Lenovo Yoga Pro 3

Associate
Joined
17 Apr 2007
Posts
423
Location
London
Hi,

I'm looking for a new laptop and wanted to get some views and opinions of the new Lenovo Yoga Pro 3.

I've read various reviews online and many have stated that the processor is not as good as the Lenovo Yoga Pro 2 and also, that the battery life is not great.

Based on these two points above, I find it hard to justify the expensive price tag of the Lenovo Yoga Pro 3.

I do love the design of the new laptop however, browsing the Internet using Chrome, watching HD Videos etc. should all run flawlessly although reviews say otherwise.

I did look at Microsoft Surface Pro 3 however, I wanted a proper keyboard.

I'm on the lookout for a 2 in 1 laptop (laptop & tablet) so am open to alternative recommendations (budget around ~£1000). I am not interested in a gaming laptop.

Please let me know your views and opinions.

Thanks.
 
The Yoga Pro 2 used an i7-4510U (http://ark.intel.com/products/81015/). These new ones use the Core M processors. The biggest change being the die shrink and huge reduction in TDP. So battery life should be considerably better on the Yoga 3. I'm assuming the Core M-70 that Lenovo is touting on the Yoga Pro 3 landing page will be the M-5Y70 (http://ark.intel.com/products/83612).

Honestly. I've never been a particular fan of Intel's attempts at extremely low powered processors. They simply didn't live up to all the hype they gave them. I remember when Atom was first announced it was going to be a break through in computing and the chips, while low powered, sucked. Performance was abysmal and the whole low power aspect went right out the window when north or south bridges where pulling two or three times as much juice as the CPU. The ultimate question was "what is the point".

They seem to be doing exactly the same thing with Core M and talking it up a lot. But, like has appeared in print, reviewers are mostly unimpressed with the performance so far. Though battery life should be much better considering TDP is down from just below 20watts to under 5w in some cases.
 
The Yoga Pro 2 used an i7-4510U (http://ark.intel.com/products/81015/). These new ones use the Core M processors. The biggest change being the die shrink and huge reduction in TDP. So battery life should be considerably better on the Yoga 3. I'm assuming the Core M-70 that Lenovo is touting on the Yoga Pro 3 landing page will be the M-5Y70 (http://ark.intel.com/products/83612).

Honestly. I've never been a particular fan of Intel's attempts at extremely low powered processors. They simply didn't live up to all the hype they gave them. I remember when Atom was first announced it was going to be a break through in computing and the chips, while low powered, sucked. Performance was abysmal and the whole low power aspect went right out the window when north or south bridges where pulling two or three times as much juice as the CPU. The ultimate question was "what is the point".

They seem to be doing exactly the same thing with Core M and talking it up a lot. But, like has appeared in print, reviewers are mostly unimpressed with the performance so far. Though battery life should be much better considering TDP is down from just below 20watts to under 5w in some cases.

Thanks for the feedback.

Would you recommend any alternative laptops (2 in 1) that I can look at? I'm not convinced I should spend over £1000 on a processor that lags when completing simple tasks such as browsing the Internet.
 
I have absolutely no hands on experience with 2 in 1s (only a few "regular" laptops with touch screens). I can wax lyrical about the particulars of certain bits of the hardware (like the CPUs), but that's about as far as I'll go in that regard. You're better off waiting for someone who has owned or currently owes such a device for better feedback from a "real world" end user scenario. They'll be able to provide better info in real world usage from how it handles media playback, to how the touch aspect of the devices function in real world use.
 
Does anyone's Yoga Pro 3 lag when viewing a 4K Video on YouTube?

Mine does however, is this normal? Is there a potential bottleneck on the laptop or can it be a range of other things?

Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom