as a review sample did not have Superfish, and Lenovo has stopped installing it on new devices. This was a major blow against Lenovo’s reputation, but it also brought to light how much extra software is installed on PCs, and made people realise that they not only do not need it, but it can harm the experience, and possibly their system security.

The Yoga 3 Pro does come with quite a bit of extra software. Some of it, like the Harmony software, is kind of useful. Some people may also enjoy the trial version of McAfee. A lot of it is not very useful though, at least not for me. I can’t speak for everyone out there, because if I say software X is not useful, I am sure someone will disagree.

I am not here to defend Lenovo for Superfish. It was clearly a bad idea from the start, and I am sure there has been some fierce internal discussion within the company about how they even fell for it.

The only good thing to come out of Superfish was that it has woken the industry up, and they are taking action. Lenovo has stated that they are going to “significantly reduce preloaded applications” and they want to be the leader in cleaner PCs. They have stated that by the time Windows 10 is launched on Lenovo products, they will only include the OS, hardware drivers and software to power said hardware, security software, and Lenovo applications. This will be a good step, because it has become a big problem. Hopefully they will go far enough.

For those that are still wary, any PC purchased from a Microsoft Store will be a “Signature Edition” of that device, and all bloatware will not be installed.

GPU Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

113 Comments

View All Comments

  • sonicmerlin - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    The Apple A8X and Tegra K1 have faster GPUs than the Core M. You're paying a huge Intel premium for the faster CPUs.
  • ASEdouardD - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    I just saw and realized that. Pretty crazy when you think about it. The iPad is more powerful than the new Macbook.
  • arsjum - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    You mean GPU-wise? Then, yes. The dual-core CPU in Core M is 2 to 3 times more powerful than A8X's three cores.
  • ppi - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    For typical workload of tablets and ultrabooks (web, mail, light-to-mid office), CPU is more important than GPU.
  • Frenetic Pony - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    Yah, I'd wait for Skylake Core M to buy any device with it. Skylake apparently improves IPC, battery life, and comes with a completely overhauled GPU architecture. Right now Core M seems a bit underpowered for the devices carrying it.
  • ppi - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    Short bursts of activity are actually what you do with computer most of the time. Open document -> burst of activity. Open website -> burst. Swap application -> burst. Then reading, scrolling, editing is basically idle time for CPU waiting for user input.

    I am convinced 90%+ people in my company would be better served by Core-M system, rather than Broadwell-U, simply because they will hardly ever utilise the sustained Broadwell-U performance, but improved portability will make their life easier while travelling.

    Sure, there are types of tasks that need sustained performance, but then ultrabook is probably not a good answer either.

    Frankly, I was curious about feasibility of Core M until Apple introduced MacBook. As much as I dislike Apple, they never choose anything but top notch components. Core M however requires good passive cooling through chasis.

    Nevertheless, I was also disappointed with battery performance vs all but Yoga 2. I wonder why, could it be display?
  • tim851 - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    > I am convinced 90%+ people in my company would be better served by Core-M system, rather
    > than Broadwell-U

    Probably. The performance deficit of Core M gets exaggerated IMO. And that despite the well-established fact that the majority of use cases haven't needed a performance boost since forever.
    Web, office, music, video. Even most photoshopping or coding tasks can easily be done on a Core M. The 13" or less sized displays of ultrabooks will be more of a usability problem than CPU speed.

    > Nevertheless, I was also disappointed with battery performance vs all but Yoga 2. I wonder why,
    > could it be display?

    Considering the FHD XPS13 got 5.5 hours more battery life than the UHD model, I'd say: definitely.
  • mkozakewich - Saturday, March 14, 2015 - link

    The promise years ago was that we'd be able to attach some kind of cooling solution for turbo performance. It seems that world has come, but... without the cooling solutions? I've tossed my Stream 7 into a freezer for a few minutes to restore performance while playing a game. I've also got some aluminum foil under the cover to transfer the heat through that air gap.

    In short, someone needs to release some kind of Peltier mat that you can lay these kinds of devices on. Imagine a stand with an angled cool surface.
  • Thorburn - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    The N2840 isn't an Atom, its a Bay Trail based Celeron.
  • Thorburn - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    Also its TDP is 7.5W, it has an SDP of 4.5W.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now