The Dell Pro Precision 7 16 is the higher-end 16-inch mobile workstation in Dell’s current Pro Precision lineup. Our review unit is built around significantly more GPU power than the 5 16s Intel tested alongside it. It pairs a Series 3 Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, a 16-core Panther Lake processor with a 50 TOPS NPU, with NVIDIA RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell graphics and 12GB of GDDR7, 64GB of LPDDR5x at 8533 MT/s, and two 1TB Gen5 SSDs in RAID 0. The panel is a 16-inch UHD+ Tandem OLED with touch and a 120Hz variable refresh rate, running at 3840 x 2400. In testing, the discrete GPU rendered the Blender Monster scene at 1,555.53 samples per minute, roughly 2.7 times the integrated Arc Pro B390 in the 5 16s Intel, while the same configuration recorded the shortest battery runtime of any Pro Precision we have tested.

Compared with the Pro Precision 5 16s Intel, the 7 16 trades some portability and battery life for substantially more GPU performance and a higher-end feature set. Our configuration adds the RTX PRO 3000, a 96Wh battery, a 165 W adapter, a second Gen5 drive bay, and two Thunderbolt 5 ports alongside Thunderbolt 4. It is a better fit for engineers, designers, visualization specialists, video professionals, and other users whose applications benefit from dedicated NVIDIA graphics. The 7 16 also features a large haptic trackpad, which immediately differentiates the keyboard deck from the 5 16s.

The RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell is the mobile professional card in the NVIDIA Blackwell generation, with 12GB of GDDR7 and certified drivers for professional applications. Combined with the 50 TOPS NPU in the Core Ultra 9 386H, the system can run local AI work across the CPU, the discrete GPU, or the dedicated accelerator, and our Procyon testing covers all three paths. Coverage also includes professional graphics, rendering, content creation, storage, and battery.

The Dell Pro Precision 7 16 starts at $3,293, while the hardware in our review unit costs approximately $8,245. Dell’s public configurator does not currently allow us to reproduce the two-drive Gen5 RAID 0 configuration exactly, even though the otherwise equivalent single-drive configuration is priced at $7,795 in our brief. Applying the same $440 price difference for the second Gen5 SSD brings the as-shipped equivalent to that figure. Commercial buyers may see different pricing through account agreements and volume purchases, so Dell.com’s single-unit pricing is best used as a reference. The system is now available on the Dell Pro Precision 7 Series 16 product page.

Dell Pro Precision 7 16 Specifications

Specification	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (PW716260)
Model	Dell Pro Precision 7 Series 16 (PW716260)
Processor	Intel Core Ultra 9 386H vPro Enterprise (Series 3), 16 cores / 16 threads, up to 4.9GHz, 50 TOPS NPU
Graphics	NVIDIA RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell, 12GB GDDR7
Memory	64GB LPDDR5x, 8533 MT/s, dual-channel, onboard, non-ECC
Storage	Two 1TB Gen5 SED-ready SSDs in RAID 0
Display	16″ UHD+ Tandem OLED 3840 x 2400, touch, 120Hz VRR, 500 nits, 100% DCI-P3, VESA DisplayHDR True Black 1000, anti-reflection
Camera	8MP HDR RGB + IR with User Presence Detection and ExpressSign-In
Wireless	Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211 2×2, Bluetooth 6.0
Keyboard	Zero-lattice spill-resistant with mini-LED backlighting
Security	TPM 2.0, FIPS 140-3, TCG certified, post-quantum cryptography, chassis intrusion detection, SED storage, Windows Hello facial recognition
Battery	6-cell, 96Wh Long Life Cycle
Power	165W USB-C AC adapter
Ports	Two Thunderbolt 5, one Thunderbolt 4, HDMI 2.1, headset, SD card slot
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro, Copilot+ PC
Chassis	Aluminum and magnesium, Magnetite
Systems Management	Intel vPro Enterprise
Certifications	ENERGY STAR, EPEAT Gold with Climate+, TCO Certified
Warranty	36 months ProSupport Next Business Day Onsite Service after Remote Diagnosis
Price	$3,293 base / approximately $8,245 as shipped

Build and Design

The Dell Pro Precision 7 16 has a noticeably more substantial design than the 5 Series models, featuring aluminum and magnesium construction with Dell’s dark Magnetite finish. Our configuration remains fairly portable for a 16-inch workstation with RTX PRO 3000 graphics and a 96Wh battery, with Dell listing a starting weight of 4.78 lb. The OLED configuration measures 13.93 x 9.46 inches and ranges from 0.80 to 0.83 inches thick. Next to the Pro Precision 5 16s, the differences are easy to see: the 7 16 drops the numeric keypad in favor of a centered keyboard, a large haptic trackpad, and speaker grilles running along both sides of the deck.

The keyboard uses Dell’s zero-lattice design with mini-LED backlighting, and the centered layout makes good use of the wider 16-inch chassis. Removing the numeric keypad gives the main keyboard and trackpad a more symmetrical position in front of the display, while the large speaker grilles fill the space along either side. Dell uses two 2.5W woofers and two 2.5W tweeters for a total peak output of 10W, a much larger audio configuration than the basic stereo setup in the 5 16s. The keyboard also includes the dedicated Copilot key used across Dell’s current commercial lineup.

Below the keyboard is one of the Pro Precision 7 16’s more distinctive features: a large haptic trackpad that takes up a substantial portion of the palm rest. Instead of using the hinged mechanism found in a conventional trackpad, the click response is generated electronically, allowing the surface to provide a similar click response across a much larger area. Combined with the centered keyboard layout, it gives the 7 16 a noticeably different feel from the Pro Precision 5 systems we have been testing.

Dell equips the Precision 7 16 with an 8MP HDR RGB and IR camera above the display, with User Presence Detection and ExpressSign-In available for automatic Windows locking and sign-in behavior. The camera supports Windows Hello facial recognition and is paired with dual-array microphones, although this camera configuration does not include a physical privacy shutter.

The 16-inch Tandem OLED display is a substantial upgrade over the IPS panels used in the Pro Precision 5 systems, particularly for creators and other users working with high-resolution visual content. Our configuration has a 3840 x 2400 resolution, 120Hz variable refresh rate, 500-nit brightness, 100% DCI-P3 coverage, anti-reflection treatment, and VESA DisplayHDR True Black 1000 certification. The combination of 4K-class resolution and a 16:10 aspect ratio gives applications a large working area, while the 120Hz refresh rate makes scrolling, window movement, and cursor motion noticeably smoother than on a conventional 60Hz workstation panel. OLED also delivers very deep blacks and strong contrast, which is useful when working with HDR media, photography, and other color-sensitive content.

Our OLED configuration also supports touch, which works particularly well on a display this large for quick navigation, selecting items, or moving through visual content. The conventional clamshell hinge limits the system’s usefulness for extended pen-style input compared with a convertible, since the display cannot fold flat against the keyboard. For occasional direct interaction, however, having touch available on a 16-inch workstation panel is a useful addition, especially with the high-resolution OLED display.

For I/O and connectivity, the right side has a full-size SD card slot, one Thunderbolt 4 USB-C port, the 3.5mm headset connection, and a wedge-shaped lock slot. Having two Thunderbolt 5 ports plus a third Thunderbolt 4 connection gives the 7 16 an unusually strong USB-C layout, although Dell leaves out both USB-A and built-in Ethernet. So, users working with older USB peripherals or wired networks will need an adapter or dock, which is an important difference from the Pro Precision 5 16s and its wider selection of legacy ports.

Moving over to the left side, you’ll see that connectivity is heavily centered on Thunderbolt, with HDMI 2.1 alongside two Thunderbolt 5 USB-C ports. Those Thunderbolt 5 connections support Power Delivery and DisplayPort 2.1, with bandwidth reaching up to 120 Gbps for supported devices, giving the 7 16 a lot more external I/O bandwidth for fast storage, docks, and high-resolution displays. The two ports are positioned beside the HDMI connection, keeping most desk-oriented display and docking cables together on the same side.

The underside of the Pro Precision 7 16 features a broad two-row intake grille that feeds the dual-fan cooling system directly above it. The long, narrow rubber feet maintain clearance beneath the chassis for airflow, while the rear edge provides additional space for the cooling system to exhaust heat behind the display. Dell keeps access to the internals relatively simple, with the entire bottom panel secured by just four T5 screws. Once those are removed, the cover can be released from the recesses near the hinges and lifted away.

Here, there is direct access to the 96Wh battery, both SSD positions, and the dual-fan cooling system. Our configuration uses two 1TB Gen5 SSDs in RAID 0, with SSD1 and SSD2 in separate positions on opposite sides of the motherboard. Dell classifies the battery, SSDs, cooling fans, wireless card, and speaker assembly as customer-replaceable components, while hardware such as the heatsink, I/O boards, display assembly, touchpad, and keyboard assembly is intended for technician service. The 64GB of LPDDR5x memory is integrated into the system board, so the memory capacity must be selected when the system is ordered.

The Pro Precision 7 16 uses a much beefier cooling setup than the single-fan design in the 5 16s, which is appropriate given the RTX PRO 3000 and higher power demands. Two large fans fill the rear corners and work with a wide thermal assembly covering the CPU and GPU, with hot air exhausted out the back of the chassis. Both SSDs are positioned outside that central cooling area and have their own covers, so either drive is easy to reach once the bottom panel is off. The large 96Wh battery takes up most of the lower half, but Dell still leaves the storage, cooling system, and other serviceable components easily accessible.

Dell Pro Precision 7 16 Performance

Our review unit runs the Core Ultra 9 386H with NVIDIA RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell graphics, 64GB of LPDDR5x at 8533 MT/s, and two 1TB Gen5 SSDs in RAID 0 on Windows 11 Pro, with benchmarks tested on the Best Performance power mode. For battery life testing, we configure systems into Balanced power mode and set the screen brightness to 50%.

For comparables, we included the Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc Pro B390, 64GB), the Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, Radeon 890M, 64GB), and the Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (Core Ultra 7 366H, RTX PRO 1000, 64GB) as the external workstation reference.

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. The overall score is supported by the Essentials, Productivity, and Digital Content Creation subscores, which indicate where a system’s strengths lie. Higher scores are better.

PCMark 10	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Overall Score	8,901	9,994	8,627	9,083
Essentials	9,671	12,106	10,744	10,686
Productivity	16,381	15,505	14,574	16,501
Digital Content Creation	12,081	14,433	11,127	11,534

 

PCMark 10 was one of the weaker results for the Pro Precision 7 16, with an overall score of 8,901, trailing both the 5 16s Intel and the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7. Essentials came in at 9,671, the lowest result of the four systems, while Productivity was much closer at 16,381 compared with 16,501 for the ThinkPad. These general productivity workloads do not take full advantage of the RTX PRO 3000, which becomes much more important in the GPU-focused tests later on.

PCMark 10 Modern Office Battery

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point, in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness. This is a rundown of the whole system rather than a synthetic idle drain, so it tracks closely with what a full day of productivity work does to the battery. Longer runtimes are better.

Modern Office Battery	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Runtime (higher is better)	11 hours 43 minutes	24 hours 43 minutes	15 hours 5 minutes	15 hours 52 minutes

 

This is the bill for the configuration. Eleven hours and 43 minutes is the shortest run of any Pro Precision we have tested, less than half the 24 hours and 43 minutes the 5 16s Intel manages, and that is with a 96Wh pack against the 5 series 70Wh. A discrete GPU, a 4K OLED at 120Hz, and two Gen5 drives all draw power from the same battery. It still clears a working day, but all-day-and-then-some belongs to the 5 series.

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads, plus GPU compute scores through OpenCL and Vulkan. Higher scores are better. Our review unit’s CPU run was flagged as invalid by the benchmark’s tamper detection. We reviewed it and treated the flag as a false positive, so the scores are included below.

Geekbench 6	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	2,915	2,969	2,854	2,808
CPU Multi-Core	17,280	17,401	14,169	16,319
GPU OpenCL	131,492	57,998	37,520	87,537
GPU Vulkan	104,344	63,015	53,969	73,204

 

The two Intel Precisions are effectively tied on CPU, with the 5 16s Intel a fraction ahead at 2,969 and 17,401 against 2,915 and 17,280. Everything that separates them is on the GPU side, where the RTX PRO 3000 returns 131,492 in OpenCL, 2.3 times the Arc Pro B390 and 50% clear of the RTX PRO 1000 in the ThinkPad.

Geekbench 7

Geekbench 7 joins the suite alongside Geekbench 6 as comparison data builds. Its CPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 2,500, set by the AMD Ryzen 7700, while GPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 100,000, set by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Higher scores are better, and double the score indicates double the performance. Because Geekbench 7 uses new workloads and new baselines, its scores are not comparable to Geekbench 6 results.

Geekbench 7	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	2,652	2,733	2,659	2,533
CPU Multi-Core	18,648	18,965	16,641	17,651
GPU OpenCL	96,919	54,247	31,874	75,340
GPU Vulkan	104,229	47,436	*	70,067
GPU CUDA	174,559	N/A	N/A	114,469

 

Geekbench 7 repeats the pattern. The 386H trails its own 5 16s sibling slightly on both CPU metrics, then leads every GPU metric, topping out at 174,559 in CUDA against 114,469 for the RTX PRO 1000. Neither integrated system can run CUDA at all, which is the practical argument for the card.

Cinebench 2026

Cinebench 2026 is the current release in the Cinebench line and the only version we report. It tests CPU and GPU performance using Maxon’s Redshift render engine. It is built on the latest Cinema 4D 2026 code and is designed to show whether a machine is stable under high CPU load, whether a notebook’s cooling can sustain longer render tasks, and how it handles demanding real-world 3D work. Because code and compiler changes accelerated scene rendering, Cinebench 2026 scores use an adjusted range and should not be compared to scores from previous Cinebench versions. Its GPU test supports current NVIDIA and AMD hardware but does not yet run on Intel integrated graphics, and our review unit’s CPU results were confirmed by a repeat run.

Cinebench 2026	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU Single Thread	518	535	471	502
CPU Multiple Threads	3,873	4,618	4,767	4,492
GPU	51,517	N/A	5,667	34,437

 

The GPU result is the headline here: 51,517 for the Radeon 890M versus 5,667, with the Arc Pro B390 unable to run the test. The CPU side is less flattering. Single thread at 518 sits mid-pack, and the multi-thread 3,873 is the lowest of the four, 16% behind the 5 16s Intel on a comparable 16-core, 16-thread part. We repeated the run and reproduced the same figure.

7-Zip Compression

The built-in 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads, run with a 128MB dictionary across ten passes. Decompression tends to scale with thread count while compression leans on memory latency, so the two halves often tell different stories. Higher GIPS scores are better.

7-Zip 24.09 (GIPS)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Compressing	96.202	96.281	85.627	90.364
Decompressing	95.896	97.246	117.863	90.526
Total Rating	96.049	96.764	101.745	90.445

 

Compression was essentially tied between the two Intel Precisions, with the 7 16 scoring 96.202 GIPS compared with 96.281 GIPS from the 5 16s Intel. Decompression favors the 24-thread AMD system, which reached 117.863 GIPS and finished with the highest total rating at 101.745. The 7 16 placed second overall at 96.049, ahead of the ThinkPad but behind both the 5 16s Intel and AMD systems in total performance.

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of digits of Pi, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory subsystem. At the same time, the BBP runs to extract hexadecimal digits of Pi. Results are in seconds, so lower times are better. The AMD unit could not complete the 5-billion- and 10-billion-digit runs because its memory reservation for the integrated GPU reduces the available pool below the amount required for those sizes.

y-cruncher (seconds, lower is better)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Pi 1B	31.557	26.422	22.840	26.685
Pi 2.5B	101.524	80.463	64.242	76.787
Pi 5B	226.255	183.822	N/A	172.994
Pi 10B	500.875	407.658	N/A	392.083
Pi BBP 1B	1.639	1.635	1.100	1.621
Pi BBP 10B	21.512	19.036	12.277	18.200
Pi BBP 100B	291.628	234.797	140.284	219.969

 

y-cruncher is the clearest CPU loss in the review. The 7 16 is the slowest of the four on every computation, taking 500.875 seconds at Pi 10B, compared with 392.083 for the ThinkPad and 407.658 for the 5 16s Intel, and the BBP runs repeat it exactly. There is no GPU component here, so the discrete card contributes nothing, and the sustained-clock behavior is left exposed.

Blender

The Blender benchmark measures rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better. We test on both the CPU and GPU. Scores are not comparable across Blender versions, so we have trimmed the older releases from the suite and report the current Blender 5.2 results here. The GPU figures represent each system’s fastest renderer: the discrete card on the two NVIDIA systems and the integrated GPU on the 5 16s pair.

Blender 5.2 (samples/min)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
GPU
Monster	1,555.53	572.84	123.00	922.95
Junkshop	1,257.01	468.85	101.21	795.65
Classroom	1,000.62	420.48	82.84	625.62
CPU
Monster	137.49	138.88	130.86	131.08
Junkshop	101.34	94.97	99.74	97.76
Classroom	69.26	65.39	74.18	68.45

 

This is what the card is for. The RTX PRO 3000 renders Monster at 1,555.53 samples per minute, 2.7 times the Arc Pro B390 and 69% ahead of the RTX PRO 1000, and the margin holds across Junkshop and Classroom. CPU rendering is a different picture, with all four within a few percent of each other; the 7 16 takes Junkshop at 101.34 and loses to the 24-thread AMD part in Classroom.

LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL, based on LuxCoreRender. We run the Food and Hall scenes on all available OpenCL devices in each system, so single-GPU systems are scored on that GPU while the dual-GPU systems render on the discrete and integrated GPUs together, as noted in the column headers. Higher scores are better.

LuxMark v4	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000 + iGPU)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000 + iGPU)
Hall	19,300	3,505	2,058	11,342
Food	7,624	1,713	1,034	4,103

 

LuxMark scales the same way. Hall at 19,300 is 5.5 times the Arc Pro B390 and 70% ahead of the ThinkPad, and Food widens that to 4.5 times and 86%. These are the margins that justify the chassis for anyone running OpenCL renderers.

V-Ray

Chaos V-Ray measures ray-traced rendering throughput, reported in vpaths, where higher is better. We run the CUDA-compatible engine on every system so results remain comparable to notebooks with only integrated graphics; on systems without a discrete GPU, that path executes on the integrated graphics, even though V-Ray reports the processor name in its device field. On dedicated NVIDIA hardware, we also capture V-Ray’s RTX engine, which engages the card’s ray tracing cores and is reported separately.

V-Ray GPU (vpaths)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CUDA Engine	2,469	946	1,039	1,568
RTX Engine	3,891	N/A	N/A	2,589

 

V-Ray shows a significant advantage for the two systems with dedicated NVIDIA graphics, especially when the RTX engine is used. The Pro Precision 7 16 reached 3,891 vpaths in the RTX test, compared with 2,589 for the RTX PRO 1000, while its CUDA result of 2,469 was 57% higher than that of the ThinkPad. The integrated systems can use only the CUDA path here, with both finishing at less than half of the 7 16’s score.

3DMark CPU Profile

The 3DMark CPU Profile benchmark measures CPU performance at fixed thread counts, from a single thread up to the maximum available, showing how performance scales as more cores are engaged. Higher scores are better.

3DMark CPU Profile	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Max Threads	10,557	10,748	9,267	10,500
8 Threads	5,996	6,818	6,573	6,550
4 Threads	4,261	4,483	4,238	4,219
1 Thread	1,185	1,210	1,178	1,165

 

The three Intel systems finish within about 2% of each other at max threads, with the 7 16 second at 10,557. The eight-thread result is the outlier, with 5,996 the lowest in the group by a clear margin, even behind the ThinkPad. Single-thread is a four-way tie inside 4%.

3DMark Storage and Blackmagic Disk Speed Test

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files. Higher is better in both.

Storage	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
3DMark Storage	2,189	2,804	2,325	3,094
Blackmagic Write (MB/s)	7,387.8	7,660.2	5,070.5	8,262.3
Blackmagic Read (MB/s)	6,776.2	8,418.1	5,071.2	8,511.5

 

On paper, the RAID 0 array does not deliver what the configuration implies. 3DMark Storage returns 2,189, the lowest of the four comparison systems and well behind the ThinkPad’s single drive at 3,094, and SPECworkstation independently puts Storage at 1.30, second lowest. The sequential numbers are healthier in absolute terms, with Blackmagic writes of 7,387.8 MB/s and reads of 6,776.2 MB/s, though both still trail the single-drive 5 16s Intel and ThinkPad. Those results are consistent with how striping behaves rather than a sign of a faulty array. Lightly threaded storage tests split a single queue across two drives, which adds overhead without adding parallelism, and RAID 0’s benefits only appear as demand climbs. We verified that the array is configured and performing as intended.

As always, we tested the system as it shipped, and this one shipped in RAID 0, which is a somewhat unusual factory choice. Buyers are not locked into it. The two Gen5 drives can be split into separate OS and data volumes, mirrored in RAID 1 for redundancy, or simply run as independent drives, and several of those layouts may net better storage performance in scenarios like the ones tested here. The catch is that moving away from the factory RAID 0 means reinstalling the operating system, so the storage layout is worth deciding at deployment time rather than after the machine is in service.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test

The Blackmagic RAW Speed Test measures how many frames per second a system can decode Blackmagic RAW video on the CPU and on the GPU. We quote the 8K results at 12:1 compression, and higher is better.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
8K 12:1 CPU (fps)	77	77	74	77
8K 12:1 GPU (fps)	137	87	49	96

 

CPU decode is identical across the three Intel systems at 77fps. The GPU path is where the card shows up, reaching 137fps, 57% ahead of the Arc Pro B390 and 43% ahead of the RTX PRO 1000.

Topaz Video AI

The Topaz Video AI benchmark measures AI video upscaling and frame-interpolation performance in frames per second across the application’s enhancement models, run here at 1080p input, where higher is better. The 16X Slowmo Aion model failed to complete on our review unit and on the 5 16s Intel, while the 5 16s AMD ran it without issue.

Topaz Video AI (fps)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Artemis 1X / 2X / 4X	12.38 / 8.94 / 3.15	6.24 / 5.21 / 1.90	3.72 / 2.21 / 0.78	5.17 / 3.19 / 1.12
Iris 1X / 2X / 4X	13.06 / 7.49 / 2.32	5.29 / 3.19 / 0.96	4.91 / 2.72 / 0.92	5.91 / 3.12 / 1.01
Proteus 1X / 2X / 4X	12.06 / 8.60 / 2.66	6.45 / 6.09 / 2.47	3.99 / 2.70 / 1.18	4.78 / 3.14 / 1.05
Gaia 1X / 2X / 4X	3.73 / 2.66 / 2.02	3.30 / 2.26 / 1.51	1.87 / 1.34 / 0.96	1.62 / 1.13 / 0.79
Nyx 1X / 2X	3.59 / 3.08	1.56 / 1.57	1.87 / 1.53	2.40 / 2.09
Hyperion HDR 1X	15.58	3.23	11.48	14.56
4X Slowmo Apollo / APFast	18.04 / 30.60	8.48 / 22.00	6.08 / 17.59	10.39 / 29.94
16X Slowmo Aion	DNF	DNF	9.05	N/A

 

The 7 16 leads every model it completed, roughly doubling the 5 16s Intel on Artemis and Iris and better than doubling the ThinkPad. The one gap in the row is the 16X Slowmo Aion model, which did not finish (the same failure we recorded on the 5 16s Intel).

UL Procyon AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines LLM performance testing by providing a concise, consistent evaluation method. It enables repeated testing across four local models (Phi, Mistral, Llama3, and Llama2) while minimizing the complexity of large models and the number of variables. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators to deliver more reliable, efficient performance assessments. All four systems ran the models through ONNX Runtime with DirectML on their GPUs.

Procyon AI Text Generation	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Phi	2,244	893	434	1,618
Mistral	2,062	646	403	1,397
Llama3	1,859	669	357	1,252
Llama2	1,990	750	390	DNF

 

Local LLM inference is the widest AI margin in the review. The 7 16 leads every model, 2,244 on Phi against 893 for the Arc Pro B390, and it still holds a 39% lead over the ThinkPad on the same test. The ThinkPad did not complete Llama2.

UL Procyon AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of neural networks, evaluating tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution with models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. The WinML runs use float32 on CPU and GPU, giving a like-for-like view across vendors. We also run the newer Computer Vision 2 suite through each vendor’s native path: OpenVINO in int8 on the Intel NPUs and fp16 on their iGPUs, TensorRT in fp16 on the RTX PRO 3000, and Ryzen AI on the AMD NPU; those results are listed separately since precision and runtime differ by platform. Higher scores are better.

Procyon AI Computer Vision (WinML)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU	122	143	114	134
GPU	553	410	245	426

 

Procyon AI Computer Vision 2 (native runtimes)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD
NPU (int8)	1,614	1,630	1,189
iGPU (fp16)	837	1,529	N/A
dGPU (TensorRT fp16)	3,470	N/A	N/A

 

The WinML float32 path puts the 7 16 last on CPU at 122 and first on GPU at 553, 35% ahead of the Arc Pro B390 and 30% ahead of the ThinkPad. Running each vendor native runtime instead, the discrete card more than doubles anything the integrated silicon manages at 3,470 through TensorRT. The NPU result of 1,614 is a virtual tie with the 5 16s Intel, which is expected since both use the same 50 TOPS engine, and the 837 on integrated graphics reflects the smaller iGPU in the 386H rather than the Arc Pro B390.

UL Procyon AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent method for measuring AI inference performance from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs, with three tests: Stable Diffusion XL FP16 for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 FP16 for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 INT8 for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference path for each platform: OpenVINO on Intel systems, the AMD-optimized DirectML pipeline on Radeon GPUs, and TensorRT on NVIDIA GPUs. The INT8 test uses Intel’s quantized SD 1.5 model where supported; the AMD pipeline does not offer a comparable quantized run. Our review unit runs this suite through TensorRT on the RTX PRO 3000. New with this round, we also ran the INT8 workload on the Intel NPU.

Procyon AI Image Generation	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
SD 1.5 FP16	1,424	638	316	943
SD 1.5 INT8	17,287	7,778	2,855	12,403
SDXL FP16	1,273	738	200	765
SD 1.5 INT8 NPU	2,870	2,881	N/A	N/A

 

TensorRT leads every row. The INT8 workload returns 17,287 against 12,403 for the ThinkPad and 7,778 for the Arc Pro B390, and SDXL comes in at 1,273, where the two integrated systems sit at 738 and 200. The NPU score of 2,870 is effectively identical to the 5 16s Intel score of 2,881, again, the same Intel accelerator doing the same work.

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets derived from professional applications in CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization. Our review unit ran the suite at its native 4K and produced scores in all 11 viewsets. The comparison systems ran at 1080p, which is not comparable to a 4K run, so this table includes only the review unit.

SPECviewperf 15 (4K)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)
3dsmax-08	32.38
blender-01	30.20
catia-07	42.71
creo-04	114.70
energy-04	26.28
enscape-01	11.65
maya-07	71.18
medical-04	50.48
snx-05	82.27
solidworks-08	63.99
unreal_engine-01	50.42

 

Run at the panel native 4K, the 7 16 completed all 11 viewsets. creo-04 at 114.70 and snx-05 at 82.27 are the strongest results, and enscape-01 at 11.65 is the weakest. Because the comparison systems ran these viewsets at 1080p, these figures should not be read against the other tables in this review.

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads, using real applications grouped into seven industry verticals. Higher scores are better, and N/A means the system did not complete every workload required for that category. The standalone 7-Zip workload inside SPECworkstation failed on our review unit and on the 5 16s AMD, which suppresses the CPU subsystem and Productivity and Development scores for both; reruns reproduced the same failure on each, and our separate 7-Zip section above covers that ground.

SPECworkstation 4	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Hardware Subsystems
Graphics	6.54	2.67	2.65	4.51
Accelerator	3.88	2.25	2.31	3.26
Storage	1.30	1.80	1.00	1.67
CPU	N/A	1.34	N/A	1.35
Industry Verticals
AI & Machine Learning	1.76	1.47	1.45	1.65
Energy	1.87	1.55	1.38	1.69
Financial Services	1.03	0.94	1.29	0.96
Life Sciences	2.03	1.84	1.47	1.82
Media & Entertainment	1.87	1.60	1.48	1.81
Product Design	1.87	1.75	1.41	1.89
Productivity & Development	N/A	1.35	N/A	1.34

 

The Graphics subsystem score of 6.54 is 2.4 times that of the integrated system and 45% higher than the ThinkPad, while the 7 16 leads four of the six industry verticals it completed. Product Design goes to the ThinkPad by a narrow 1.89 to 1.87 margin, while the AMD system leads Financial Services. The CPU and Productivity and Development scores are N/A because the standalone 7-Zip workload failed, the same failure recorded on the 5 16s AMD. Storage finished at 1.30, the second-lowest result of the group, which also follows the relatively weak storage performance recorded in 3DMark Storage.

Conclusion

The Dell Pro Precision 7 16 is built around a very different set of priorities than the Pro Precision 5 16s Intel, and the RTX PRO 3000 is the reason to spend the extra money. GPU rendering was where the gap became especially large, with the 7 16 producing 1,555.53 samples per minute in Blender Monster compared with 572.84 from the Arc Pro B390, with similarly large gains in Junkshop and Classroom. V-Ray, local AI text generation, Topaz Video AI, and Blackmagic RAW also benefited heavily from the discrete GPU, including 137 fps in the BRAW GPU test compared with 87 fps from the 5 16s Intel. CPU performance does not provide the same advantage; however, the less expensive 5 16s Intel was as fast or faster in several processor-heavy tests, including Geekbench, Cinebench, and y-cruncher.

The additional hardware also comes with a substantial battery penalty, even with the 7 16 carrying a much larger 96Wh brick. Its 11 hours and 43 minutes in the Modern Office test is less than half the 24 hours and 43 minutes delivered by the 5 16s Intel, which is a major difference for anyone regularly working away from a desk. There are some excellent upgrades beyond the RTX PRO 3000, including the 3840 x 2400 Tandem OLED with 120Hz VRR, the large haptic trackpad, two Thunderbolt 5 ports, a full-size SD card reader, and room for two Gen5 SSDs. Dell also keeps the battery, SSDs, and cooling fans accessible once the bottom cover is removed, although the 64GB of LPDDR5x memory is soldered and cannot be upgraded later. Our RAID 0 configuration was also light in storage testing, as the two Gen5 drives did not outperform the single-drive systems, contrary to what their configuration would suggest.

Pricing ultimately makes the choice between these two systems fairly easy. Our exact dual-drive configuration works out to approximately $8,245 based on the hardware Dell shipped, putting the 7 16 roughly $1,900 to $2,300 above the 5 16s Intel, depending on how the configurations are compared. Engineers, 3D artists, visualization professionals, video editors, and users running GPU-accelerated local AI workloads can see enormous performance gains from the RTX PRO 3000, and those workloads give the added cost a valuable purpose. Users spending most of their time in CPU-heavy applications, development work, office workloads, or anything that does not benefit substantially from NVIDIA graphics should look closely at the 5 16s Intel instead. It offers similar or better CPU performance, more than twice the battery life, and a considerably lower price, while the Pro Precision 7 16 earns its premium specifically for users who can put its much faster GPU to work.

For configuration options and current pricing, visit the Dell Pro Precision 7 Series 16 product page.

Leaderboard: The Dell Pro Precision 7 16 Intel ranks #19 on our Laptop Battery Life Leaderboard and appears in the field on our Best Mobile Workstations and Best Laptops for Local AI pages.

The post Dell Pro Precision 7 16 Intel Review: RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell in a Tandem OLED Workstation appeared first on StorageReview.com.

The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD is the Ryzen half of Dell’s newest 14-inch mobile workstation. Our review unit runs the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, a 12-core, 24-thread processor with a 60 TOPS NPU, alongside Radeon 890M integrated graphics, 64GB of LPDDR5x memory, a 1TB Gen4 SSD, and a 14-inch QHD+ display running at 120Hz. It is the same chassis Dell sells with Intel silicon, but the two configurations diverge more than the shared shell suggests.

The headline for this one is threads. Where most 14-inch workstations in this class ship 16 cores without simultaneous multithreading, the HX PRO 475 brings 24 threads to bear, and it shows up everywhere rendering and compression workloads scale. The panel is the other differentiator: this configuration gets a 2560 x 1600 120Hz screen, whereas the Intel build we tested shipped a 1920 x 1200 panel with no high-refresh option listed.

The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD starts at $2,253, and our review configuration prices out at $5,404 as a single-unit purchase on Dell.com, with the 16GB to 64GB LPDDR5x jump being the largest line item at $1,700. As with all commercial systems, most business buyers purchase through an account team at volume discounts, so the web price is best viewed as a reference ceiling rather than a typical fleet cost. The system is available now on the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 14S product page.

Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD Specifications

Specification	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (PW514265)
Processor	AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 (12 cores/24 threads, up to 5.2GHz, 36MB cache, 60 TOPS NPU)
Graphics	AMD Radeon 890M (integrated)
Memory	64GB LPDDR5x, 8533 MT/s rated, dual-channel, non-ECC
Storage	1TB SSD, PCIe Gen4
Display	14-inch QHD+/WQXGA (2560 x 1600), non-touch, 120Hz, 500 nits, IPS, 100% sRGB, ComfortView Plus, anti-glare
Camera	8MP HDR RGB + IR with User Presence Detection
Wireless	MediaTek Wi-Fi 7 MT7925, Bluetooth 5.4
Keyboard	English US mini-LED backlit with Copilot key
Security	Fingerprint reader, smart card reader, ControlVault 3+, TPM 2.0, FIPS 140-3 certified, post-quantum cryptography, chassis intrusion detection
Battery	3-cell, 70Wh Long Lifecycle, ExpressCharge and ExpressCharge Boost
Power	100W USB-C adapter
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro (Copilot+ PC)
Chassis	Aluminum alloy
Certifications	ENERGY STAR, EPEAT Gold with Climate+
Warranty	36 months Basic Onsite Service after Remote Diagnosis
Price	$2,253 starting; $5,404 as tested (Dell.com single-unit)

Build and Design

The Dell Pro 5 14 AMD arrives in a dark gray aluminum-alloy chassis with a sleek matte finish and a subtle Dell logo centered on the lid. Measuring just 0.75 inches thick and weighing approximately 3.08 pounds, it offers a portable design without sacrificing performance. Processor options range from the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO to the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO, paired with integrated AMD Radeon 840M through 890M graphics, depending on the configuration. Our review unit features the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 processor with integrated Radeon 890M graphics.

The unit features a 14-inch non-touch QHD+ IPS display with a 120Hz refresh rate and a rated 35ms response time. Its 500-nit brightness and anti-glare finish produce a bright, easily visible image under a variety of lighting conditions, while 100% sRGB coverage provides vibrant and accurate colors. AMD FreeSync support helps deliver smoother motion, and Dell ComfortView Plus reduces potentially harmful blue-light emissions without significantly affecting color accuracy.

The keyboard deck features a mini-LED backlit keyboard with a dedicated Copilot key. As expected for a compact 14-inch system, there is no numeric keypad, leaving enough room for a comfortable, well-spaced layout. A square power button with an integrated fingerprint reader sits at the upper-right corner, providing convenient biometric authentication.

Below the keyboard is a large, centered glass touchpad that offers plenty of room for navigation and multitouch gestures.

The right side of the Dell Pro 5 includes a 1GbE RJ-45 port, a USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A port, and a universal audio jack. It also features a wedge-shaped lock slot for physically securing the laptop, along with optional eSIM support for mobile broadband connectivity.

The left side provides the remainder of the laptop’s connectivity, including two Thunderbolt 4 USB-C ports with Power Delivery and DisplayPort 1.4 support. It also includes a USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A port with PowerShare and a full-size HDMI 2.1 output. An optional Smart Card reader is available for organizations that require card-based authentication.

Above the display is an 8MP HDR RGB+IR camera with user-presence detection, enabling high-resolution video conferencing, Windows Hello facial authentication, and presence-aware security features. Dual-array microphones help capture clear audio during calls, while an integrated sliding privacy shutter provides a simple physical way to block the camera when it is not in use.

Removing the bottom panel provides a clear view of the Dell Pro 5’s internal layout. The cooling solution uses a single fan and heat-pipe assembly to manage the processor’s heat, while two 2W speakers are positioned along the lower corners of the chassis. Powering the system is a three-cell, 70Wh lithium-ion battery pack that occupies much of the lower portion of the unit.

Wireless connectivity is handled by a replaceable MediaTek Wi-Fi 7 MT7925 card supporting 2×2 802.11be MIMO and Bluetooth 5.4. Our configuration also includes a replaceable 1TB Kioxia TLC PCIe Gen4 SSD. The system memory is soldered to the motherboard and cannot be upgraded by the user, making the initial configuration an important purchasing decision. Our review unit shipped with 64GB of dual-channel LPDDR5 memory operating at 8,533MT/s.

The bottom cover features a generously sized ventilation section that provides the cooling system with a consistent supply of fresh air. Long rubber feet run along the front and rear edges, slightly elevating the laptop to improve airflow while keeping it stable and preventing it from sliding across a desk.

Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD Performance

Our review unit runs the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 with Radeon 890M graphics, 64GB of LPDDR5x, and a 1TB Gen4 SSD on Windows 11 Pro, with benchmarks tested in the Best Performance power mode. For battery life testing, we configure systems into Balanced power mode and set the screen brightness to 50%. One note on the memory: Dell rates this configuration at 8533 MT/s, but Task Manager, the system BIOS, and our SPEC runs all report 8000 MT/s on the review unit.

For comparables, we included the Intel version of the same machine, the Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc Pro B390, 64GB), the 16-inch Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, Radeon 890M, 64GB), and the previous-generation Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470, Radeon 890M, 64GB) as the generational reference. There is no 14-inch AMD system in the prior Pro 5 lineup, so both AMD comparisons are 16-inch machines; the comparisons here are about silicon and platform rather than chassis size.

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. The overall score is supported by Essentials, Productivity, and Digital Content Creation subscores that show where a system’s strengths sit. Higher scores are better.

PCMark 10	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Overall Score	8,762	10,019	8,627	8,268
Essentials	11,442	12,188	10,744	10,870
Productivity	14,272	15,827	14,574	14,322
Digital Content Creation	11,178	14,147	11,127	9,852

The review unit scored 8,762 overall, a 6% gain on the previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD and effectively a tie with its own 16-inch sibling. The Intel twin is 14% clear of it here, with the gap concentrated in Digital Content Creation, where Arc Pro B390 graphics do most of the work.

PCMark 10 Modern Office Battery

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point, in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness. This is a rundown of the whole system rather than a synthetic idle drain, so it tracks closely with what a full day of productivity work does to the battery. Longer runtimes are better.

Modern Office Battery	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Runtime (higher is better)	14 hours 26 minutes	23 hours 50 minutes	15 hours 5 minutes	15 hours 22 minutes

This is the review unit’s weakest showing. At 14 hours and 26 minutes, it trails the previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD by nearly an hour, gives up 39 minutes to its own 16-inch sibling, and concedes more than nine hours to the Intel version of the same laptop. A 120Hz QHD+ panel accounts for part of that against the Intel unit’s lower-resolution screen, but not nine hours of it. Buyers who value all-day unplugged runtime should look hard at the Intel build.

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads, plus GPU compute scores through OpenCL and Vulkan. Higher scores are better.

Geekbench 6	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
CPU Single-Core	2,831	3,010	2,854	2,989
CPU Multi-Core	14,611	17,396	14,169	14,348
GPU OpenCL	36,322	56,745	37,520	33,449
GPU Vulkan	49,868	55,581	53,969	48,348

Geekbench 6 is the one CPU test in this review where the Intel twin’s 16 cores beat 24 threads outright, taking multi-core by 19%. The generational gain over the HX PRO 470 is modest at 2% multi-core, and single-core goes to the older chip. On GPU compute, the Radeon 890M is roughly two-thirds of the Arc Pro B390 in OpenCL and close to 90% in Vulkan.

Geekbench 7

Geekbench 7 joins the suite alongside Geekbench 6 as comparison data builds. Its CPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 2,500, set by the AMD Ryzen 7700, while GPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 100,000, set by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Higher scores are better, and double the score indicates double the performance. Because Geekbench 7 uses new workloads and new baselines, its scores are not comparable to Geekbench 6 results.

Geekbench 7	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
CPU Single-Core	2,571	2,702	2,659	2,602
CPU Multi-Core	15,514	18,788	16,641	14,860
GPU OpenCL	31,423	54,854	31,874	29,645
GPU Vulkan	*	46,906	*	14,451

*Both Precision AMD units failed workload validation in the Geekbench 7 Vulkan run, which assigns a score of zero to the affected subtest. We traced it to the fluid simulation workload and have discarded both results pending clean runs.

The newer suite tells the same story as Geekbench 6, with the Intel twin 21% ahead in multi-core. Worth noting the 16-inch AMD sibling lands 7% above this unit on the same silicon, the clearest thermal-headroom signal in the review.

Cinebench 2026

Cinebench 2026 is the current release in the Cinebench line and the only version we report. It tests CPU and GPU performance using Maxon’s Redshift render engine. It is built on the latest Cinema 4D 2026 code and is designed to show whether a machine is stable under high CPU load, whether a notebook’s cooling can sustain longer render tasks, and how it handles demanding real-world 3D work. Because code and compiler changes accelerated scene rendering, Cinebench 2026 scores use an adjusted range and should not be compared to scores from previous Cinebench versions. Its GPU test supports current AMD and NVIDIA hardware but does not yet run on Intel integrated graphics, and the Dell Pro 5 16 AMD has not completed a GPU run.

Cinebench 2026	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
CPU Single Thread	466	513	471	485
CPU Multiple Threads	4,230	4,513	4,767	4,407
GPU	5,313	N/A	5,667	N/A

The Radeon 890 M’s ability to run the GPU test at all is a practical advantage over the Arc Pro B390 here, since Cinebench 2026 does not yet support Intel integrated graphics. On the CPU side, the 16-inch AMD sibling pulls 13% ahead of the review unit, again pointing to sustained-load headroom rather than silicon differences.

7-Zip Compression

The built-in 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads, run with a 128MB dictionary across ten passes. Decompression tends to scale with thread count, while compression leans on memory latency, so the two halves often tell different stories. Higher GIPS scores are better.

7-Zip 24.09 (GIPS)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Compressing	89.099	92.836	85.627	92.443
Decompressing	117.545	93.089	117.863	115.362
Total Rating	103.322	92.963	101.745	103.903

Decompression scales almost perfectly with thread count, and all three 24-thread AMD systems land near 116 GIPS, while the 16-thread Intel unit manages 93. That carries the total rating: 103.322 for the review unit against 92.963 for the Intel twin, an 11% win. Compression, which leans more on memory latency, goes the other way.

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of digits of Pi, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory subsystem. At the same time, the BBP runs to extract hexadecimal digits of Pi. Results are in seconds, so lower times are better. Neither Pro Precision AMD unit could complete the 5-billion or 10-billion digit runs, because the memory these platforms reserve for the integrated GPU leaves less available than those problem sizes require; the previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD completed 5 billion but not 10 billion.

y-cruncher (seconds, lower is better)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Pi 1B	24.648	28.404	22.840	25.160
Pi 2.5B	71.084	83.968	64.242	73.320
Pi 5B	N/A	190.356	N/A	163.768
Pi 10B	N/A	417.224	N/A	N/A
Pi BBP 1B	1.104	1.684	1.100	1.249
Pi BBP 10B	14.333	20.028	12.277	14.141
Pi BBP 100B	166.762	241.409	140.284	161.401

At the sizes it can run, the review unit is quicker than the Intel twin across the board, finishing Pi to 2.5 billion digits 15% faster and the 100 billion BBP extraction 31% faster. The asterisk is that the Intel machine finishes the two largest runs at all, which matters for anyone whose workloads scale past what the shared memory pool allows.

Blender

The Blender benchmark measures rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better, and we test on both the CPU and GPU. Scores are not comparable across Blender versions, so we report the current 5.2 release here.

Blender 5.2 (samples/min)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
GPU
Monster	124.50	567.52	123.00	118.77
Junkshop	101.06	463.30	101.21	95.75
Classroom	82.95	417.38	82.84	78.42
CPU
Monster	127.02	133.46	130.86	127.45
Junkshop	95.84	94.27	99.74	98.89
Classroom	71.63	64.26	74.18	69.52

Blender is the clearest illustration of the tradeoff in this review. The Radeon 890M renders Monster at 124.50 samples per minute against 567.52 for the Arc Pro B390, more than four and a half times faster on the Intel twin. CPU rendering runs the other direction but by far smaller margins, with the review unit taking Junkshop and Classroom from the Intel twin on thread count. Against the previous generation, the GPU gain is 5%, so the 890M in this platform performs essentially as it did last round.

LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL, based on LuxCoreRender. We run the Food and Hall scenes on all available OpenCL devices in each system, so the GPU listed in each column header did the rendering. Higher scores are better.

LuxMark v4	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
Hall	2,077	3,494	2,058	2,125
Food	1,041	1,705	1,034	982

The Arc Pro B390 is 68% faster in Hall and 64% faster in Food. Against its own predecessor, the review unit is flat in Hall and 6% up in Food, which matches the Blender picture: this is the same GPU generation, not a step forward.

V-Ray

Chaos V-Ray measures ray-traced rendering throughput, reported in vpaths, where higher is better. We run the CUDA-compatible engine on every system so results remain comparable to notebooks with discrete graphics; on systems without a discrete GPU, that path executes on the integrated graphics, even though V-Ray reports the processor name in its device field.

V-Ray GPU (vpaths)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
CUDA Engine	897	890	1,039	861

The four systems land within 20% of each other, and the review unit edges the Intel twin by less than 1%. That tight grouping is consistent with what we saw across the Precision family. This compatibility path leans on the CPU and memory subsystem as much as the GPU, so it does not separate these platforms the way LuxMark and Blender do.

3DMark CPU Profile

The 3DMark CPU Profile benchmark measures CPU performance at fixed thread counts, from a single thread up to the maximum available, showing how performance scales as more cores are engaged. Higher scores are better.

3DMark CPU Profile	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Max Threads	8,778	10,277	9,267	6,696
8 Threads	6,270	6,441	6,573	5,153
4 Threads	4,047	4,176	4,238	3,513
1 Thread	1,160	1,174	1,178	1,176

All four are within 2% on one thread, and the field only separates as threads are added. The generational gain is the story here: 8,778 at max threads is 31% ahead of the previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD, the largest generational CPU gain in this review. The Intel twin still leads at 10,277.

3DMark Storage and Blackmagic Disk Speed Test

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files. Higher is better in both.

Storage	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
3DMark Storage	2,424	3,093	2,325	2,477
Blackmagic Write (MB/s)	4,772.0	9,000.8	5,070.5	5,166.5
Blackmagic Read (MB/s)	4,900.4	9,809.2	5,071.2	4,758.0

Our review unit shipped with a Gen4 Kioxia BG7, and it shows: sequential throughput sits near 4.8 GB/s in both directions, whereas the Intel configuration’s Gen5 drive reads at nearly 9.8 GB/s, roughly twice as fast. Dell’s configurator lists this AMD build with Gen4 storage, while the Intel build is Gen5, so this is a platform difference rather than a bad sample, and it is worth attention from anyone moving large media files.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test

The Blackmagic RAW Speed Test measures how many frames per second a system can decode Blackmagic RAW video on the CPU and on the GPU. We quote the 8K results at 12:1 compression, and higher is better.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
8K 12:1 CPU (fps)	77	79	74	72
8K 12:1 GPU (fps)	49	85	49	45

CPU decode is close across the group at 72 to 79 fps. The GPU path is where the Radeon 890M struggles, at 49 fps against 85 for the Arc Pro B390, which is the difference between falling short of real-time 8K playback and clearing it comfortably.

Topaz Video AI

The Topaz Video AI benchmark measures AI video upscaling and frame-interpolation performance in frames per second across the application’s enhancement models, run here at 1080p input, where higher is better. The previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD was not tested with Topaz.

Topaz Video AI (fps)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
Artemis 1X / 2X / 4X	3.75 / 2.24 / 0.79	6.22 / 5.28 / 1.89	3.72 / 2.21 / 0.78	3.25 / 1.94 / 0.68
Iris 1X / 2X / 4X	4.86 / 2.70 / 0.86	5.18 / 3.14 / 0.94	4.91 / 2.72 / 0.92	4.20 / 2.38 / 0.78
Proteus 1X / 2X / 4X	3.93 / 2.69 / 1.19	6.43 / 6.08 / 2.46	3.99 / 2.70 / 1.18	3.42 / 2.35 / 1.03
Gaia 1X / 2X / 4X	1.90 / 1.35 / 0.94	3.24 / 2.25 / 1.50	1.87 / 1.34 / 0.96	1.66 / 1.15 / 0.83
Nyx 1X / 2X	1.86 / 1.56	1.57 / 1.54	1.87 / 1.53	1.56 / 1.34
Hyperion HDR 1X	11.34	3.22	11.48	9.49
4X Slowmo Apollo / APFast	6.05 / 17.72	8.57 / 22.13	6.08 / 17.59	5.72 / 16.11
16X Slowmo Aion	9.13	DNF	9.05	7.98

The Intel twin wins most of the upscaling models, in some cases by wide margins. Still, the Radeon 890M owns the two places it matters for AMD buyers: Hyperion HDR at 11.34 fps against 3.22, more than triple, and the 16X Slowmo Aion model, which completed here and on the 16-inch sibling but failed on the Intel twin. If your pipeline depends on either of those, the AMD build is the safer machine.

UL Procyon AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines LLM performance testing by providing a concise, consistent evaluation method. It enables repeated testing across four local models, Phi, Mistral, Llama3, and Llama2, while minimizing the complexity of large models and the number of variables. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators to deliver more reliable, efficient performance assessments. All four systems ran the models through ONNX Runtime with DirectML on their GPUs.

Procyon AI Text Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
Phi	424	887	434	371
Mistral	396	646	403	346
Llama3	352	674	357	306
Llama2	379	786	390	329

The Arc Pro B390 roughly doubles the Radeon 890M in Phi, Llama2, and Llama3, and leads Mistral by 63%, the widest AI gap in the review. Generationally, the review unit gains 14 to 15% on the HX PRO 470, and all four systems complete Llama2 thanks to their 64GB shared memory pools, which is the practical advantage integrated platforms hold over small-VRAM discrete cards for local inference.

UL Procyon AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of neural networks, evaluating tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution with models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. The WinML runs use float32 on CPU and GPU, giving a like-for-like view across vendors. We also run the newer Computer Vision 2 suite through each vendor’s native path, Ryzen AI in int8 on the AMD NPUs and OpenVINO on the Intel NPU and iGPU; those results are listed separately since precision and runtime differ by platform. Higher scores are better.

Procyon AI Computer Vision (WinML)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
CPU	106	141	114	91
GPU	247	404	245	214

 

Procyon AI Computer Vision 2 (native runtimes)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
NPU	1,176	1,647	1,189	611
iGPU	N/A	1,517	N/A	N/A

The generational NPU gain is the standout number: 1,176 against 611 for the HX PRO 470, nearly double, reflecting the move from a 50 TOPS to a 60 TOPS engine plus a newer Ryzen AI runtime. It is worth noting that the Intel twin still scores higher at 1,647 despite its 50 TOPS rating, a reminder that vendor TOPS figures do not translate directly into benchmark throughput.

UL Procyon AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent method for measuring AI inference performance from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs, with three tests: Stable Diffusion XL FP16 for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 FP16 for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 INT8 for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference path for each platform, meaning the AMD-optimized DirectML pipeline on the Radeon systems and OpenVINO on the Intel unit. The INT8 test runs on the NPU where a supported quantized model exists; the current Pro Precision AMD units do not yet have one available through Procyon, so those cells are blank pending a supported path.

Procyon AI Image Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
SD 1.5 FP16	281	632	316	255
SDXL FP16	197	731	200	173
SD 1.5 INT8 (iGPU)	N/A	7,873	N/A	N/A
SD 1.5 INT8 (NPU)	N/A	3,003	N/A	3,598

On the FP16 runs, the Arc Pro B390 is more than twice as fast in SD 1.5 and nearly four times as fast in SDXL, which is a real gap for anyone generating images locally. The interesting cell is the NPU row: the previous-generation Pro 5 16 AMD has a genuine quantized NPU running at 3,598 using AMD’s Ryzen AI path, ahead of the Intel twin’s 3,003, and we would expect this unit’s newer 60 TOPS NPU to beat it once Procyon exposes a supported quantized model for the platform.

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets derived from professional applications in CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization, replayed here at 1080p. Higher scores are better, although performance can vary considerably between applications and graphics architectures. The enscape-01 viewset failed to complete on the review unit across multiple runs, and catia-07 failed on the Intel twin.

SPECviewperf 15 (FHD)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (Radeon 890M)
3dsmax-08	26.30	19.51	26.23	23.21
blender-01	23.01	21.55	23.17	19.89
catia-07	22.70	DNF	22.70	20.16
creo-04	49.27	63.57	49.42	44.27
energy-04	29.51	38.07	29.69	25.39
enscape-01	DNF	14.92	8.45	8.02
maya-07	53.30	83.86	53.48	48.67
medical-04	73.42	69.41	73.31	65.45
snx-05	59.58	78.74	61.33	51.67
solidworks-08	36.66	33.38	36.40	33.12
unreal_engine-01	27.31	41.38	27.38	26.61

This table is more competitive than the raw GPU compute results suggest. The review unit beats the Intel twin in four of the nine viewsets, both completed, taking 3dsmax, blender, medical, and solidworks. At the same time, Intel’s certified driver advantage shows up in the CAD and engineering traces, where it leads by 29 to 57%. Against its own predecessor, the review unit gains in all ten viewsets it completed, by about 12% on average.

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads, using real applications grouped into seven industry verticals. Higher scores are better, and N/A means the system did not complete every workload required for that category.

SPECworkstation 4	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro 5 16 AMD
Hardware Subsystems
CPU	1.15	N/A	N/A	1.09
Graphics	2.57	2.70	2.65	2.36
Accelerator	2.22	2.29	2.31	N/A
Storage	0.93	1.70	1.00	0.89
Industry Verticals
AI & Machine Learning	1.38	1.45	1.45	1.37
Energy	1.28	1.67	1.38	1.24
Financial Services	1.07	0.93	1.29	0.98
Life Sciences	1.41	N/A	1.47	1.34
Media & Entertainment	1.39	1.53	1.48	N/A
Product Design	1.34	1.80	1.41	1.34
Productivity & Development	1.03	1.32	N/A	0.78

The review unit beats the Intel twin in Financial Services, where the 16-inch AMD sibling leads the group outright, and trails Intel in the graphics-weighted verticals, while its 0.93 Storage subsystem score tracks with the Gen4 drive.

Conclusion

The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD packs substantial multi-threaded performance into a compact 3.08-pound chassis. Its Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 delivered its strongest results in CPU-intensive workloads, beating the Intel version by 11% in the overall 7-Zip benchmark. It also completed every y-cruncher workload that fit within its available memory. Compared with the previous-generation AMD platform, the 31% improvement in the 3DMark CPU Profile and near doubling of NPU performance represent meaningful progress.

The trade-offs are equally clear. Radeon 890M graphics fall well behind the Intel model’s Arc Pro B390 in most GPU compute, rendering, and AI workloads. At the same time, the Gen4 Kioxia SSD provides roughly half the sequential throughput of the Intel configuration’s Gen5 drive. Battery life reached a respectable 14 hours and 26 minutes, but that remains more than nine hours behind the Intel version. The AMD system does have a few workload-specific advantages, including support for the Cinebench 2026 GPU test and successful completion of Topaz Video AI’s 16X Slowmo Aion model.

Outside of performance, the AMD configuration benefits from an excellent 14-inch QHD+ 120Hz display, a durable aluminium-alloy chassis, strong port selection, Wi-Fi 7, and a comprehensive set of business security features. The soldered memory makes choosing the correct capacity upfront important, especially considering the steep $1,700 upgrade to 64GB in Dell’s online configurator.

Configurations on the Dell Store start at $2,253 and reach $5,404 as tested. The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD carries a high single-unit price, but commercial customers will typically buy through negotiated volume agreements. It is best suited to mobile professionals whose workloads benefit from 24 CPU threads, ample shared memory, and a high-resolution display. Buyers prioritizing GPU acceleration, maximum battery life, or faster storage will find the Intel configuration more compelling, but for CPU-heavy workstation tasks in a highly portable form factor, the AMD version makes a strong case.

For configuration options and current pricing, visit the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 14S product page.

Leaderboard: The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD ranks #13 on our Laptop Battery Life Leaderboard at 14 hours 26 minutes.

The post Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD Review: 24 Threads in a 3.08-Pound Workstation appeared first on StorageReview.com.

When we reviewed the NVIDIA DGX Spark, storage was the platform’s clearest design flaw, and it is a form-factor problem before it is anything else. The Spark’s internal slots take short M.2 drives, the 2230 and 2242 class, where packaging wins, and capacity loses. The high-capacity end of the client SSD market lives in full-size 2280 drives, where 8TB models ship today, and the Spark simply has nowhere to put one. That leaves a machine built for serious AI work with a storage ceiling better suited to a thin-and-light laptop, and no internal path around it. The Luisuantech GP Spark is a solution for exactly that problem: a 0.58-liter, four-bay box for full-size M.2 drives that cables to the Spark’s 100GbE port, shows up as native NVMe devices with no drivers or formatting, and serves GPU Direct Storage traffic at close to line rate.

The pitch is simplicity with client-drive economics. The GP Spark’s four bays take ordinary M.2 2280 or 22110 NVMe SSDs, the form factors the Spark itself locks out, and presents them over NVMe-oF RDMA through a hardware offload engine on a dedicated chip. Luisuantech’s spec sheet validates drives up to 4TB today, 16TB per enclosure, though these are the same slots where 8TB client drives already ship, so the practical ceiling is a validation question rather than a mechanical one. There is no enterprise array here, no licensing, and no storage OS to learn. Plug a DAC or AOC cable between the GP Spark and the DGX Spark, run modprobe nvme-rdma on the Spark’s Ubuntu base, and the drives appear as /dev/nvme devices ready for GDS access.

Design and Build

The GP Spark is a 150mm x 150mm x 26mm box, a smaller footprint than the Spark itself, wrapped in a perforated metal chassis with a single power button that doubles as a status light: green for normal, red for fault. Power comes over USB-C PD from a 20V/5.4A external adapter, with the whole unit rated under 100W, including drives. The rear panel carries exactly three connectors: the USB-C power input, a USB-C factory debug port, and the QSFP28 100GbE data port, which accepts copper DACs or optical modules. Inside, a dedicated data processor and coprocessor handle the NVMe-oF offload, and the four M.2 bays sit under the top cover.

The rear panel is all business: USB-C power and debug ports on the left, the QSFP28 cage on the right, and a row of copper fin stacks visible through the vents between them. Cooling is entirely passive.

Pop the top cover, and the four M.2 bays sit in a row, here populated with our KIOXIA XG8 test drives. The lid itself is the drive cooler: blue thermal pads on its underside couple each SSD to the finned heatsink that forms the top of the chassis, a clean passive solution for client drives that never see sustained enterprise duty cycles.

A disclosure before the numbers: our unit is a prototype. The bottom label reads GP-Spark-1000, marks the device Prototype, Not for Resale, and carries a February 2026 build date under the Swingsoon brand Luisuantech uses on hardware. Production units may differ in fit and finish, though the platform behavior we tested is what Luisuantech is shipping to reviewers today. Two further notes on the out-of-box experience. Our unit shipped with two printed manuals entirely in Chinese, and initial setup appears to route through Wi-Fi onboarding. Neither is a blocker for the audience this box targets, but a Western launch will need English documentation.

Setup and Architecture

There is no RAID controller and no storage abstraction onboard: the GP Spark is a JBOF in the literal sense, exposing each installed SSD as its own NVMe-oF namespace. In our configuration, four drives appeared as four /dev/nvme devices on the host. Redundancy or striping is the host’s job. The vendor spec sheet lists a single 100GbE port at 10GB/s and 2.7M IOPS; the product report separately references 2x100GbE configurations and up to 24GB/s, a figure Luisuantech confirmed is aggregate read plus write. Our unit and testing used the single-port configuration.

Luisuantech GP Spark Specifications

Specification	Luisuantech GP Spark
Platform Overview
Drive Bays	4 x M.2 NVMe (2280 / 22110) Mixed capacities supported, up to 4TB per drive
Network	QSFP28 100GbE (DAC or optical) RDMA required
Protocols	NVMe-oF RDMA GPU Direct Storage (GDS)
Performance (Vendor-Stated)
Throughput	10GB/s per 100GbE port Up to 24GB/s aggregate read plus write
IOPS	2.7M
Access Latency	Under 20 microseconds
Power and Physical
Power	Under 100W total 20V/5.4A USB-C PD external adapter
Dimensions	150mm x 150mm x 26mm (0.58L)
Operating Temperature	0 to 40C
Compatibility	NVIDIA DGX Spark DGX Station Workstations and servers with RDMA-capable NICs

Performance

Our test configuration paired the GP Spark with a GIGABYTE DGX Spark over a direct 100GbE connection, with four 1TB KIOXIA XG8 client NVMe SSDs populating the bays. It’s important to keep in mind that the drives you pick will play a significant role in the measured performance. We leveraged client Gen5 SSDs; some models, especially enterprise SSDs, may offer higher sustained write performance. We ran FIO sweeps across 4K and 64K random and 1M sequential workloads, read and write, stepping iodepth and numjobs to map the full envelope. Results reflect the final retest after applying Luisuantech’s MTU guidance, which improved transfer behavior over our initial runs.

4K Random Performance

Small-block reads are where the offload engine shows its worth. 4K random reads scaled with queue depth to a peak of 2.43 million IOPS at 9,475 MiB/s, within sight of the vendor’s 2.7M claim and effectively saturating the 100GbE link with 4K transfers. For a passively powered four-bay box feeding a desk-side AI system, that is a remarkable figure.

Writes follow the same shape at roughly half the height, peaking at 1.19 million IOPS. The gap between read and write ceilings is consistent across every workload we ran. The performance is directly related to the underlying drives, so results here will vary depending on configuration.

Read latency bottoms out at 65.3 microseconds on average at low queue depth. That is higher than the vendor’s sub-20-microsecond claim, but results will vary depending on drive selection and network configuration. The network round trip is also doing work in that number; latency stays flat and predictable until the link saturates.

Write latency is the one place the spec sheet claim lands: 20.4 microseconds average at minimal depth, right at the vendor’s under-20-microsecond figure and low enough that the fabric is effectively invisible to the application.

64K Random Performance

At 64K, the story becomes purely about bandwidth. Random reads hold 9,503 MiB/s at peak, statistically identical to the 4K and 1M ceilings. Whatever block size the workload brings, the GP Spark delivers the same answer: the full line rate of its 100GbE port.

64K random writes plateau at 4,742 MiB/s, the same ceiling we measured at every other block size.

1M Sequential Performance

Large-block sequential reads, the profile of model loading and dataset streaming, reach 9,496 MiB/s and hold there from modest queue depths onward. This is the workload the GP Spark exists for, and it runs at the wire.

Sequential writes hold 4,742 MiB/s, roughly half of read throughput, and that ceiling is identical at every block size we tested. We flagged the asymmetry to Luisuantech during testing and worked through a round of tuning with the company, including MTU changes; the figures here represent the best the platform delivers in its current single-port configuration, and Luisuantech confirmed they are consistent with its specifications for the write path. For the read-dominated workloads this box targets, model loading, dataset streaming, and RAG retrieval, it is a footnote; for heavy ingest, size expectations accordingly.

Conclusion

The GP Spark does one thing and does it cleanly: it gives one or more DGX Spark the storage the platform really needs for heavy lifting. Cable it up, load the kernel module, and nearly 10GB/s of GDS-accessible flash appears without a driver install, a storage OS, or an enterprise invoice. Filling it with client M.2 drives is the point; capacity gets relatively cheap when the box accepts whatever 2280 or 22110 SSDs you have, and the offload engine handles the protocol work the drives never see.

Our take is that this is a neat, well-executed add-on rather than a breakthrough. Reads stop at the single link’s line rate; writes stop at roughly half of that. Pricing is the open question: the GP Spark is not yet listed at retail in the US or China, our test unit is a prototype, and Luisuantech has not published pricing. The value argument rests on the box coming in meaningfully below enterprise NVMe-oF alternatives, which its client-drive design should allow. For Spark owners who hit the internal storage wall, and our original review suggests that many of them will, this is an easy path to solve that issue without carving out storage from a large enterprise storage estate.

Product page: Luisuantech GP Spark

The post Luisuantech GP Spark Review: Nearly 10GB/s of Plug-and-Play Storage for the DGX Spark appeared first on StorageReview.com.

The Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel is a 16-inch mobile workstation built for users who want more screen space while keeping the system reasonably portable. Our review unit pairs the Core Ultra X9 388H with Intel Arc Pro B390 graphics, 64GB of LPCAMM2-8533 memory, and a 1TB Gen5 SED SSD. The 2560 x 1600 IPS display gives plenty of room for larger spreadsheets, development tools, and creative applications, while the added numeric keypad makes better use of the wider chassis. It also manages to pack all of this in while delivering excellent battery life.

The 16s is built for engineers, developers, analysts, creators, and other professionals who need workstation-level performance in a system that is still fairly easy to carry around. Intel vPro Enterprise, Wi-Fi 7, a fingerprint reader, smart card support, TPM 2.0, and Dell’s management tools also make it a good fit for managed business environments. Our 64GB LPCAMM2 configuration has plenty of memory for heavier multitasking, professional applications, and local AI workloads. Dell also offers the same chassis with an AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, so potential buyers have another platform option with a very similar overall design.

The Arc Pro B390 gives the 16s considerably more graphics capability than most business laptops with integrated graphics, along with 12 Xe cores and certified drivers for professional applications. The Core Ultra X9 388H also includes a 50 TOPS NPU, giving the system dedicated hardware for supported local AI workloads without relying entirely on the CPU or GPU. The larger 16-inch chassis gives the cooling system more room to work as well, and, as you will see in our testing below, the 16s posted the strongest multicore results we have seen from a B390-based system.

Our review configuration is priced at $5,929.25 as a single-unit purchase on Dell.com, with the jump from 16GB to 64GB of LPCAMM2 memory accounting for $1,600 of that total. Commercial pricing can vary considerably depending on configuration, support agreements, volume, and account-level discounts, so the listed web price is better treated as a reference point than a typical fleet purchase price. The system is available now through the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 16S product page.

Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Specifications

Specification	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s (PW516260)
Processor	Intel Core Ultra X9 388H vPro (Series 3, 16 cores/16 threads, up to 5.1GHz, 50 TOPS NPU)
Graphics	Intel Arc Pro B390 (12 Xe cores, integrated)
Memory	64GB LPCAMM2, 8533 MT/s, dual-channel
Storage	1TB SED PCIe NVMe 2280 SSD, Gen5 x4
Display	16-inch QHD+/WQXGA (2560 x 1600), non-touch, 500 nits, IPS, 100% sRGB, anti-glare, low blue light
Camera	8MP HDR RGB + IR with User Presence Detection
Wireless	Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211, 2×2
Keyboard	English US backlit with numeric keypad and Copilot key
Security	Fingerprint reader, smart card reader, ControlVault 3+, TPM 2.0
Battery	3-cell, 70Wh Long Lifecycle, ExpressCharge and ExpressCharge Boost
Power	100W USB-C adapter
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro (Copilot+ PC)
Chassis	Aluminum top cover, palm rest, and bottom cover
Systems Management	Intel vPro Enabled
Certifications	ENERGY STAR, EPEAT Gold with Climate+, TCO Certified
Warranty	36 months Basic Onsite Service after Remote Diagnosis
Price	$5,929.25 as tested (Dell.com single-unit)

Build and Design

The Dell Pro Precision 5 16s uses aluminum across the top cover, palm rest, and bottom cover, giving the 16-inch chassis a solid feel while keeping the design fairly slim for a mobile workstation. It measures 14.12 x 9.98 inches, reaches 0.79 inches at its thickest point, and starts at 4.20 lb. Compared with the 14-inch Pro Precision 5 14s, which starts at 3.12 lb, the added size and roughly 1.1 lb of extra weight are easy to notice in a bag, but the larger chassis gives users considerably more screen and keyboard space. The AMD version of the 16s uses the same chassis, so the exterior design, dimensions, keyboard, port layout, and service access are essentially identical between the two platforms.

The 16-inch display is a 2560 x 1600 IPS panel with a 16:10 aspect ratio, 500-nit brightness, 100% sRGB coverage, an anti-glare finish, and low-blue-light support. That combination works nicely for a workstation this size, especially when working with larger spreadsheets, development environments, timelines, or applications with several tool panels open at once. The extra vertical room from the 16:10 panel is particularly useful beside a conventional 16:9 display, and the 500-nit rating gives the screen enough brightness for offices with stronger overhead lighting. Our configuration is non-touch.

Dell uses a wide hinge across the rear of the chassis, with most of the mechanism tucked behind the display rather than occupying space along the keyboard deck. The lid itself is fairly thin, which helps keep the 16s from looking bulky when viewed from the side, and the aluminum construction gives the display assembly more rigidity than a typical plastic business notebook. Compared with the 14s, the overall design is very similar, but the wider base gives the keyboard, touchpad, and display more room without dramatically increasing chassis thickness.

For audio, it has two internal 2W speakers for 4W of total output, with the speaker modules visible at the lower corners when the bottom cover is removed. Their placement keeps speaker grilles away from the keyboard deck and directs audio through openings along the lower chassis. The setup is primarily geared toward conferencing, calls, and everyday media use, with keyboard controls available for quick volume adjustment. Dell also pairs the speakers with dual digital-array microphones for conferencing.

The larger keyboard deck is put to good use with a full numeric keypad, which is a useful addition for spreadsheet work, financial applications, engineering software, and other number-heavy workloads. Our unit has a backlit keyboard with a dedicated Copilot key, while the power button at the upper-right corner also houses the fingerprint reader. Dell shifts the large clickpad slightly toward the left so it lines up more closely with the main typing area instead of centering it across the entire width of the notebook. There is still plenty of palm-rest space around it, even with the wider keyboard and number pad.

Port selection is the strongest practical argument for working from this machine without a dock. Dell fits nine ports and slots across the two sides, which is a lot for a chassis that measures 0.79 inches at its thickest point, and almost none of it is legacy that has been quietly dropped on competitive systems. The left side carries HDMI 2.1, one USB-A port, two Thunderbolt 4 USB-C ports with DisplayPort and Power Delivery, and the smart card reader.

The right side adds the 3.5mm headset jack, a second USB-A port, Gigabit Ethernet on a drop-jaw hinge that lets a full-size RJ45 fit a chassis this thin, and a wedge lock slot. The small blank ahead of the headset jack is an eSIM cover rather than a card slot.

The effect is a full desk setup that needs nothing extra. Displays can hang off HDMI 2.1 or either Thunderbolt port; wired networking does not need a dongle or a USB adapter; and the two USB-A ports are split, one per side, for the peripherals that never moved to USB-C. The smart card reader is one that most competitors have given up, and it remains a requirement in government, healthcare, and finance deployments where CAC or PIV login is mandatory. The only layout quibble is that both USB-C ports sit on the left, so charging is left-side-only.

Above the display, Dell includes an 8MP HDR RGB and IR camera with dual-array microphones, user presence detection, and a physical privacy shutter. The 8MP sensor provides considerably more image resolution than the basic 1080p webcams still common in business notebooks, which can help retain facial detail during calls and conferencing. IR support provides Windows Hello facial authentication, while presence detection can work with supported Windows features to wake or lock the notebook as the user approaches or leaves. The physical shutter is built directly into the camera housing and can be closed with a small slider above the display. Dell lists several camera configurations for the 16s, with the 8MP HDR RGB+IR setup used in our review unit sitting at the top of that range.

In addition to the fingerprint reader and IR camera, security hardware with our configuration also includes a smart card reader, TPM 2.0, and Dell ControlVault 3+. There is no NFC reader on this configuration, which is one difference from the 14s unit we tested. Intel vPro Enterprise adds another layer for organizations using remote administration and hardware-assisted security features, which gives IT departments several authentication and management options without requiring external hardware.

Opening the bottom cover shows several major components accessible instead of fixing everything permanently to the motherboard. The 70Wh long-lifecycle battery in our configuration stretches across much of the lower half of the chassis and is customer-replaceable, while the LPCAMM2 memory module, M.2 SSD, WLAN card, fan, and several other components can also be replaced. Below, you can also see a single large cooling fan and heat pipe covering the processor area, with the LPCAMM2 module and storage positioned nearby for direct access once the cover is removed. Dell officially classifies the battery, memory, SSD, WLAN card, fan, speakers, and fingerprint reader as customer-replaceable components, which gives IT departments a lot more flexibility when it comes to repairs and upgrades over the life of the notebook.

Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Performance

Our review unit runs the Core Ultra X9 388H with Arc Pro B390 graphics, 64GB of LPCAMM2 at 8533 MT/s, and a 1TB Gen5 SED SSD on Windows 11 Pro, with benchmarks tested on the Best Performance power mode. For battery life testing, we configure systems into Balanced power mode and set the screen brightness to 50%.

For comparables, we included the AMD version of the same machine, the Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, Radeon 890M, 64GB), the step-up Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (Core Ultra 9 386H, NVIDIA RTX PRO 3000 Blackwell 12GB, 64GB, dual-drive RAID 0), and the Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (Core Ultra 7 366H, RTX PRO 1000, 64GB) as the external workstation reference. A few comp cells are marked N/A where a system could not complete a workload. The 7 16 Geekbench 6 run carried an invalid flag from tamper detection, which we reviewed and treated as a false positive, and its Cinebench CPU results were confirmed by a repeat run. We also tested the Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel, which shares this unit’s CPU and GPU; its results land within a few percent across the suite, so we left it off the tables and call out the places where the chassis difference shows up.

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. The overall score is supported by Essentials, Productivity, and Digital Content Creation subscores that show where a system’s strengths sit. Higher scores are better.

PCMark 10	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Overall Score	9,994	8,627	8,901	9,083
Essentials	12,106	10,744	9,671	10,686
Productivity	15,505	14,574	16,381	16,501
Digital Content Creation	14,433	11,127	12,081	11,534

 

At 9,994 overall, the 5 16s Intel leads this group by a comfortable margin, 12% over the far more expensive 7 16 and 16% over its AMD twin, though it stops just six points short of the 10,000 mark its 14-inch sibling crossed. Its Digital Content Creation score of 14,433 is the best of the four, while the 7 16 and ThinkPad claw back ground in the Productivity subscore.

PCMark 10 Modern Office Battery

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point, in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness. This is a rundown of the whole system rather than a synthetic idle drain, so it tracks closely with what a full day of productivity work does to the battery. Longer runtimes are better.

Modern Office Battery	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Runtime (higher is better)	24 hours 43 minutes	15 hours 5 minutes	11 hours 43 minutes	15 hours 52 minutes

 

This is the longest battery run of the entire Pro Precision fleet. At 24 hours and 43 minutes, the 5 16s Intel more than doubles the dGPU-equipped 7 16, adds nine hours and 38 minutes over the AMD version of the same chassis, runs nearly nine hours past the ThinkPad, and even outlasts its own 14-inch twin by 53 minutes despite the larger, higher-resolution panel, a credit to the same 70Wh pack paired with the 16-inch chassis thermals. For all-day-and-then-some field work, this is the unit in the family to pick.

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads, plus GPU compute scores through OpenCL and Vulkan. Higher scores are better. The 7 16 CPU run was flagged as invalid by the benchmark’s tamper detection; we reviewed it and treated the flag as a false positive, so its scores are included below.

Geekbench 6	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	2,969	2,854	2,915	2,808
CPU Multi-Core	17,401	14,169	17,280	16,319
GPU OpenCL	57,998	37,520	131,492	87,537
GPU Vulkan	63,015	53,969	104,344	73,204

 

The X9 388H leads the CPU runs on both metrics, edging the Core Ultra 9 386H in the 7 16 by 2% single-core and under 1% multi-core, and the Arc Pro B390’s 63,015 Vulkan score is the best we have recorded from this iGPU, edging past even its own OpenCL result. The RTX PRO 3000 resets the scale on GPU compute, more than doubling the review unit in OpenCL.

Geekbench 7

Geekbench 7 joins the suite alongside Geekbench 6 as comparison data builds. Its CPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 2,500, set by the AMD Ryzen 7700, while GPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 100,000, set by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Higher scores are better, and double the score indicates double the performance. Because Geekbench 7 uses new workloads and new baselines, its scores are not comparable to Geekbench 6 results.

Geekbench 7	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	2,733	2,659	2,652	2,533
CPU Multi-Core	18,965	16,641	18,648	17,651
GPU OpenCL	54,247	31,874	96,919	75,340
GPU Vulkan	47,436	*	104,229	70,067
GPU CUDA	N/A	N/A	174,559	114,469

 

*The AMD unit’s Vulkan run failed workload validation in Geekbench 7 and was assigned a zero score for the affected subtest; we have discarded the result and will update the table when a clean run is available. Separately, on the dual-GPU 7 16, Geekbench’s Vulkan device selector runs the workload on the opposite GPU from the one selected; the scores above are attributed to the device that did the work.

Here is the quiet upset of the review: at 18,965 multi-core, the 5 16s Intel beats every system in the group, including the Core Ultra 9-equipped 7 16, and its 2,733 single-core leads as well. On the GPU side, the Arc Pro B390’s OpenCL score lands at just over half of Geekbench 7’s RTX 4060 baseline, while the RTX PRO 3000 clears the baseline in Vulkan and beats it by three-quarters in CUDA.

Cinebench 2026

Cinebench 2026 is the current release in the Cinebench line and the only version we report. It tests CPU and GPU performance using Maxon’s Redshift render engine. It is built on the latest Cinema 4D 2026 code and is designed to show whether a machine is stable under high CPU load, whether a notebook’s cooling can sustain longer render tasks, and how it handles demanding real-world 3D work. Because code and compiler changes accelerated scene rendering, Cinebench 2026 scores use an adjusted range and should not be compared to scores from previous Cinebench versions. Its GPU test supports current NVIDIA and AMD hardware but does not yet run on Intel integrated graphics, and the 7 16’s CPU results were confirmed by a repeat run.

Cinebench 2026	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU Single Thread	535	471	518	502
CPU Multiple Threads	4,618	4,767	3,873	4,492
GPU	N/A	5,667	51,517	34,437

 

The review unit takes a single thread at 535, the best Cinebench 2026 single-thread result we have recorded from a laptop, while the AMD twin’s 24 threads edge it in the multi-thread test by 3%. On GPU, the RTX PRO 3000’s 51,517 is the number that justifies the 7 16’s existence for supported renderers, half as quick as the RTX PRO 1000 in the ThinkPad.

7-Zip Compression

The built-in 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads, run with a 128MB dictionary across ten passes. Decompression tends to scale with thread count while compression leans on memory latency, so the two halves often tell different stories. Higher GIPS scores are better.

7-Zip 24.09 (GIPS)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Compressing	96.281	85.627	96.202	90.364
Decompressing	97.246	117.863	95.896	90.526
Total Rating	96.764	101.745	96.049	90.445

 

The AMD unit’s 24-thread decompression hands it the total rating. Still, the review unit wins compression outright, and its 96.764 total edges the 7 16 while beating its own 14-inch twin by 4%, one of the clearest examples of what the bigger chassis buys from identical silicon.

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of digits of Pi, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory subsystem. At the same time, the BBP runs to extract hexadecimal digits of Pi. Results are in seconds, so lower times are better. The AMD unit could not complete the 5-billion- and 10-billion-digit runs because its memory reservation for the integrated GPU reduces the available pool below what those sizes require.

y-cruncher (seconds, lower is better)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Pi 1B	26.422	22.840	31.557	26.685
Pi 2.5B	80.463	64.242	101.524	76.787
Pi 5B	183.822	N/A	226.255	172.994
Pi 10B	407.658	N/A	500.875	392.083
Pi BBP 1B	1.635	1.100	1.639	1.621
Pi BBP 10B	19.036	12.277	21.512	18.200
Pi BBP 100B	234.797	140.284	291.628	219.969

 

The AMD unit’s SMT threads dominate every run it completed, and the ThinkPad stays slightly ahead of the review unit at the largest Pi sizes. The surprise is the 7 16 trailing the whole group at every size, 23% behind the review unit at 10 billion digits, a result consistent with its lower memory throughput in the SPEC runs and worth revisiting alongside its Cinebench reruns.

Blender

The Blender benchmark measures rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better, and we test on both the CPU and GPU. Scores are not comparable across Blender versions, so we have trimmed the older releases from the suite and report the current Blender 5.2 results here. The GPU figures are each system’s fastest renderer, meaning the discrete card on the two NVIDIA systems and the integrated GPU on the 5 16s pair.

Blender 5.2 (samples/min)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
GPU
Monster	572.84	123.00	1,555.53	922.95
Junkshop	468.85	101.21	1,257.01	795.65
Classroom	420.48	82.84	1,000.62	625.62
CPU
Monster	138.88	130.86	137.49	131.08
Junkshop	94.97	99.74	101.34	97.76
Classroom	65.39	74.18	69.26	68.45

 

The RTX PRO 3000 renders Monster at 1,555.53 samples per minute, 69 percent ahead of the RTX PRO 1000 in the ThinkPad and nearly triple the Arc Pro B390, which is what the 7 16’s dGPU premium buys in a supported renderer. Among the integrated GPUs, the review unit leads the Radeon 890M by more than four times across all three scenes, and it lands at 37 percent of the RTX PRO 3000, a respectable showing for a system with no discrete graphics. CPU rendering separates the four by only a few percent, with the review unit taking Monster outright.

LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL, based on LuxCoreRender. We run the Food and Hall scenes on all available OpenCL devices in each system, so single-GPU systems are scored on that GPU while the dual-GPU systems render on the discrete and integrated GPUs together, as noted in the column headers. Higher scores are better.

LuxMark v4	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000 + iGPU)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000 + iGPU)
Hall	3,505	2,058	19,300	11,342
Food	1,713	1,034	7,624	4,103

 

The review unit led the single-GPU systems by 70% in Hall, essentially matching its 14-inch twin, while the 7 16’s combined RTX PRO 3000 and iGPU output is in a different class at 19,300.

V-Ray

Chaos V-Ray measures ray-traced rendering throughput, reported in vpaths, where higher is better. We run the CUDA-compatible engine on every system so results remain comparable to notebooks with only integrated graphics; on systems without a discrete GPU, that path executes on the integrated graphics, even though V-Ray reports the processor name in its device field. On dedicated NVIDIA hardware, we also capture V-Ray’s RTX engine, which engages the card’s ray tracing cores and is reported separately.

V-Ray GPU (vpaths)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CUDA Engine	946	1,039	2,469	1,568
RTX Engine	N/A	N/A	3,891	2,589

 

The Radeon 890M takes the integrated matchup here by 10%, one of the few GPU tests where it beats the Arc Pro B390. The 7 16’s RTX PRO 3000 is the clear headliner, and its 3,891 vpaths on the RTX engine are 50% up on the ThinkPad’s RTX PRO 1000 in the same mode.

3DMark CPU Profile

The 3DMark CPU Profile benchmark measures CPU performance at fixed thread counts, from a single thread up to the maximum available, showing how performance scales as more cores are engaged. Higher scores are better.

3DMark CPU Profile	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Max Threads	10,748	9,267	10,557	10,500
8 Threads	6,818	6,573	5,996	6,550
4 Threads	4,483	4,238	4,261	4,219
1 Thread	1,210	1,178	1,185	1,165

 

The review unit sweeps every thread count, and its 10,748 max threads score is the best of any Pro Precision unit we have tested, 4.6% up on its 14-inch twin from the same silicon.

3DMark Storage and Blackmagic Disk Speed Test

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files. Higher is better in both.

Storage	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
3DMark Storage	2,804	2,325	2,189	3,094
Blackmagic Write (MB/s)	7,660.2	5,070.5	7,387.8	8,262.3
Blackmagic Read (MB/s)	8,418.1	5,071.2	6,776.2	8,511.5

 

The review unit’s SK hynix PCB01 posted solid Gen5 numbers, though this is one place the 14-inch twin’s Micron 4600 pulls ahead, reading nearly 9.8 GB/s against 8.4 here and scoring 3,093 in 3DMark Storage versus 2,804. Drive assignments vary within the family: the AMD twin’s SanDisk SN7100S lands near 5 GB/s in both directions, and the 7 16’s dual-drive RAID 0 volume wins nothing in these traces, trailing even in reads. Buyers with storage-sensitive workflows should watch which SSD their configuration ships with.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test

The Blackmagic RAW Speed Test measures how many frames per second a system can decode Blackmagic RAW video on the CPU and on the GPU. We quote the 8K results at 12:1 compression, and higher is better.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
8K 12:1 CPU (fps)	77	74	77	77
8K 12:1 GPU (fps)	87	49	137	96

 

CPU decode is effectively flat across the group at 74 to 77 fps. On the GPU, the 7 16 RTX PRO 3000 runs away with it at 137 fps through CUDA, while the review unit’s 87 fps over OpenCL comfortably clears real-time 8K playback, and the Radeon 890M falls short at 49.

Topaz Video AI

The Topaz Video AI benchmark measures AI video upscaling and frame-interpolation performance in frames per second across the application’s enhancement models, run here at 1080p input, where higher is better. The 16X Slowmo Aion model failed to complete on both Intel-graphics Precisions, this unit and the 7 16, while the AMD twin ran it without issue.

Topaz Video AI (fps)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Artemis 1X / 2X / 4X	6.24 / 5.21 / 1.90	3.72 / 2.21 / 0.78	12.38 / 8.94 / 3.15	5.17 / 3.19 / 1.12
Iris 1X / 2X / 4X	5.29 / 3.19 / 0.96	4.91 / 2.72 / 0.92	13.06 / 7.49 / 2.32	5.91 / 3.12 / 1.01
Proteus 1X / 2X / 4X	6.45 / 6.09 / 2.47	3.99 / 2.70 / 1.18	12.06 / 8.60 / 2.66	4.78 / 3.14 / 1.05
Gaia 1X / 2X / 4X	3.30 / 2.26 / 1.51	1.87 / 1.34 / 0.96	3.73 / 2.66 / 2.02	1.62 / 1.13 / 0.79
Nyx 1X / 2X	1.56 / 1.57	1.87 / 1.53	3.59 / 3.08	2.40 / 2.09
Hyperion HDR 1X	3.23	11.48	15.58	14.56
4X Slowmo Apollo / APFast	8.48 / 22.00	6.08 / 17.59	18.04 / 30.60	10.39 / 29.94
16X Slowmo Aion	DNF	9.05	DNF	N/A

 

The 7 16’s RTX PRO 3000 leads the upscaling models across the board, roughly doubling the review unit in Artemis and Proteus, which is the expected order of things. More interesting is the middle of the table: the Arc Pro B390 beats the RTX PRO 1000 in Artemis, Proteus, and Gaia while losing the interpolation models and Hyperion HDR, the same split we saw on the 14s. The Aion failure on Intel graphics repeats here, one for the driver team.

UL Procyon AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines LLM performance testing by providing a concise, consistent evaluation method. It enables repeated testing across four local models, Phi, Mistral, Llama3, and Llama2, while minimizing the complexity of large models and the number of variables. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators to deliver more reliable, efficient performance assessments. All four systems ran the models through ONNX Runtime with DirectML on their GPUs.

Procyon AI Text Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Phi	893	434	2,244	1,618
Mistral	646	403	2,062	1,397
Llama3	669	357	1,859	1,252
Llama2	750	390	1,990	DNF

 

The 7 16 owns this table, with its 12GB card also completing Llama2 at 1,990, where the 8GB RTX PRO 1000 could not load the model. Among the integrated GPUs, the Arc Pro B390 roughly doubles the Radeon 890M in Phi and Llama2, and the review unit’s 64GB memory pool finishes everything; the quiet advantage shared-memory platforms hold for local AI.

UL Procyon AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of neural networks, evaluating tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution with models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. The WinML runs use float32 on CPU and GPU, giving a like-for-like view across vendors. We also run the newer Computer Vision 2 suite through each vendor’s native path: OpenVINO in int8 on the Intel NPUs and fp16 on their iGPUs, TensorRT in fp16 on the RTX PRO 3000, and Ryzen AI on the AMD NPU; those results are listed separately since precision and runtime differ by platform. Higher scores are better.

Procyon AI Computer Vision (WinML)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU	143	114	122	134
GPU	410	245	553	426

 

Procyon AI Computer Vision 2 (native runtimes)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16
NPU (int8)	1,630	1,189	1,614
iGPU (fp16)	1,529	N/A	837
dGPU (TensorRT fp16)	N/A	N/A	3,470

 

In the vendor-neutral WinML view, the review unit posts the best CPU score and lands within 4% of the ThinkPad’s dGPU on graphics. On the native paths, the Intel AI Boost NPUs in the review unit and the 7 16 are within 1% of each other, both more than a third ahead of the Ryzen AI NPU, and the review unit’s iGPU nearly matches its NPU. Note the 7 16’s iGPU score of 837 comes from the smaller integrated Arc in the Core Ultra 9 386H, not the B390 class part in the 5-series units; its TensorRT result on the RTX PRO 3000 towers over everything at 3,470.

UL Procyon AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent method for measuring AI inference performance from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs, with three tests: Stable Diffusion XL FP16 for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 FP16 for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 INT8 for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference path for each platform: OpenVINO on Intel systems, the AMD-optimized DirectML pipeline on Radeon GPUs, and TensorRT on NVIDIA GPUs. The INT8 test uses Intel’s quantized SD 1.5 model where supported; the AMD pipeline does not offer a comparable quantized run. The 7 16 runs this suite through TensorRT on its RTX PRO 3000. New with this round, we also ran the INT8 workload on the Intel NPU.

Procyon AI Image Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro Precision 7 16 (RTX PRO 3000)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
SD 1.5 FP16	638	316	1,424	943
SD 1.5 INT8	7,778	2,855	17,287	12,403
SDXL FP16	738	200	1,273	765
SD 1.5 INT8 NPU	2,881	2,870	N/A	N/A

 

At 50.8 seconds per SDXL image, the review unit sits within 4% of the RTX PRO 1000, mirroring the 14s result, while the 7 16’s TensorRT run turns in 1,273 at 29.4 seconds per image for those who need volume. The NPU run at 2,881 delivers about 37% of the iGPU’s INT8 throughput while leaving the GPU free. Scores are not comparable between the FP16 and INT8 rows since the workloads use different batch sizes and step counts.

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets derived from professional applications in CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization, replayed here at 1080p. Higher scores are better, although performance can vary considerably between applications and graphics architectures. The 7 16 ran SPECviewperf at its native 4K resolution, which is not comparable to the FHD runs, so it sits this table out; the enscape-01 viewset also produced an unusually low score on the AMD twin that is worth a driver revisit.

SPECviewperf 15 (FHD)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
3dsmax-08	21.46	26.23	28.20
blender-01	23.15	23.17	40.69
catia-07	26.35	22.70	43.36
creo-04	68.14	49.42	107.59
energy-04	38.86	29.69	45.79
enscape-01	15.24	8.45	25.45
maya-07	85.61	53.48	112.84
medical-04	70.91	73.31	86.38
snx-05	80.24	61.33	103.61
solidworks-08	32.99	36.40	53.63
unreal_engine-01	42.15	27.38	49.24

 

The review unit wins seven of the eleven viewsets against the Radeon 890M, with the certified CAD and engineering traces (creo, maya, snx, energy) showing the Arc Pro driver stack at its best. Unlike its 14-inch twin, it completed catia-07 cleanly at 26.35. The RTX PRO 1000 sweeps the table. For the record, the 7 16 native-4K run posted 114.70 in creo-04 and 63.99 in solidworks-08 even at four times the pixels, so its FHD equivalents would land higher still.

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads, using real applications grouped into seven industry verticals. Higher scores are better, and N/A means the system did not complete every workload required for that category. The standalone 7-Zip workload inside SPECworkstation failed on both the AMD twin and the 7 16, which suppresses their CPU subsystem and Productivity and Development scores; a rerun of the AMD twin reproduced the same failure, and our separate 7-Zip section above covers that ground.

SPECworkstation 4	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 16s AMD	Dell Pro Precision 7 16	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Hardware Subsystems
Graphics	2.67	2.65	6.54	4.51
Accelerator	2.25	2.31	3.88	3.26
Storage	1.80	1.00	1.30	1.67
CPU	1.34	N/A	N/A	1.35
Industry Verticals
AI & Machine Learning	1.47	1.45	1.76	1.65
Energy	1.55	1.38	1.87	1.69
Financial Services	0.94	1.29	1.03	0.96
Life Sciences	1.84	1.47	2.03	1.82
Media & Entertainment	1.60	1.48	1.87	1.81
Product Design	1.75	1.41	1.87	1.89
Productivity & Development	1.35	N/A	N/A	1.34

 

The review unit posts the best Storage subsystem score of the four systems. The 7 16’s Graphics subsystem score of 6.54 shows the dGPU gap at its widest, while the review unit and its AMD twin split the verticals, with AMD ahead in Financial Services and the review unit well ahead in Life Sciences and Product Design. Against the ThinkPad, the review unit trades verticals rather than trailing across the board, taking Life Sciences and splitting the productivity scores.

Conclusion

The Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel ended up delivering the strongest CPU performance we have seen from any B390-based system, along with the longest battery life across the Pro Precision lineup we tested. Its 18,965 Geekbench 7 multicore score even beat the Core Ultra 9-equipped Pro Precision 7 16, and 7-Zip compression topped the group. PCMark 10 was equally strong at 9,994, six points shy of the 10,000 mark and 25 behind the 14-inch Intel model. Battery life was even more impressive at 24 hours and 43 minutes, more than double the Pro Precision 7 16, nearly nine hours beyond the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7, and 53 minutes longer than the 14s Intel despite its larger QHD+ display.

The Arc Pro B390 also performed well across the professional graphics and AI tests, including strong certified ISV results, good Topaz upscaling performance, SDXL image generation within 4% of the RTX PRO 1000, and an NPU image generation score of 2,881.

Choosing between the Pro Precision models depends heavily on the workload. The AMD 16s has an advantage in heavily threaded rendering and y-cruncher, while the Intel model performed better in single-threaded work, graphics, AI, storage, and battery testing. Buyers who need substantially more GPU performance can move up to the Pro Precision 7 16, which was roughly 2.7 times faster in Blender and much faster in V-Ray, local AI text generation, and BRAW processing, but that configuration costs roughly $1,900 to $2,300 more and lasts less than half as long on battery. Compared with the Intel 14s, the 16s delivers very similar overall performance while adding the larger QHD+ display, numeric keypad, slightly better sustained CPU results, and another 53 minutes of battery life, although it is larger and heavier, and our review unit shipped with a slower SSD. The 16s also gives IT teams good service access, with a customer-replaceable battery along with replaceable LPCAMM2 memory, SSD, WLAN card, fan, and other internal components.

For configuration options and current pricing, visit the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 16S product page.

Leaderboard: The Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel also holds the Best Battery Life spot on our Best Mobile Workstations leaderboard.

The post Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel Review: 24 Hours of Battery in a 16-Inch Workstation appeared first on StorageReview.com.

The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s is a compact mobile workstation built around Intel’s latest professional laptop platform. Our review unit combines a Series 3 Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, a 16-core Panther Lake processor with a 50 TOPS NPU, with Intel Arc Pro B390 graphics, 64GB of LPCAMM2 memory running at 8533 MT/s, and a 1TB Gen5 SED-ready SSD. During testing, this configuration produced the strongest productivity results we have recorded from a 14-inch laptop while lasting nearly a full day on battery.

Within Dell’s lineup, the Pro Precision 5 14s adds workstation-focused graphics drivers and enterprise features without moving to a heavier discrete GPU design. It is designed for engineers, developers, analysts, and creators who need certified application support, strong CPU performance, and easier business deployment in a portable system. Dell also offers the same chassis with an AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, giving us a direct platform comparison throughout the review. This size also keeps the portability expected from a 14-inch business laptop: it’s compact, has a decent selection of ports, and features a replaceable LPCAMM2 memory.

Intel’s Arc Pro B390 is the professional version of the Arc B390 integrated GPU, pairing 12 Xe cores with certified drivers for professional applications. Alongside the Core Ultra X9 388H’s NPU, the system can run local AI workloads across the CPU, GPU, or dedicated 50 TOPS accelerator. Our testing covers all three, along with professional graphics, content creation, storage, and battery performance.

The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s starts at $2,228. Our review configuration prices out at $5,725.11 as a single-unit purchase on Dell.com, with the 16GB to 64GB LPCAMM2 memory jump representing the largest single line item. As with all commercial systems, most business buyers purchase through an account team at volume discounts, so the web price is best viewed as a reference ceiling rather than a typical fleet cost. The system is available now on the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 14S product page.

Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Specifications

Specification	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s (PW514260)
Processor	Intel Core Ultra X9 388H vPro (Series 3, 16 cores/16 threads, up to 5.1GHz, 18MB cache, 50 TOPS NPU)
Graphics	Intel Arc Pro B390 (12 Xe cores, integrated)
Memory	64GB LPCAMM2, 8533 MT/s, dual-channel
Storage	1TB Performance SSD, PCIe Gen5, SED-ready
Display	14-inch FHD+/WUXGA (1920 x 1200), non-touch, 500 nits, IPS, 100% sRGB, anti-glare, low blue light, low power
Camera	8MP HDR RGB + IR with User Presence Detection
Wireless	Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211
Keyboard	English US backlit (mini-LED backlight)
Security	Fingerprint reader, smart card reader, NFC, ControlVault 3+, TPM 2.0
Battery	3-cell, 70Wh Long Lifecycle, ExpressCharge and ExpressCharge Boost
Power	100W USB-C adapter
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro (Copilot+ PC)
Chassis	Aluminum top cover, palm rest, and bottom cover
Systems Management	Intel vPro Enabled
Warranty	36 months Onsite Service after Remote Diagnosis
Price	$2,228 starting; $5,725.11 as tested (Dell.com single-unit)

Build and Design

The 5 14s is the thin system. Dell builds two 14-inch machines in this family, and the S gives up internal volume to hit a travel weight. It starts at 3.12 pounds against 3.98 for the standard Pro Precision 5 14, and measures 19.1mm at its thickest point against 23.65mm, in a chassis with effectively the same footprint at 315.5 by 226mm. Losing 0.86 pounds and roughly 4.5mm off a 14-inch workstation is the entire premise of the model, and the compromises it forces are visible once the bottom comes off.

The top cover is aluminum in a dark graphite that reads closer to blue than black under lab light, with a fine matte texture that hides fingerprints far better than the gloss lids Dell used to ship on this line. A mirrored Dell badge sits dead center and is the only marking on the surface. Dell specifies a three-sided aluminum chassis across the top cover, palm rest, and bottom, and states that it uses 50% recycled and 50% low-emissions aluminum. The wedge is pronounced for a machine this thin, tapering from 14.72mm at the hinge to 10.80mm at the front lip. The aluminum top cover provides good rigidity with minimal flex when opening the lid from a far corner. The hinge also provides a consistent, low-effort glide when opening the lid single-handedly.

The keyboard is a standard 79-key US layout with no number pad, mini-LED backlighting, and a function row that earns its keys: microphone mute on F4, a presence-detection toggle on F5, keyboard backlight on F6, display switching on F9, and a camera privacy toggle on F10. Dell puts home, end, insert, and delete in a column down the right edge rather than doubling them onto the arrows, which is a sensible call on a keyboard this size. The power button at the top right integrates the fingerprint reader. A Copilot key sits between the right alt and the arrow cluster, and that cluster is the one place the layout gives ground: full-size left and right arrows with half-height up and down keys that double as page up and page down. The keyboard layout is pretty typical of other Dell notebooks in its class, with a noticeable spacing between the keys, compared to others with tightly-neighboring keycaps. The mini-LED backlighting features two brightness levels, and both are respectable but not too bright in low-light environments, and even visible in well-lit environments.

The touchpad is a seamless clickpad, generously sized for a 14-inch deck, featuring a smooth coating for effortless navigation, and utilizes a typical diving board-style click mechanism. There is a tap target printed in the center for the NFC reader Dell builds into the palm rest, which is a good place for it on a machine aimed at badge-in environments.

The right edge carries a slim tray at the front, the headset jack, a USB-A port at 5Gbps, gigabit Ethernet, and a wedge lock slot at the rear corner. Beyond the headphone jack, we also see a blank for an optional nano-SIM tray for configurations with WWAN. The RJ45 is the surprise. Dropping a full-height Ethernet jack into a chassis that is 10.8mm at the front is the kind of thing that disappears from consumer machines first, and its presence here says more about the intended buyer than any spec-sheet line does.

The left edge holds HDMI 2.1, a second 5Gbps USB-A, and two Thunderbolt 4 ports rated at 40Gbps with Power Delivery and DisplayPort, either of which takes the 100W charger. Further back along the palm rest edge is the smart card reader slot. Counting it up, this is a workstation that drives external displays over HDMI or either USB-C port, takes legacy USB-A peripherals on both sides, has wired networking, and reads both smart cards and NFC badges, all without a dock. Very few 3.1-pound machines can say that.

The top bezel is thin without resorting to a notch or a pop-up camera. The 8MP HDR module sits center with IR emitters flanking it for Windows Hello and user presence detection, and a mechanical shutter slides across the lens, visible as the textured tab in the middle of the housing. That is a physical shutter rather than an electronic kill switch, which is what security-minded IT actually wants. Audio comes from stereo speakers driven by Cirrus CS35L63 amplifiers at 2W per channel, with a dual-array microphone alongside the camera. The 8MP webcam produces a more than respectable image for use in conference calls without much grain or light distortion noticeable. The bottom-firing stereo speakers also produce a noticeable stereo effect for how close they are together, and make a pretty full sound, without a lot of distortion or rattle at full volume.

With the bottom cover off, the serviceability claims hold up better than they usually do at this thickness. Memory is an LPDDR5X CAMM2 module under a metal retention plate, not soldered, and Dell prints the tightening order and an 18 to 20 kgf/cm torque spec directly on the shield. That is the single most consequential thing in this photo: a 3.12-pound workstation where a customer can change the RAM is quite rare. The Wi-Fi card is socketed M.2 rather than soldered down; the SSD sits under its own thermal plate on the right, with service instructions silkscreened next to it; and the 70Wh battery, Dell type 77C3X, lifts out with the connector at the center. Cooling is a single AVC blower and one heatpipe, which is the price of the thin chassis and the thing to watch in the sustained load results below.

For a machine built to a weight target, very little has been engineered out. The port selection is fuller than most thin-and-lights twice its class, the security hardware is all present, and the parts a fleet manager expects to replace over three years are the parts that come out first. What the 5 14s trades away is thermal headroom rather than features, and that shows up in the numbers rather than the hands.

Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Performance

Our review unit runs the Core Ultra X9 388H with Arc Pro B390 graphics, 64GB of LPCAMM2 at 8533 MT/s, and a 1TB Gen5 SSD on Windows 11 Pro, with benchmarks tested on the Best Performance power mode. For battery life testing, we configure systems into Balanced power mode and set the screen brightness to 50%.

For comparables, we included the AMD version of the same machine, the Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475, Radeon 890M, 64GB LPDDR5x), the standard Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Core Ultra X7 368H with Arc B390 integrated graphics, 64GB), and the Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (Core Ultra 7 366H, NVIDIA RTX PRO 1000, 64GB), the closest competing 14-inch mobile workstation. The Pro 5 14 predates our adoption of Geekbench 7, Cinebench 2026, and standalone 7-Zip, so it sits out those tables. We also tested the 16-inch Dell Pro Precision 5 16s Intel, which shares this unit’s exact CPU and GPU; its results land within a few percent of the 14s across the suite, so we left it off the tables and call out the handful of places where the bigger chassis makes a substantial difference.

A note on GPU labeling: the three systems in this group without a discrete GPU run V-Ray’s GPU test through the CUDA-compatible engine on their integrated graphics, and V-Ray reports the processor name in its device field. We label those results by the GPU that did the work.

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. The overall score is supported by the Essentials, Productivity, and Digital Content Creation subscores, which show where a system’s strengths lie. Higher scores are better.

PCMark 10	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Overall Score	10,019	8,762	7,945	9,083
Essentials	12,188	11,442	10,751	10,686
Productivity	15,827	14,272	13,821	16,501
Digital Content Creation	14,147	11,178	9,158	11,534

 

The Pro Precision 5 14s posted an overall score of 10,019, the first laptop in our 14-inch group to cross the 10,000 mark. It led every subscore except Productivity, where the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 edged ahead, and its Digital Content Creation score of 14,147 ran 23% ahead of the P14s and 54% ahead of the standard Pro 5 14.

PCMark 10 Modern Office Battery

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point, in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness. This is a rundown of the whole system rather than a synthetic idle drain, so it tracks closely with what a full day of productivity work does to the battery. Longer runtimes are better.

Modern Office Battery	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Runtime (higher is better)	23 hours 50 minutes	14 hours 26 minutes	26 hours 48 minutes	15 hours 52 minutes

 

At 23 hours and 50 minutes, the 5 14s Intel ran more than nine hours past the AMD version of the same chassis and eight hours past the dGPU-equipped ThinkPad. The standard Pro 5 14 remains our overall champion at 26 hours and 48 minutes, helped by its lower-power X7 silicon, but Precision gets remarkably close while carrying much stronger sustained performance. For what it is worth, the 16-inch 5 16s Intel and its larger thermal envelope stretched the same platform to 24 hours and 43 minutes.

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads, plus GPU compute scores through OpenCL and Vulkan. Higher scores are better.

Geekbench 6	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	3,010	2,831	2,952	2,808
CPU Multi-Core	17,396	14,611	10,372	16,319
GPU OpenCL	56,745	36,322	32,458	87,537
GPU Vulkan	55,581	49,868	43,382	73,204

 

The X9 388H took the single-core lead at 3,010 and posted 17,396 multi-core, ahead of every comp, including the ThinkPad. The GPU results are where the Arc Pro B390 separates itself from its non-Pro sibling in the Pro 5 14: 56,745 in OpenCL versus 32,458, a 75% gap between two GPUs with the same core count, reflecting the X9 platform’s higher graphics clocks and the Pro driver stack. The RTX PRO 1000 in the ThinkPad still owns outright GPU compute.

Geekbench 7

Geekbench 7 joins the suite alongside Geekbench 6 as comparison data builds. Its CPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 2,500, set by the AMD Ryzen 7700, while GPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 100,000, set by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Higher scores are better, and double the score indicates double the performance. Because Geekbench 7 uses new workloads and new baselines, its scores are not comparable to Geekbench 6 results. The Dell Pro 5 14 was tested before we adopted Geekbench 7, so it sits this table out.

Geekbench 7	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CPU Single-Core	2,702	2,571	2,533
CPU Multi-Core	18,788	15,514	17,651
GPU OpenCL	54,854	31,423	75,340
GPU Vulkan	46,906	*	70,067
GPU CUDA	N/A	N/A	114,469

 

*The AMD unit’s Vulkan run failed workload validation in Geekbench 7 and was assigned a zero score for the affected subtest; we have discarded the result and will update the table when a clean run is available.

The story repeats on the newer suite: the X9 388H leads both CPU metrics in this group, with 18,788 multi-core putting it 6% ahead of the ThinkPad and 21% ahead of the AMD sibling. In GPU compute, the Arc Pro B390 lands at roughly half of Geekbench 7’s RTX 4060 baseline, which is strong territory for integrated graphics but well short of the RTX PRO 1000.

Cinebench R23 and 2024

Cinebench measures how quickly the processor can render a complex photorealistic scene, with separate single-core and multi-core tests. R23 uses the legacy Cinema 4D engine that remains the most widely quoted version, while Cinebench 2024 moves to the Redshift render engine with a rebased score range. Hence, scores are not comparable between the two versions. The GPU test in Cinebench 2024 requires more graphics memory than these integrated platforms expose, so it did not run on the Dell systems. Higher scores are better.

Cinebench	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Cinebench R23
Single-Core	2,137	2,028	2,010	2,056
Multi-Core	18,466	20,884	16,915	18,546
Cinebench 2024
Single-Core	125	114	122	123
Multi-Core	1,106	1,089	807	1,118

 

The AMD unit’s 24-thread Ryzen takes R23 multi-core at 20,884, a workload that has long favored AMD’s thread count, while the X9 388H wins single-core in both versions. In Cinebench 2024, the three current-generation machines bunch within 3% of each other in multi-core, all well clear of the Pro 5 14’s 807.

Cinebench 2026

Cinebench 2026 joins the suite alongside R23 and 2024. It tests CPU and GPU performance using Maxon’s Redshift render engine. It is built on the latest Cinema 4D 2026 code and is designed to show whether a machine is stable under high CPU load, whether a notebook’s cooling can sustain longer render tasks, and how it handles demanding real-world 3D work. Because code and compiler changes accelerated scene rendering, Cinebench 2026 scores use an adjusted range and should not be compared to scores from previous Cinebench versions. Its GPU test supports current NVIDIA and AMD hardware but does not yet run on Intel integrated graphics, so the two Intel Dell systems have no GPU score.

Cinebench 2026	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU Single Thread	513	466	502
CPU Multiple Threads	4,513	4,230	4,492
GPU	N/A	5,313	34,437

 

On the Redshift-based CPU test, the X9 388H again finishes first, though the margin over the ThinkPad is under 1%. The Radeon 890M managed a GPU score of 5,313, and the RTX PRO 1000 shows what a workstation dGPU adds in a supported renderer.

7-Zip Compression

The built-in 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads, run with a 128MB dictionary across ten passes. Decompression tends to scale with thread count while compression leans on memory latency, so the two halves often tell different stories. Higher GIPS scores are better.

7-Zip 24.09 (GIPS)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Compressing	92.836	89.099	90.364
Decompressing	93.089	117.545	90.526
Total Rating	92.963	103.322	90.445

 

Decompression scales with thread count, which gives the 24-thread AMD unit a total rating of 103.322 GIPS. The Intel unit’s 92.963 edges the ThinkPad, and for reference, the 16-inch 5 16s Intel squeezed out 96.764 GIPS from the same silicon with more thermal room.

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of digits of Pi, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory subsystem. At the same time, the BBP runs extract hexadecimal digits of Pi. Results are in seconds, so lower times are better. The AMD unit could not complete the 5 billion and 10 billion digit runs because its memory reservation for the integrated GPU reduces the available pool below what those sizes require.

y-cruncher (seconds, lower is better)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Pi 1B	28.404	24.648	29.405	26.685
Pi 2.5B	83.968	71.084	90.719	76.787
Pi 5B	190.356	N/A	204.685	172.994
Pi 10B	417.224	N/A	512.277	392.083
Pi BBP 1B	1.684	1.104	1.718	1.621
Pi BBP 10B	20.028	14.333	20.210	18.200
Pi BBP 100B	241.409	166.762	256.416	219.969

 

The AMD unit’s SMT threads give it a clear edge in every run it completed, and the ThinkPad finishes ahead of the review unit at the larger sizes. The Precision still beats the Pro 5 14 across the board, with the gap widening to 19% at 10 billion digits.

Blender

The Blender benchmark measures rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better, and we test on both the CPU and GPU. Scores are not comparable across Blender versions, so each version gets its own table. Starting with this review, we are trimming the older Blender releases from the suite and reporting the current 5.1 and 5.2 results; the Pro 5 14 predates Blender 5.2, and the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 will join these tables once it completes the expanded version sweep.

Blender 5.1 (samples/min)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)
GPU
Monster	559.73	134.65	360.50
Junkshop	467.52	107.84	309.81
Classroom	418.63	95.60	232.02
CPU
Monster	131.04	130.35	70.12
Junkshop	97.86	100.31	52.95
Classroom	66.98	76.40	34.97

 

Blender 5.2 (samples/min)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)
GPU
Monster	567.52	124.50
Junkshop	463.30	101.06
Classroom	417.38	82.95
CPU
Monster	133.46	127.02
Junkshop	94.27	95.84
Classroom	64.26	71.63

 

The Arc Pro B390 rendered Monster at 559.73 samples per minute in Blender 5.1, more than four times the Radeon 890M and 55 percent ahead of the Arc B390 in the Pro 5 14, and the 5.2 results hold the same level. On CPU rendering the Intel and AMD Precision twins trade scenes, with AMD’s extra threads winning Junkshop and Classroom, while the Pro 5 14 falls off sharply in the 5.x releases.

LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL, based on LuxCoreRender. We run the Food and Hall scenes on all available OpenCL devices in each system, so the GPU listed in each column header did the rendering. Higher scores are better.

LuxMark v4	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Hall	3,494	2,077	3,287	11,342
Food	1,705	1,041	1,585	4,103

 

The Arc Pro B390 led the integrated pack in both scenes, finishing 68% ahead of the Radeon 890M in Hall. The gap to its non-Pro sibling is modest here, unlike the Geekbench compute results, suggesting LuxCoreRender is less sensitive to the clock and driver differences between the two B390 variants.

V-Ray

Chaos V-Ray measures ray-traced rendering throughput, reported in vpaths, where higher is better. We run the CUDA-compatible engine on every system so results remain comparable to notebooks with only integrated graphics; on systems without a discrete GPU, that path executes on the integrated graphics, even though V-Ray reports the processor name in its device field. On dedicated NVIDIA hardware, we also capture V-Ray’s RTX engine, which engages the card’s ray tracing cores and is reported separately.

V-Ray GPU (vpaths)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
CUDA Engine	890	897	919	1,568
RTX Engine	N/A	N/A	N/A	2,589

 

The three integrated platforms cluster within about 3% of each other, an unusually tight grouping given how differently they behave elsewhere, which points to this compatibility path leaning on CPU and memory as much as the GPU. The ThinkPad pulls well clear on either engine.

3DMark CPU Profile

The 3DMark CPU Profile benchmark measures CPU performance at fixed thread counts, from a single thread up to the maximum available, showing how performance scales as more cores are engaged. Higher scores are better.

3DMark CPU Profile	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Max Threads	10,277	8,778	10,370	10,500
8 Threads	6,441	6,270	6,669	6,550
4 Threads	4,176	4,047	4,256	4,219
1 Thread	1,174	1,160	1,181	1,165

 

The four systems are effectively tied at every thread count except max, where the AMD unit trails; its strength in rendering workloads does not carry over to this physics test. The 16-inch 5 16s Intel posted the group’s best max threads result at 10,748, one of the few places its extra thermal headroom shows up.

3DMark Storage and Blackmagic Disk Speed Test

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files. Higher is better in both.

Storage	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
3DMark Storage	3,093	2,424	3,144	3,094
Blackmagic Write (MB/s)	9,000.8	4,772.0	8,747.3	8,262.3
Blackmagic Read (MB/s)	9,809.2	4,900.4	8,609.6	8,511.5

 

The review unit’s Micron 4600 posted the best sequential numbers in the group, reading at nearly 9.8 GB/s. The AMD twin ships with a Kioxia BG7 in this configuration and lands at roughly half the sequential throughput, a config difference worth noting for video-heavy workflows. Buyers of the 16-inch model should also know its drive tested lower here, with the 5 16s Intel’s SSD reaching 7,660 MB/s writes, and 8,418 MB/s reads and a 3DMark Storage score of 2,804, about 9% behind the 14s.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test

The Blackmagic RAW Speed Test measures how many frames per second a system can decode Blackmagic RAW video on the CPU and on the GPU. We quote the 8K results at 12:1 compression, and higher is better.

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
8K 12:1 CPU (fps)	79	77	76	77
8K 12:1 GPU (fps)	85	49	86	96

 

Decode is effectively CPU-bound at these settings, with all four systems between 76 and 79 fps on the processor. On the GPU side, the RTX PRO 1000 leads at 96 fps through CUDA, the two B390-class systems decode in the mid-80s over OpenCL, and the Radeon 890M trails at 49 fps.

Topaz Video AI

The Topaz Video AI benchmark measures AI video upscaling and frame-interpolation performance in frames per second across the application’s enhancement models, run here at 1080p input, where higher is better. The Dell Pro 5 14 was not tested with Topaz, and the 16X Slowmo Aion model failed to complete on the review unit, an error we also saw on the 5 16s Intel; both AMD Precision units ran it without issue.

Topaz Video AI (fps)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Artemis 1X / 2X / 4X	6.22 / 5.28 / 1.89	3.75 / 2.24 / 0.79	5.17 / 3.19 / 1.12
Iris 1X / 2X / 4X	5.18 / 3.14 / 0.94	4.86 / 2.70 / 0.86	5.91 / 3.12 / 1.01
Proteus 1X / 2X / 4X	6.43 / 6.08 / 2.46	3.93 / 2.69 / 1.19	4.78 / 3.14 / 1.05
Gaia 1X / 2X / 4X	3.24 / 2.25 / 1.50	1.90 / 1.35 / 0.94	1.62 / 1.13 / 0.79
Nyx 1X / 2X	1.57 / 1.54	1.86 / 1.56	2.40 / 2.09
Hyperion HDR 1X	3.22	11.34	14.56
4X Slowmo Apollo / APFast	8.57 / 22.13	6.05 / 17.72	10.39 / 29.94
16X Slowmo Aion	DNF	9.13	N/A

 

The Arc Pro B390 won most of the upscaling models outright, including a wide lead in Proteus and Gaia, and even beat the RTX PRO 1000 in several. The pattern flips in Hyperion HDR and the interpolation models, where NVIDIA and AMD hold clear advantages, and the Aion failure on Intel graphics is worth watching for anyone whose pipeline depends on 16X slow motion.

UL Procyon AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines LLM performance testing by providing a concise, consistent evaluation method. It enables repeated testing across four local models, Phi, Mistral, Llama3, and Llama2, while minimizing the complexity of large models and the number of variables. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators to deliver more reliable, efficient performance assessments. All four systems ran the models through ONNX Runtime with DirectML on their GPUs.

Procyon AI Text Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
Phi	887	424	904	1,618
Mistral	646	396	716	1,397
Llama3	674	352	708	1,252
Llama2	786	379	641	DNF

 

The two B390-class systems hold a wide lead over the Radeon 890M across all four models, ranging from 63% in Mistral to more than double in Phi, and the review unit’s 64GB memory pool lets it finish Llama2 at 786, a model the 8GB RTX PRO 1000 could not load at all. For smaller models, the dGPU’s bandwidth still wins decisively.

UL Procyon AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of neural networks, evaluating tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution with models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. The WinML runs use float32 on CPU and GPU, giving a like-for-like view across vendors. We also run the newer Computer Vision 2 suite through each vendor’s native path: OpenVINO in int8 on the Intel NPU and fp16 on its iGPU, and Ryzen AI on the AMD NPU; those results are listed separately since precision and runtime differ by platform. Higher scores are better.

Procyon AI Computer Vision (WinML)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
CPU	141	106	119	134
GPU	404	247	398	426

Procyon AI Computer Vision 2 (native runtimes)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD
NPU (int8)	1,647	1,176
iGPU (fp16)	1,517	N/A

 

In the vendor-neutral WinML view, the review unit leads on both CPU and lands within 5% of the ThinkPad’s dGPU on graphics. On the native path, Intel’s AI Boost NPU scored 1,647 in Computer Vision 2, 40% ahead of the Ryzen AI NPU, and notably, the B390 iGPU nearly matches the NPU while the NPU sips a fraction of the power.

UL Procyon AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent method for measuring AI inference performance from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs, with three tests: Stable Diffusion XL FP16 for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 FP16 for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 INT8 for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference path for each platform: OpenVINO on Intel systems, the AMD-optimized DirectML pipeline on Radeon, and TensorRT on NVIDIA GPUs. The INT8 test uses Intel’s quantized SD 1.5 model where supported; the AMD pipeline does not offer a comparable quantized run, so that cell is blank pending a supported path. New with this round, we also ran the INT8 workload on the Intel NPU.

Procyon AI Image Generation	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
SD 1.5 FP16	632	281	635	943
SD 1.5 INT8	7,873	N/A	7,693	12,403
SDXL FP16	731	197	646	765
SD 1.5 INT8 NPU	3,003	N/A	N/A	N/A

 

At 51.3 seconds per SDXL image, the review unit came within 5% of the RTX PRO 1000, a result that would have been hard to believe from integrated graphics a generation ago, and its SDXL score of 731 beat the Pro 5 14 by 13%. The NPU run is the first we have recorded on this workload; at 3,003, it delivers roughly 38% of the iGPU’s INT8 throughput while leaving the GPU free, a useful trade for background generation tasks. Note that scores are not comparable between the FP16 and INT8 rows since the workloads use different batch sizes and step counts.

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets derived from professional applications in CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization, replayed here at 1080p. Higher scores are better, although performance can vary considerably between applications and graphics architectures. The Catia-07 viewset failed to complete on the review unit across multiple runs, and Enscape-01 failed on the AMD Twin; we will update if new driver releases resolve either.

SPECviewperf 15 (FHD)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel (Arc Pro B390)	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel (Arc B390)	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)
3dsmax-08	19.51	26.30	20.21	28.20
blender-01	21.55	23.01	21.19	40.69
catia-07	DNF	22.70	10.27	43.36
creo-04	63.57	49.27	32.53	107.59
energy-04	38.07	29.51	10.78	45.79
enscape-01	14.92	DNF	14.28	25.45
maya-07	83.86	53.30	82.42	112.84
medical-04	69.41	73.42	22.96	86.38
snx-05	78.74	59.58	46.22	103.61
solidworks-08	33.38	36.66	23.60	53.63
unreal_engine-01	41.38	27.31	38.77	49.24

 

This table justifies the Pro in Arc Pro. The review unit beat the standard B390 by wide margins in the ISV viewsets that lean on certified driver paths, roughly doubling it in creo-04 and tripling it in energy-04 and medical-04, while the two trade places in the game-engine and DCC traces where certification matters less. The Radeon 890M wins a handful of viewsets, and the RTX PRO 1000 sweeps all eleven.

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads, using real applications grouped into seven industry verticals. Higher scores are better, and N/A means the system did not complete every workload required for that category. The NAMD workload failed repeatedly on the review unit, which also suppresses its Life Sciences vertical and CPU subsystem scores; the other three systems completed their runs, though the Pro 5 14’s HandBrake failure removes its Media and Entertainment vertical.

SPECworkstation 4	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel	Dell Pro Precision 5 14s AMD	Dell Pro 5 14 Intel	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7
Hardware Subsystems
Graphics	2.70	2.57	1.68	4.51
Accelerator	2.29	2.22	N/A	3.26
Storage	1.70	0.93	1.76	1.67
CPU	N/A	1.15	1.19	1.35
Industry Verticals
AI & Machine Learning	1.45	1.38	1.36	1.65
Energy	1.67	1.28	1.18	1.69
Financial Services	0.93	1.07	0.78	0.96
Life Sciences	N/A	1.41	1.34	1.82
Media & Entertainment	1.53	1.39	N/A	1.81
Product Design	1.80	1.34	1.64	1.89
Productivity & Development	1.32	1.03	1.10	1.34

 

The review unit’s Graphics and Accelerator subsystem scores clear the AMD twin and post the biggest gap over the standard Pro 5 14, again reflecting the Pro driver stack. It leads the Dell group in five of the six verticals it completed. The ThinkPad’s dGPU keeps it on top overall. The AMD unit’s 0.93 Storage score tracks with its slower Kioxia drive.

Conclusion

For configuration options and current pricing, visit the Dell Pro Precision 5 Series 14S product page.

Leaderboard: The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel is our Best Ultraportable Workstation on the Best Mobile Workstations leaderboard.

Leaderboard: The Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel holds the Best Without a Discrete GPU spot on the Best Laptops for Local AI leaderboard.

The post Dell Pro Precision 5 14s Intel Review: Certified Workstation Graphics Without a Discrete GPU appeared first on StorageReview.com.

Lenovo’s ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 packs a Series 3 Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with Intel vPro and NVIDIA’s RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell Generation laptop GPU into a 14.5-inch mobile workstation that starts at 3.59 pounds. Our review unit backs that pairing with 64GB of LPCAMM2 memory in a single customer-replaceable module, a 2TB PCIe Gen5 SSD, and a 3K 120Hz display. This configuration is aimed at engineers and content professionals who need workstation graphics and ISV certifications in a chassis that travels like a mainstream business laptop. At the time of this review, Lenovo lists the equivalent retail configuration, model 21XJ0038US, at a discounted web price of $4,703.16.

The configuration does well in the lab. The P14s Gen 7 posted a PCMark 10 score of 9,083 and a Cinebench R23 multicore result of 18,546. At the same time, the RTX PRO 1000 pushed Blender 4.5 rendering roughly 29% past the RTX PRO 500 in last year’s P14s Gen 6 and carried UL Procyon’s AI Image Generation suite to 2.5 seconds per image in Stable Diffusion 1.5 INT8. It did all of that and still ran 15 hours and 52 minutes in our PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test, four hours longer than its predecessor.

This review examines how far the 14-inch P-series has come in a single generation, and what the 8GB GDDR7 workstation GPU can and cannot do. We tested the P14s Gen 7 against its direct predecessor, the larger Dell Pro Max 16 with the same RTX PRO 1000 GPU, and the Dell Pro 7 14, which uses the same Core Ultra 7 366H processor but lacks discrete graphics.

Design and Build

This generation of the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 uses a larger 14.5-inch chassis but remains easy to carry as a mobile workstation. It starts at 3.59 pounds and measures 325.2 mm wide by 226.3 mm deep. The chassis is 11.7 mm at the front and rises to 16.22 mm, with Lenovo listing a maximum height of 22.2 mm at the rear. It has also been tested against MIL-STD-810H procedures for durability.

Flipping the P14s Gen 7 over reveals a straightforward bottom panel, with two large ventilation areas positioned above the cooling fans. A long rubber strip near the hinge and two smaller feet at the front keep the laptop steady while leaving enough space underneath for airflow. The panel is held in place by several visible screws and can be removed to access the battery, LPCAMM2 memory, SSD, and cooling system.

Removing the bottom panel provides access to the customer-replaceable 75 Wh battery, Gen5 M.2 SSD, and single LPCAMM2 memory module. LPCAMM2 delivers the speed and efficiency of LPDDR5x memory without permanently soldering it to the motherboard. The P14s Gen 7 also carries ISV certifications from Altair, ANSYS, Autodesk, AVID, Bentley, Dassault, Nemetschek, PTC, and Siemens.

Upgradability and Warranty

The P14s Gen 7 leaves more room to grow than most thin 14-inch machines. The single LPCAMM2 slot accepts modules up to 96GB, so memory can be upgraded or replaced years into a deployment instead of being soldered for life, and the Gen5 M.2 2280 bay takes drives up to 2TB, though a user could swap that for something else larger. With the battery and keyboard also serviceable, the practical service life stretches well past what sealed designs allow.

Lenovo covers the retail configuration with a one-year courier or carry-in warranty, with Premier Support, Premier Support Plus, and Accidental Damage Protection available as upgrades for fleets that need faster turnaround or on-site coverage.

Display and Input

Our review unit has the top 14.5-inch 3K IPS display, with a 3072 x 1920 resolution, 16:10 aspect ratio, 500-nit brightness, 120 Hz refresh rate, and full DCI-P3 coverage. The panel has an anti-glare finish, Eyesafe certification, and timing controller color calibration. Lenovo also offers lower-resolution WUXGA touch and non-touch panels for those who do not need the added resolution or color coverage.

The spill-resistant keyboard has LED backlighting and a dedicated Copilot key, along with the familiar red TrackPoint and three physical buttons above the touchpad.

The trackpad itself is 4.53 inches wide with a glass-like Mylar surface. There is plenty of room for everyday navigation and Windows gestures, though the three physical TrackPoint buttons above it reduce its height somewhat. Longtime ThinkPad users should feel at home with this layout, which lets you choose between the trackpad and the red TrackPoint without giving up dedicated left, middle, and right buttons.

The 5MP RGB and infrared camera supports Windows Hello facial recognition, which worked quickly and made signing in easier without needing to reach for the fingerprint reader. It also supports presence detection, allowing the laptop to lock when you step away and wake when you return. A physical privacy shutter covers the camera when it is not in use.

Ports and Connectivity

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 has two Thunderbolt 4 USB-C ports and two 5Gbps USB Type-A ports, including one with always-on charging. It also provides HDMI 2.1 TMDS, Gigabit Ethernet, an SD Express 8.0 card reader, and a combined audio jack. The built-in Ethernet and high-speed SD card reader are especially useful (and rare) on a mobile workstation, where adapters are often required for either connection. An optional smart-card reader is also available.

For wireless connectivity, it features an Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211 2×2 adapter with Bluetooth 6. Lenovo also offers optional Snapdragon X61 5G connectivity with eSIM support and optional NFC. The system charges through USB-C using the included slim 100 W adapter.

Security and Manageability

The Core Ultra 7 366H supports Intel vPro and Active Management Technology, giving IT teams out-of-band access to diagnose, configure, and support the laptop even when the operating system is unavailable. Intel Hardware Shield protects the operating system, while Threat Detection Technology works with compatible security software to help identify certain attacks, and the Stable IT Platform Program gives businesses a more consistent hardware and software platform across larger deployments.

Lenovo builds on those capabilities with its ThinkShield security features, including a discrete TPM 2.0 chip and Self-Healing BIOS. Our configuration also includes a touch-style fingerprint reader, Windows Hello facial recognition, and presence detection, which (as mentioned earlier) can lock the laptop when you leave and wake it when you return. A physical webcam shutter and Kensington lock slot provide more direct security options, and NFC is available on select configurations.

For day-to-day management, Lenovo preloads Commercial Vantage to handle driver, firmware, and system updates, and the P series supports Lenovo Performance Tuner, a free utility that matches power, thermal, and process settings to professional applications. Paired with the out-of-band access vPro provides, IT can provision, update, and troubleshoot the P14s Gen 7 remotely across its service life.

Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 Specifications

Specification	Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (21XJ0032US)
Platform Overview
Processor	Series 3 Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with Intel vPro 16 cores, up to 4.8 GHz 50 TOPS NPU (Copilot+ PC)
Graphics	NVIDIA RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell Generation Laptop GPU, 8GB GDDR7 Integrated Intel Graphics
Memory	64GB LPDDR5x-7467 LPCAMM2 1 slot, customer replaceable, up to 96GB
Storage	2TB PCIe Gen5 NVMe SSD (SK hynix)
Display	14.5-inch 3K (3072 x 1920) IPS, 16:10 500 nits, 120Hz, 100% DCI-P3, anti-glare, Eyesafe
Connectivity
Ports	2x Thunderbolt 4 (USB-C) 2x USB-A 3.1 5Gbps (1 always-on) HDMI 2.1 (TMDS) RJ45 Gigabit Ethernet SD Express 8.0 card reader Mic/headphone combo jack Optional smart card reader
Wireless	Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211 2×2 + Bluetooth 6 Optional Snapdragon X61 5G with eSIM
Camera	5MP RGB + IR with privacy shutter Windows Hello, presence detection
Power and Build
Battery	75Wh, customer replaceable, Rapid Charge 100W USB-C slim adapter
Chassis	From 3.59 lb / 1.63 kg MIL-STD-810H tested
Security and Software
Security	Intel vPro (AMT, Hardware Shield, TDT, SIPP) Lenovo ThinkShield, dTPM 2.0, Self-Healing BIOS Touch fingerprint reader, webcam privacy shutter
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro
Warranty	1-year courier or carry-in (retail configuration) Premier Support, Premier Support Plus, ADP optional
Price as Tested	$4,703.16 (Lenovo.com web price; $5,599.00 estimated value)

Performance

To put the ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 in context, we compared it against three systems from our recent laptop testing. The ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 is its direct predecessor, built on the Core Ultra 7 265H and RTX PRO 500 Blackwell. The Dell Pro Max 16 carries the same RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell GPU in a larger 16-inch chassis, paired with an AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370. The Dell Pro 7 14 runs the same Core Ultra 7 366H processor as the P14s Gen 7 with only integrated graphics, which isolates exactly what the discrete GPU adds.

This review is also our first to include Cinebench 2026 and Geekbench 7, which are entering our benchmark suite alongside the previous versions. Where the comparison systems predate those tests, their rows will fill in as units return to the lab.

Test Systems

Configuration	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
CPU	Core Ultra 7 366H (16C)	Core Ultra 7 265H (16C)	Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 (12C/24T)	Core Ultra 7 366H (16C)
GPU	RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell 8GB	RTX PRO 500 Blackwell 6GB	RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell 8GB	Intel Graphics (integrated)
Memory	64GB LPCAMM2 LPDDR5x-7467	32GB DDR5	64GB LPDDR5x-8400	64GB LPDDR5x-8533
Storage	SK hynix 2TB (Gen5)	1TB NVMe	2x 2TB NVMe	SK hynix PCB01 1TB (Gen5)
Battery	75Wh	75Wh	96Wh	70Wh
Price as Tested	$4,703	Not published	$4,691	$5,600

UL Procyon: AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of state-of-the-art neural networks. It evaluates tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution using models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. Tests are run on multiple inference engines, including NVIDIA TensorRT, Intel OpenVINO, Qualcomm SNPE, Microsoft Windows ML, and Apple Core ML, providing a broad view of hardware and software efficiency. Results are reported for float- and integer-optimized models, providing a consistent, practical measure of machine vision performance for professional workloads. For the overall scores, higher is better; for the per-model figures, the average inference times are in milliseconds, where lower is better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 led the CPU portion of the benchmark with an overall score of 134, ahead of all three comparison systems. It also recorded the fastest CPU result in REAL-ESRGAN, completing the test in 2,848.37 ms. The Core Ultra 7 366H was competitive across the remaining CPU workloads, with results generally close to those of the Dell Pro 7 14 using the same processor.

GPU performance showed a larger generational improvement, as the equipped RTX PRO 1000 scored 426 in Windows ML, which was 20% higher than the RTX PRO 500 in the P14s Gen 6 and more than twice the score of the Dell Pro 7 14’s integrated graphics. Moving to TensorRT increased the P14s Gen 7’s overall score to 600, giving it a 37% lead over its predecessor.

CPU Results, Windows ML (avg time in ms)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Overall Score	134	122	120	121
MobileNet V3	1.28 ms	1.11 ms	1.21 ms	1.24 ms
ResNet 50	10.08 ms	10.89 ms	9.75 ms	11.57 ms
Inception V4	29.94 ms	31.91 ms	30.81 ms	34.01 ms
DeepLab V3	35.09 ms	39.42 ms	57.37 ms	37.98 ms
YOLO V3	69.31 ms	74.45 ms	67.98 ms	81.22 ms
REAL-ESRGAN	2,848.37 ms	4,161.76 ms	3,470.93 ms	3,163.45 ms

GPU Results, Windows ML (avg time in ms)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500)	Dell Pro Max 16 (Radeon 890M)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Graphics)
Overall Score	426	355	439	205
MobileNet V3	0.98 ms	1.05 ms	0.83 ms	1.04 ms
ResNet 50	3.31 ms	3.77 ms	3.20 ms	6.52 ms
Inception V4	8.58 ms	10.13 ms	9.43 ms	20.72 ms
DeepLab V3	19.77 ms	25.40 ms	19.26 ms	26.53 ms
YOLO V3	14.93 ms	19.16 ms	15.63 ms	43.07 ms
REAL-ESRGAN	312.96 ms	399.21 ms	286.48 ms	1,309.49 ms

TensorRT Results, NVIDIA GPUs (avg time in ms)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500)
Overall Score	600	438
MobileNet V3	0.59 ms	0.76 ms
ResNet 50	2.24 ms	3.33 ms
Inception V4	7.51 ms	9.53 ms
DeepLab V3	8.82 ms	13.34 ms
YOLO V3	10.69 ms	15.28 ms
REAL-ESRGAN	355.17 ms	446.47 ms

UL Procyon: AI Computer Vision 2

The Procyon AI Computer Vision 2 Benchmark evaluates newer vision and multimodal workloads, including BLIP image captioning, ConvNeXt classification, DETR object detection, ESRGAN super-resolution, and SAM2.1 segmentation. Results are reported as throughput, so higher is better. The benchmark uses the optimal inference engine available on each accelerator.

The RTX PRO 1000 achieved the highest overall score of 1,954, with its strongest results in the BLIP and SAM2.1 workloads. The NPU followed with a score of 1,469 and was faster than the discrete GPU in ESRGAN, reaching 14.04 iterations per second compared with 7.16, while also holding a small lead in ConvNeXt.

These results use the best available software path for each accelerator, so they are not directly engine-matched. The NPU ran OpenVINO at INT8 precision, the RTX PRO 1000 used TensorRT at FP16, and the Intel integrated GPU used OpenVINO at FP16.

ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 CV2 Results (higher is better)	NPU (OpenVINO, int8)	RTX PRO 1000 (TensorRT, fp16)	Intel Graphics (OpenVINO, fp16)
Overall Score	1,469	1,954	822
BLIP Decoder (it/s)	213.328	246.559	141.832
BLIP Encoder (it/s)	53.368	121.213	74.825
ConvNeXt (images/s)	1,062.34	1,029.56	335.37
DETR (it/s)	103.982	104.226	47.240
ESRGAN (it/s)	14.039	7.160	4.059
SAM2.1 Decoder (it/s)	138.932	465.709	215.827
SAM2.1 Encoder (it/s)	8.730	39.288	9.891

UL Procyon: AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines LLM performance testing by providing a concise, consistent evaluation method. It enables repeated testing across multiple LLM models while minimizing the complexity of large models and the number of variables. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators to deliver more reliable, efficient performance assessments.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 ran this benchmark on the RTX PRO 1000 using ONNX Runtime and DirectML, scoring 1,618 in Phi and 1,397 in Mistral. Those results put it 24% and 23% ahead of the P14s Gen 6, respectively, though the larger Dell Pro Max 16 was faster in every model it completed despite having the same GPU. Its larger chassis and higher power limits likely allowed the RTX PRO 1000 to maintain better performance during these sustained workloads.

Neither RTX PRO 1000 system could complete the Llama2 test because the 13-billion-parameter model needs about 12GB of graphics memory through this software path, while the GPU only has 8GB. Systems with integrated graphics can borrow enough shared system memory to complete the test, making this a good example of how the P14s Gen 7’s limited VRAM can hold it back.

AI Text Generation (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Phi Score	1,618	1,307	1,709	689
Phi Tokens Per Second	55.126	45.671	61.895	34.172
Mistral Score	1,397	1,137	1,538	525
Mistral Tokens Per Second	40.287	33.960	44.929	22.843
Llama3 Score	1,252	–	1,375	509
Llama3 Tokens Per Second	35.278	–	39.475	19.104
Llama2 Score	DNF (8GB VRAM)	–	DNF	530

UL Procyon: AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent and accurate method for measuring AI inference performance across a range of hardware, from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs. It includes three tests: Stable Diffusion XL (FP16) for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16) for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8) for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference engine for each system, ensuring fair and comparable results.

The RTX PRO 1000 delivered a big improvement over the previous generation in all three image-generation workloads. It completed Stable Diffusion 1.5 FP16 in 6.623 seconds per image and the INT8 version in 2.519 seconds, with scores of 943 and 12,403. These results were 35% to 47% higher than those of the RTX PRO 500 in the P14s Gen 6.

The added 8GB of graphics memory also allowed the P14s Gen 7 to complete Stable Diffusion XL, which did not run on the previous model’s 6GB GPU. It finished that workload in 48.972 seconds per image. The Dell Pro Max 16 was 8% to 9% faster with the same GPU, while the Dell Pro 7 14’s integrated graphics produced roughly one-quarter to one-third of the P14s Gen 7’s scores.

AI Image Generation	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
SD 1.5 (FP16) Score	943	697	1,027	258
SD 1.5 (FP16) Speed	6.623 s/image	8.965 s/image	6.081 s/image	24.163 s/image
SD 1.5 (INT8) Score	12,403	8,440	13,504	3,575
SD 1.5 (INT8) Speed	2.519 s/image	3.702 s/image	2.314 s/image	8.739 s/image
SDXL (FP16) Score	765	–	785	268
SDXL (FP16) Speed	48.972 s/image	–	47.729 s/image	139.410 s/image

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 posted the highest overall PCMark 10 score in the group at 9,083, placing it 8% ahead of the P14s Gen 6 and 7.6% ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14. Its Productivity score of 16,501 was the strongest individual result, followed by an excellent Digital Content Creation score of 11,534. The Essentials result was closer to the other systems, but the overall score shows that the added graphics power does not really affect everyday responsiveness.

PCMark 10 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Overall	9,083	8,382	8,438
Essentials	10,686	–	10,981
Productivity	16,501	–	13,992
Digital Content Creation	11,534	–	10,610

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads, plus an OpenCL compute score for GPUs. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 scored 2,808 in single-core and 16,319 in multi-core, finishing within a few percent of the Dell Pro 7 14, which used the same Core Ultra 7 366H. The Dell was slightly faster in both tests, though the difference was small enough that the two systems should feel very similar during short CPU workloads.

The RTX PRO 1000 scored 87,537 in OpenCL, improving on the P14s Gen 6 by 31% and beating the same GPU in the larger Dell Pro Max 16 by 8%. Inside the P14s Gen 7, the RTX PRO 1000 was nearly four times faster than the Intel integrated GPU in OpenCL. It also scored 73,204 in Vulkan, compared with 26,886 for the integrated GPU.

Geekbench 6 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Single-Core	2,808	2,713	2,875	2,862
Multicore	16,319	12,781	15,319	16,787
GPU OpenCL (dGPU)	87,537	66,784	81,098	–
GPU OpenCL (iGPU)	23,565	–	–	23,741
GPU Vulkan (dGPU)	73,204	–	–	–
GPU Vulkan (iGPU)	26,886	–	–	25,533

Geekbench 7

Starting with this review, we are adding Geekbench 7 to the suite alongside Geekbench 6 as comparison data builds. Geekbench 7 CPU scores are calibrated against a baseline score of 2,500, set by the AMD Ryzen 7700, while GPU scores are calibrated against a baseline of 100,000, set by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. Higher scores are better, and double the score indicates double the performance. Details on the individual workloads are available in Primate Labs’ CPU and GPU workload documentation. Because Geekbench 7 uses new workloads and new baselines, its scores are not comparable to Geekbench 6 results.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 and Dell Pro 7 14 were close in the Geekbench 7 CPU tests. The Dell led by 2% in single-core and less than 1% in multicore, with scores of 2,589 and 17,805 compared with 2,533 and 17,651 for the ThinkPad. The RTX PRO 1000 reached 114,469 in CUDA, exceeding Geekbench 7’s desktop RTX 4060 reference score of 100,000. Its OpenCL score was 75,340, while the Intel integrated GPU scored 23,026. In Vulkan, the RTX PRO 1000 reached 70,067, compared to 23,177 for the integrated GPU, which is within 2% of the identical integrated graphics in the Dell Pro 7 14. One testing note: Geekbench 7 labels the two GPUs in reverse order in its device selector on this platform, so we confirmed these Vulkan results with repeat runs and a Dell cross-check before assigning the scores to the correct hardware.

Geekbench 7 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
CPU Single-Core	2,533	2,589
CPU Multicore	17,651	17,805
GPU CUDA (RTX PRO 1000)	114,469	–
GPU OpenCL (dGPU)	75,340	–
GPU OpenCL (iGPU)	23,026	23,876
GPU Vulkan (dGPU)	70,067	–
GPU Vulkan (iGPU)	23,177	23,484

Cinebench R23

Cinebench measures how quickly the processor can render a complex scene, with separate tests for single-core and multi-core performance. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 and Dell Pro 7 14 produced nearly identical single-core results, scoring 2,056 and 2,043, respectively. The difference was much larger in multicore, where the ThinkPad scored 18,546 and finished 27% ahead of the Dell, despite both systems using the Core Ultra 7 366H. The P14s Gen 7’s thicker workstation chassis and cooling system allow the processor to maintain higher performance when all its cores are busy.

Cinebench R23 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Single-Core	2,056	2,043
Multicore	18,546	14,640

Cinebench 2024

Cinebench 2024 uses the Redshift render engine to measure CPU rendering performance, with separate single-core and multicore tests. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 scored 123 in single-core, only 6% ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14. Its multicore score of 1,118 was 64% higher than Dell’s 683, showing a much larger advantage during sustained rendering. Cinebench 2024 did not detect the RTX PRO 1000 for its GPU test, though the newer Cinebench 2026 recognized it correctly.

Cinebench 2024 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Single-Core	123	116
Multicore	1,118	683

Cinebench 2026

This review marks our first use of Cinebench 2026, which joins the suite alongside R23 and 2024. Cinebench 2026 tests CPU and GPU performance using Maxon’s Redshift render engine and is built on the latest Cinema 4D 2026 code. It is designed to show whether a machine is stable under high CPU load, whether a notebook’s cooling can sustain longer render tasks, and how it handles demanding real-world 3D work. Because code and compiler changes accelerated scene rendering, Cinebench 2026 scores use an adjusted range and should not be compared to scores from previous Cinebench versions.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 scored 4,492 in the CPU multicore test, putting it 18% ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14, which used the same processor. The Dell was slightly faster in single-core at 511 compared with 502, but the ThinkPad produced a higher multicore scaling ratio of 8.96 times versus 7.45 times for the Dell.

Cinebench 2026 also detected the RTX PRO 1000, which posted a GPU score of 34,437. The Dell’s integrated Intel Graphics did not meet the benchmark’s GPU requirements and could not complete that portion of the test.

Cinebench 2026 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
GPU	34,437	DNF (Intel Graphics unsupported)
CPU Multi-Thread	4,492	3,807
CPU Single-Thread	502	511

3DMark CPU Profile

The 3DMark CPU Profile benchmark measures CPU performance at fixed thread counts, from a single thread up to the maximum available, showing how performance scales as more cores are engaged. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 led the maximum-thread test with a score of 10,500, though the P14s Gen 6 and Dell Pro Max 16 were both within 1.2%. The Dell Pro 7 14 scored 9,699, leaving all four systems within about 8% of one another when every available thread was active.

The P14s Gen 6 led the eight-thread test with 7,525, compared with 6,550 for the Gen 7. The Dell Pro 7 14 followed closely at 6,450. Results tightened again at four, two, and one thread, with the four systems separated by relatively small margins.

3DMark CPU Profile (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Max Threads	10,500	10,377	10,396	9,699
16 Threads	10,421	10,294	9,879	9,679
8 Threads	6,550	7,525	7,214	6,450
4 Threads	4,219	4,400	4,445	4,240
2 Threads	2,251	2,389	2,310	2,230
1 Thread	1,165	1,222	1,173	1,163

7-Zip Compression

The 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads. Higher GIPS scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 recorded a total rating of 90.445 GIPS in the 7-Zip benchmark, placing it 4.5% ahead of the P14s Gen 6 and 11% ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14 with the same Core Ultra 7 366H, another case of the workstation chassis pulling more sustained performance from identical silicon. The generational gain comes entirely from compression, where the Gen 7 reached 90.364 GIPS against 78.199 for its predecessor, while its decompression result actually came in just below the Gen 6. The Dell Pro Max 16 stayed well in front at 118.766 GIPS total, as the 24 threads on its Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 are a better fit for this heavily threaded workload than the 16-thread Intel chips.

7-Zip GIPS (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Compression	90.364	78.199	110.458	–
Decompression	90.526	92.580	127.034	–
Total Rating	90.445	86.572	118.766	81.2

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of digits of Pi, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory. Results are measured in seconds, so lower times are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 completed every shared y-cruncher workload faster than its predecessor and the Dell Pro 7 14. It finished the one-billion-digit calculation in 26.685 seconds, the 2.5-billion test in 76.787 seconds, and the five-billion test in 172.994 seconds. It was also the only 14-inch system here to complete the 10-billion-digit workload, though the Ryzen-powered Dell Pro Max 16 was faster across all shared test sizes.

The BBP tests currently provide single-system reference data for the P14s Gen 7. It completed the one-billion hexadecimal-digit workload in 1.621 seconds, followed by 18.200 seconds at 10 billion and 219.969 seconds at 100 billion.

y-cruncher in seconds (lower is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
1 Billion	26.685	34.056	21.856	34.775
2.5 Billion	76.787	96.273	61.851	104.586
5 Billion	172.994	216.487	137.051	240.554
10 Billion	392.083	–	313.942	–
BBP 1 Billion (hex)	1.621	–	–	–
BBP 10 Billion (hex)	18.200	–	–	–
BBP 100 Billion (hex)	219.969	–	–	–

Blender

The Blender benchmark measures rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better. We tested on the CPU and on each GPU. Blender 4.5 is used in the comparison tables to match our published comp data, and a full Blender 5.1.1 run of the P14s Gen 7 follows; scores are not comparable across Blender versions. We also ran Blender 5.0 and 5.1 during the version transition, and their GPU results track the 5.1.1 figures within a few percent.

In Blender 4.5, the RTX PRO 1000 finished 23% to 29% ahead of the RTX PRO 500 in the P14s Gen 6. It reached 1,165.14 samples per minute in Monster, 760.20 in Junkshop, and 648.55 in Classroom. The discrete GPU was about 4.7 times faster than the P14s Gen 7’s Intel integrated graphics in Monster, with similarly large gaps in the other two scenes.

CPU rendering placed the Core Ultra 7 366H between the P14s Gen 6 and the Dell Pro Max 16. In the newer Blender 5.1.1 test, the RTX PRO 1000 was also much faster than both the processor and the integrated GPU across all three scenes. It reached 957.71 samples per minute in Monster, 817.23 in Junkshop, and 647.05 in Classroom. Just a note: the 5.1.1 results should not be compared directly with Blender 4.5, because changes to the Cycles rendering engine, including a new volume-rendering algorithm and other performance updates, can affect render speeds even on the same hardware.

Blender 4.5 CPU, samples/min (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16
Monster	129.73	118.71	135.1
Junkshop	86.80	73.68	92.5
Classroom	63.82	58.11	75.3

Blender 4.5 GPU, samples/min (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (Intel Graphics)
Monster	1,165.14	903.13	248.24
Junkshop	760.20	620.11	148.45
Classroom	648.55	527.76	131.09

Blender 5.1.1, samples/min (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (Intel Graphics)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (CPU)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Graphics)
Monster	957.71	241.13	132.53	253.6
Junkshop	817.23	186.52	102.44	189.3
Classroom	647.05	148.14	70.30	153.0

LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL. Higher scores are better. LuxMark runs on all available OpenCL devices in each system.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 scored 11,342 in LuxMark Hall and 4,103 in Food. Its Hall result was 21% higher than the P14s Gen 6, while the Food result improved by 16%. The larger Dell Pro Max 16 led both tests with the same RTX PRO 1000, scoring 12,664 and 4,680. LuxMark uses every available OpenCL device in each system, so these figures represent total system performance rather than the discrete GPU alone.

LuxMark (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000 + iGPU)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500 + iGPU)	Dell Pro Max 16 (RTX PRO 1000 + iGPU)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel) (Intel Graphics)
LuxMark Hall	11,342	9,344	12,664	2,168
LuxMark Food	4,103	3,543	4,680	880

V-Ray

V-Ray GPU measures how quickly the graphics processor can render a scene using the V-Ray engine, reported in vpaths. Higher scores are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 scored 1,568 vpaths in V-Ray GPU using the CUDA engine, which we run on discrete-GPU systems, so results remain comparable to notebooks with only integrated graphics. Switching to V-Ray’s RTX engine, which engages the card’s ray-tracing hardware, lifted the same RTX PRO 1000 to 2,589 vpaths, a 65% gain from the engine change alone. That distinction matters for the comparison column as well, since we believe the Dell Pro Max 16 figure was captured with the RTX engine; the real gap between the two RTX PRO 1000 machines is much smaller than the table suggests. This is a new test for our reviews, and we didn’t label the data as well as we should have for the archives. In the future, we will capture both engines on dedicated-GPU systems.

V-Ray GPU, vpaths (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500)	Dell Pro Max 16 (RTX PRO 1000)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel) (Intel Graphics)
V-Ray GPU	1,568	2,122	2,787	775
V-Ray GPU, RTX engine	2,589	–	–	–

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets derived from professional applications in CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization. Higher scores are better, although performance can vary considerably between applications and graphics architectures.

The RTX PRO 1000 delivered a large improvement over the P14s Gen 6 in nearly every viewset, including a 33% increase in CATIA. It also put the P14s Gen 7 far ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14’s integrated graphics, with several professional workloads showing gaps of four to 12 times. These results are one of the strongest arguments for choosing a workstation GPU over a standard business laptop.

The larger Dell Pro Max 16 was faster in several viewsets, including Creo, Energy, Enscape, Medical, SolidWorks, and Unreal Engine. The P14s Gen 7 led in 3ds Max, Blender, Maya, and the completed CATIA comparison, giving it a strong overall showing for a workstation of this size.

SPECviewperf 15 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 (RTX PRO 500)	Dell Pro Max 16 (RTX PRO 1000)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel) (Intel Graphics)
3dsmax-08	28.20	18.26	20.84	9.58
blender-01	40.69	30.19	34.79	9.11
catia-07	43.36	32.65	DNF	5.27
creo-04	107.59	87.59	115.03	18.27
energy-04	45.79	34.95	52.27	3.68
enscape-01	25.45	19.64	26.16	6.22
maya-07	112.84	86.42	108.05	49.54
medical-04	86.38	74.06	90.64	9.91
snx-05	103.61	–	–	37.74
solidworks-08	53.63	39.26	57.16	11.86
unreal_engine-01	49.24	40.99	51.95	21.36

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads. Higher scores are better, while DNF means the system did not complete every workload required for that category.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 completed all 23 SPECworkstation workloads, whereas the other systems could not. Its Graphics subsystem score of 4.51 was more than five times the Dell Pro 7 14’s 0.82, while its Accelerator score reached 3.26. It also led the P14s Gen 6 across all published verticals, with the closest result in Financial Services at 0.96 compared with 0.95.

The strongest gains appeared in Energy, Product Design, AI and Machine Learning, and Productivity and Development. Storage was the one subsystem where the ThinkPad did not lead the Dell Pro 7 14, though the difference between their scores was negligible.

SPECworkstation 4 (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
CPU (subsystem)	1.35	–	1.08
Graphics (subsystem)	4.51	–	0.82
Storage (subsystem)	1.67	–	1.68
Accelerator (subsystem)	3.26	–	–
AI & Machine Learning	1.65	1.45	1.18
Energy	1.69	1.13	0.90
Financial Services	0.96	0.95	0.78
Life Sciences	1.82	1.51	1.04
Media & Entertainment	1.81	1.53	1.16
Product Design	1.89	1.16	1.41
Productivity & Development	1.34	0.87	1.04

Blackmagic RAW Speed Test

The Blackmagic RAW Speed Test measures how many frames per second a system can decode Blackmagic RAW video on the CPU and on the GPU. We quote the 8K results at 12:1 compression; higher is better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 led the CPU test at 77 fps, narrowly ahead of the Dell Pro Max 16 at 75 fps. Its RTX PRO 1000 reached 96 fps through CUDA, improving on the P14s Gen 6 by 52% and doubling the OpenCL results from both Dell systems.

The Dell Pro 7 14 decoded 68 fps through its CPU and 48 fps through OpenCL on its integrated graphics. That puts its CPU result fairly close to the ThinkPad, but the RTX PRO 1000 gives the P14s Gen 7 a much larger advantage when GPU acceleration is available.

Blackmagic RAW 8K, fps (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
CPU	77	65	75	68
GPU	96 (CUDA)	63 (OpenCL)	46 (OpenCL)	48 (OpenCL)

Topaz Video AI

The Topaz Video AI benchmark measures AI video upscaling and frame-interpolation performance in frames per second across the application’s enhancement models, run here at 1080p input. Higher is better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 stayed relatively close to the Dell Pro Max 16 with the same RTX PRO 1000, though the larger Dell was generally 10% to 25% faster across the enhancement models. The difference became much more noticeable at 4X upscaling, where Artemis, Iris, and Proteus ran at only about one frame per second on the P14s.

At 1X, the main enhancement models ran between 4.78 and 5.91 fps on the P14s Gen 7, which is enough to check a short preview but nowhere near real-time playback. The 4X tests would be better left to run as batch jobs, especially when using heavier models such as Gaia.

Topaz Video AI, fps (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 (RTX PRO 1000)	Dell Pro Max 16 (RTX PRO 1000)
Artemis 1X / 2X / 4X	5.17 / 3.19 / 1.12	5.74 / 3.99 / 1.47
Iris 1X / 2X / 4X	5.91 / 3.12 / 1.01	5.89 / 3.70 / 1.47
Proteus 1X / 2X / 4X	4.78 / 3.14 / 1.05	5.63 / 4.31 / 1.47
Gaia 1X / 2X / 4X	1.62 / 1.13 / 0.79	2.43 / 1.64 / 0.93
Nyx 1X / 2X	2.40 / 2.09	2.42 / 2.12
Hyperion HDR 1X	14.56	14.39
4X Slowmo Apollo / APFast	10.39 / 29.94	8.77 / 27.34

Storage Performance

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files.

The 2TB SK hynix Gen5 SSD nearly doubled the P14s Gen 6’s 3DMark Storage score, reaching 3,094 compared with 1,700. It also recorded 8,511.5 MB/s reads and 8,262.3 MB/s writes in Blackmagic Disk Speed Test. Those results put it close to the Gen5 SK hynix drive in the Dell Pro 7 14 and roughly 3.5 GB/s ahead of both larger comparison systems in sequential read speed.

Storage (higher is better)	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
3DMark Storage (score)	3,094	1,700	2,459	3,259
Blackmagic Disk Read (MB/s)	8,511.5	5,159.6	5,037.0	8,398.6
Blackmagic Disk Write (MB/s)	8,262.3	4,794.1	4,923.1	8,934.5

Battery Life

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point, in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness. Longer runtimes are better.

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 lasted 15 hours and 52 minutes in PCMark 10 Modern Office, adding just over four hours compared with its predecessor despite using the same 75 Wh battery capacity. It accomplished that with a brighter 3K 120 Hz display and a more powerful discrete GPU, making the generational improvement especially welcome.

The Dell Pro Max 16 lasted only 10 minutes longer despite having a much larger 96Wh battery. The Dell Pro 7 14 reached 26 hours and 18 minutes, helped by its low-power WUXGA display and integrated graphics, while our ThinkPad configuration pairs a higher-resolution display with a discrete workstation GPU. That hardware gives the P14s Gen 7 more graphics performance, but it also comes with a noticeable reduction in battery life.

Battery, PCMark 10 Modern Office	ThinkPad P14s Gen 7	ThinkPad P14s Gen 6	Dell Pro Max 16	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)
Battery Capacity	75Wh	75Wh	96Wh	70Wh
Runtime	15h 52m	11h 48m	16h 2m	26h 18m

Conclusion

The ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 takes a bigger one-generation step than this line has seen in years, and it does so without adding weight. Geekbench 6 multicore performance improved by 28%, Blender GPU rendering was up by as much as 29%, and the Gen5 SSD nearly doubled the previous model’s 3DMark Storage score. Its RTX PRO 1000 also increases graphics memory from 6GB to 8GB, which allowed it to complete our Stable Diffusion XL test, while battery life improved by just over four hours. The chassis also gets more from the silicon itself: the same Core Ultra 7 366H that scored 14,640 in Cinebench R23 multicore inside the thin Dell Pro 7 14 reached 18,546 here, a 27% gain that comes down to cooling.

Fitting workstation hardware into a 3.59-pound laptop still involves real trade-offs. The RTX PRO 1000’s 8GB of graphics memory was not enough for the Llama2 13B workload, and the same GPU generally ran faster in the larger Dell Pro Max 16. Those focused on office work and battery life can get roughly 10 more hours from the Dell Pro 7 14, but that system lacks the ThinkPad’s discrete GPU and its performance in professional graphics applications.

For engineers, designers, and creators who regularly work away from a desk, the P14s Gen 7 offers ISV-certified graphics, replaceable LPCAMM2 memory, fast Gen5 storage, and enough GPU performance for professional applications in a laptop that is still easy to carry. It was also the only system in the group to finish all 23 SPECworkstation 4 workloads, and at $4,703, it is priced within a few dollars of the same GPU in the larger Dell Pro Max 16. A larger workstation will be faster during sustained GPU workloads and offer more graphics memory. Still, the P14s is a strong option for anyone who needs more than an office laptop without carrying a heavier mobile workstation.

Product Page: Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7

The post Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 7 Review: RTX PRO 1000 and Panther Lake in a 3.6-Pound Workstation appeared first on StorageReview.com.

Dell’s naming puts the Pro 5 14 a rung below the Pro 7 in its commercial lineup, but the spec sheet complicates that hierarchy. This is the compact counterpart to the Dell Pro 5 16 AMD we reviewed earlier, yet Dell equips it with a Core Ultra X7 368H, which is a higher-tier processor than the Core Ultra 7 366H used by the more premium Pro 7 14 Intel. That gives this particular Pro 5 a performance advantage in several areas despite its lower position in Dell’s naming structure.

Inside our review unit, the Core Ultra X7 368H provides 16 cores, a maximum clock speed of 5.0GHz, Arc B390 integrated graphics, and a 50 TOPS NPU. Dell supports it with 64GB of dual-channel LPCAMM2-8533 memory and a 1TB PCIe Gen5 SSD. This configuration has enough memory and storage bandwidth for large datasets, creative software, local AI applications, and demanding multitasking, while still fitting into a 14-inch laptop.

Using LPCAMM2 also avoids one of the common limitations found in thin business systems. The single module delivers the speed and efficiency associated with LPDDR memory, but it can still be removed if it fails or if a future upgrade becomes necessary. That gives an IT department more flexibility when maintaining the laptop several years into a deployment.

Since the Pro 5 14 is designed for business fleets, Dell includes Intel vPro along with SafeBIOS, Trusted Device, Dell Command Update, and optional integration with Microsoft Intune. Our configuration also has a ControlVault 3+ fingerprint reader, an 8MP infrared camera for Windows Hello, Wi-Fi 7, and three years of ProSupport with next-business-day onsite service following remote diagnosis. The combination covers both day-to-day user authentication and the remote management needs of a larger organization.

Our Pro 5 14 configuration is listed at $5,492, placing it above the Pro 5 16 AMD and even slightly above the Pro 7 14 AMD tested alongside it. Dell’s commercial customers often negotiate pricing through account representatives, especially when purchasing systems in volume, so the listed figure may be higher than the final deployment cost. That said, buyers will need to place considerable value on the faster Intel processor, replaceable high-speed memory, and fleet support package to justify the price.

Specification	Dell Pro 5 14
Overview
Model	Dell Pro 5 14 (P514260)
Operating System	Windows 11 Pro, Copilot+ PC
Hardware
Processor	Series 3 Intel Core Ultra X7 368H vPro 16 cores Up to 5.0GHz 50 TOPS NPU
Graphics	Intel Arc B390 integrated graphics, 12 Xe cores
Memory	64GB LPCAMM2, 8,533 MT/s, dual-channel
Storage	1TB Performance SSD, PCIe Gen5, SED Ready
Display and Camera
Display	14-inch WUXGA, non-touch, VRR, 500 nits, 100% sRGB, anti-glare, super low power, lightweight, Low Blue Light
Camera	8MP RGB HDR + IR camera, 1440p at 30 fps, Presence Detection, Temporal Noise Reduction, Camera Shutter
Connectivity
Wireless	Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE211, 2×2, qualified against Bluetooth® Core 6.0
Ports	2× Thunderbolt 4 2× USB Type-A 1× HDMI 2.1 1× RJ45 Ethernet 1× Global headset port 1× Optional external nano SIM card tray 1× Optional Contacted Smart Card Reader 1× Wedge Shaped Lock Slot
Input and Security
Keyboard	English (US) Mini-LED backlit keyboard
Security	Fingerprint reader with ControlVault 3+ TPM 2.0, FIPS 140-3 and TCG Certified Quantum-resistant BIOS verification Chassis-intrusion switch Camera shutter Security lock slot
Manageability	Intel vPro® Manageability with Intel® Active Management Technology
Power and Support
Battery	3-cell, 70Wh, ExpressCharge and ExpressCharge Boost capable
Power Supply	65W USB-C PECOS-Green AC Adapter
Service	ProSupport Next Business Day Onsite Service after remote diagnosis with HW-SW Support, 36 months
Pricing
Base Price	$2,259
Price as Tested	$5,492, no discounts, Dell.com single-unit price

Design and Build

The Dell Pro 5 14 keeps its footprint small enough for regular travel without giving up access to replaceable memory, storage, and other internal components. It measures 12.42 inches wide, 8.89 inches deep, and up to 0.71 inches thick, with a starting weight of 2.96 pounds. Dell offers an all-aluminum chassis or a mixed-material version that pairs an aluminum top cover with a glass fiber composite palm rest and bottom cover, depending on the configuration.

Opening the bottom provides access to the LPCAMM2 memory module, M.2 SSD, wireless card, cooling system, and battery. Like the larger model, Dell has made the USB-C ports and mainboard modular, which can reduce the amount of hardware that needs to be replaced when one component fails. The 70Wh battery in our unit is customer-replaceable, an increasingly uncommon feature in thin 14-inch laptops and a useful option for businesses planning to keep systems in service for several years.

Durability testing covers an 18-inch free fall plus 1,000 micro-drop cycles, 30,000 hinge cycles, USB-C ports stressed with 9 kg of force over 400 cycles, and keyboard spills of up to 3.4 fluid ounces, or about 100 ml. This should be enough for the usual wear a business laptop can encounter while moving between desks, meeting rooms, and remote work locations.

Display and Input

Our review build has a 14-inch WUXGA display with a 1920 x 1200 resolution, a variable refresh rate ranging from 1Hz to 120Hz, 500-nit brightness, and full sRGB coverage. The 16:10 aspect ratio provides additional vertical room for documents and web pages, while the anti-glare coating helps control reflections in brightly lit offices. Dell also includes ComfortView Plus Low Blue Light technology, and the super-low-power panel can reduce energy use when the higher refresh rate is unnecessary.

The spill-resistant keyboard uses Mini-LED backlighting, which reduces power consumption compared with a conventional backlight while still providing even illumination across the keys. Its 14-inch layout does not include the numeric keypad found on the Pro 5 16, but the keyboard makes good use of the available width and includes a dedicated AI hotkey. A large clickpad occupies much of the remaining palm-rest area.

Video calls are covered by an 8MP RGB HDR camera recording at 1440p and 30 frames per second. It includes infrared support for Windows Hello, presence detection, temporal noise reduction, and a physical camera shutter. The higher-resolution sensor also provides more flexibility for framing and background effects than the basic 1080p camera available on lower configurations.

Ports and Connectivity

The Dell Pro 5 14 features a nice selection of ports for a laptop of this size. Its two Thunderbolt 4 connections support USB4 at 40Gbps, DisplayPort 2.1, USB Power Delivery, and external docks or displays. Dell also includes two 5Gbps USB Type-A ports, with PowerShare available on one, along with HDMI 2.1, Gigabit Ethernet, a global headset jack, and a wedge-shaped lock slot.

Optional configurations can add a contacted smart-card reader and an external nano-SIM tray for mobile broadband.

Wireless connectivity in our build includes an Intel BE211 adapter with 2×2 Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth support qualified against Bluetooth Core 6.0. The laptop charges over USB-C using the included 65W adapter, though Dell notes that the 70Wh battery requires at least a 100W USB-C adapter for ExpressCharge and ExpressCharge Boost. Buyers who want the faster charging modes will therefore need to upgrade from the bundled adapter.

Security and Manageability

The Core Ultra X7 368H includes Intel vPro and Active Management Technology, allowing IT teams to remotely inventory, diagnose, update, and manage deployed systems. Dell Management Portal can also work alongside Microsoft Intune, giving administrators a central location for BIOS settings, application deployment, and device updates across a larger fleet.

Security features include TPM 2.0 with FIPS 140-3 certification, SafeBIOS, Trusted Device, quantum-resistant BIOS verification, and a chassis-intrusion switch (the latter of which comes standard on this model). Our build also has a fingerprint reader with ControlVault 3+, which stores authentication credentials in dedicated hardware, while the IR camera provides Windows Hello facial recognition. A physical camera shutter and wedge lock slot add direct controls for users working in shared or public spaces.

Our configuration includes 36 months of Dell ProSupport with next-business-day onsite service following remote diagnosis. For businesses deploying the Pro 5 14 across multiple offices or remote employees, onsite repairs can really shorten the time a system is unavailable and sometimes eliminate the need to ship laptops back to a central IT department.

Performance

To see how the Dell Pro 5 14 compares with the rest of Dell’s current commercial lineup, we tested it alongside the Dell Pro 7 14 and Dell Pro 5 16 AMD configurations, as well as the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel. All four laptops were evaluated using our standard power profile across a broad range of workloads, including general productivity, CPU rendering, GPU compute, professional visualization, storage, AI, and battery life.

The Dell Pro 5 14 and Pro 7 14 Intel may both use Intel Core Ultra Series 3 processors, but the hardware inside is quite different. The Pro 5 14 has the higher-tier Core Ultra X7 368H with Arc B390 integrated graphics, while the more expensive Pro 7 14 uses the Core Ultra 7 366H and its smaller four-core Intel Graphics GPU. The gap was easy to see in our testing, especially across UL Procyon’s AI Computer Vision, Text Generation, and Image Generation benchmarks, where the Pro 5 14 was often the fastest system in the group and finished well ahead of its pricier counterpart in the GPU-accelerated tests.

Test Systems

Specification	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel)
CPU	Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 (12C/24T)	Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 (12C/24T)	Core Ultra 7 366H (16C)	Core Ultra X7 368H (16C)
GPU	Radeon 890M	Radeon 890M	Intel Graphics (4Xe)	Intel Arc B390 (12Xe)
Memory	64 GB DDR5-5600	64 GB LPDDR5x-8533	64 GB LPDDR5x-8533	64 GB LPCAMM2-8533
Storage	SanDisk PC SN5100S 1 TB	Samsung BM9C1a 1 TB	SK hynix PCB01 1 TB	SK hynix PCB01 1 TB
Display	16″ WQXGA	14″ WUXGA	14″ WUXGA	14″ WUXGA
Price as Tested	$4,648	$5,377	$5,600	$5,492

UL Procyon: AI Computer Vision

The Procyon AI Computer Vision Benchmark measures AI inference performance across CPUs, GPUs, and dedicated accelerators using a range of state-of-the-art neural networks. It evaluates tasks such as image classification, object detection, segmentation, and super-resolution using models including MobileNet V3, Inception V4, YOLO V3, DeepLab V3, Real ESRGAN, and ResNet 50. Tests are run on multiple inference engines, including NVIDIA TensorRT, Intel OpenVINO, Qualcomm SNPE, Microsoft Windows ML, and Apple Core ML, providing a broad view of hardware and software efficiency. Results are reported for float- and integer-optimized models, providing a consistent, practical measure of machine vision performance for professional workloads.

The Dell Pro 5 14 with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H delivered the strongest overall showing in UL Procyon’s AI Computer Vision benchmark. On the CPU side, it posted an overall score of 119, narrowly trailing the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel’s class-leading 121 by less than 2% while outperforming both AMD-based systems by 31% to 55%. The system also produced the fastest results in MobileNet V3 (1.09 ms), ResNet 50 (10.11 ms), Inception V4 (29.77 ms), and REAL-ESRGAN (2,884.51 ms), demonstrating the effectiveness of Intel’s software stack for CPU-driven AI inference workloads. Only DeepLab V3 and YOLO V3 saw the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel take the lead.

GPU acceleration further widened the gap between the Dell Pro 5 14 and the rest of the field. Its overall score of 398 was nearly double that of the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel (205), representing a 94% advantage, while also exceeding the Dell Pro 7 14 AMD (243) by 64% and the Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (214) by 86%. The notebook led nearly every workload, including MobileNet V3, ResNet 50, Inception V4, DeepLab V3, and YOLO V3, while maintaining a competitive REAL-ESRGAN result of 562.87 ms. Particularly impressive was ResNet 50, where the Pro 5 14 completed inference in just 2.94 ms, more than 2.5 times faster than either AMD system.

CPU Results (average time in ms)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
AI Computer Vision Overall Score	91	77	121	119
MobileNet V3	1.57 ms	1.79 ms	1.24 ms	1.09 ms
ResNet 50	13.64 ms	16.46 ms	11.57 ms	10.11 ms
Inception V4	40.43 ms	51.10 ms	34.01 ms	29.77 ms
DeepLab V3	69.73 ms	74.74 ms	37.98 ms	50.18 ms
YOLO V3	99.38 ms	122.35 ms	81.22 ms	112.64 ms
REAL-ESRGAN	4,504.35 ms	5,383.21ms	3,163.45 ms	2,884.51 ms

GPU Results (average time in ms)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
AI Computer Vision Overall Score	214	243	205	398
MobileNet V3	1.56 ms	1.17 ms	1.04 ms	0.84 ms
ResNet 50	8.76 ms	7.93 ms	6.52 ms	2.94 ms
Inception V4	22.46 ms	20.06 ms	20.72 ms	8.38 ms
DeepLab V3	38.40 ms	34.04 ms	26.53 ms	17.54 ms
YOLO V3	23.56 ms	21.92 ms	43.07 ms	19.14 ms
REAL-ESRGAN	570.35 ms	536.81 ms	1,309.49 ms	562.87 ms

UL Procyon: AI Text Generation

The Procyon AI Text Generation Benchmark streamlines AI LLM performance testing by providing a concise and consistent evaluation method. It allows for repeated testing across multiple LLM models while minimizing the complexity of large model sizes and variable factors. Developed with AI hardware leaders, it optimizes the use of local AI accelerators for more reliable and efficient performance assessments.

The Dell Pro 5 14 with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H delivered the strongest performance in UL Procyon’s AI Text Generation benchmark, leading every workload in the test suite. Its Phi score reached 904, putting it 31% ahead of the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel (689) and more than 2.4x faster than the Dell Pro 5 16 AMD (371). The system also recorded the lowest time to first token at just 1.158 seconds and the highest token throughput at 36.95 tokens per second, resulting in the shortest overall completion time of 81.3 seconds.

The trend continued in Mistral and Llama3, where the Dell Pro 5 14 scored 716 and 708, respectively. These results represented improvements of 36 and 39 percent over the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel and more than 80% over the Dell Pro 7 14 AMD. Mistral completed in just 123.8 seconds, while Llama3 finished in 142.8 seconds, both leading the field by a comfortable margin. The notebook maintained its advantage in sustained generation workloads as well, producing 24.7 tokens per second in Mistral and 20.4 tokens per second in Llama3.

UL Procyon: AI Text Generation	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Phi
Phi Overall Score	371	427	689	904
Phi Output Time To First Token	5.052 s	4.286 s	1.843 s	1.158 s
Phi Output Tokens Per Second	27.163 tokens/s	30.492 tokens/s	34.172 tokens/s	36.952 tokens/s
Phi Overall Duration	135.343 s	118.697 s	92.273 s	81.304 s
Mistral
Mistral Overall Score	346	389	525	716
Mistral Output Time To First Token	6.929 s	6.060 s	3.778 s	2.195 s
Mistral Output Tokens Per Second	18.174 tokens/s	20.125 tokens/s	22.843 tokens/s	24.724 tokens/s
Mistral Overall Duration	196.185 s	176.220 s	143.831 s	123.773 s
Llama3
Llama3 Overall Score	306	345	509	708
Llama3 Output Time To First Token	6.518 s	5.707s	2.992 s	1.657 s
Llama3 Output Tokens Per Second	15.050 tokens/s	16.725 tokens/s	19.104 tokens/s	20.421 tokens/s
Llama3 Overall Duration	224.176 s	199.931 s	161.290 s	142.814 s
Llama2
Llama2 Overall Score	329	367	530	641
Llama2 Output Time To First Token	11.089 s	10.307 s	5.412 s	4.082 s
Llama2 Output Tokens Per Second	8.878 tokens/s	10.260 tokens/s	11.230 tokens/s	12.397 tokens/s
Llama2 Overall Duration	381.464 s	334.648 s	278.109 s	245.572 s

UL Procyon: AI Image Generation

The Procyon AI Image Generation Benchmark provides a consistent and accurate method for measuring AI inference performance across various hardware, ranging from low-power NPUs to high-end GPUs. It includes three tests: Stable Diffusion XL (FP16) for high-end GPUs, Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16) for moderately powerful GPUs, and Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8) for low-power devices. The benchmark uses the optimal inference engine for each system, ensuring fair and comparable results.

The Dell Pro 5 14 with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H delivered a dominant showing in UL Procyon’s AI Image Generation benchmark, posting the highest scores across every workload by a significant margin. In Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16), it achieved an overall score of 635, outperforming the Dell Pro 7 14 Intel’s score of 258 by 146% while more than doubling the performance of both Ryzen AI systems. Image generation completed in just 9.83 seconds per image, compared to roughly 24 to 25 seconds for the other three notebooks, giving the Pro 5 14 a substantial advantage for interactive image generation workflows.

The gap remained just as pronounced in Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8). Here, the Dell Pro 5 14 posted a score of 7,693, more than twice the performance of the remaining systems, which all clustered between 3,521 and 3,598. Generation time dropped to 4.06 seconds per image, while the next fastest competitor required approximately 8.7 seconds. Notably, the Intel-based Dell Pro 7 14 performed almost identically to the AMD systems in this test, highlighting just how much separation the Pro 5 14 created despite both Intel systems building on the same Core Ultra Series 3 processor family.

UL Procyon: AI Image Generation	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16)
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16) – Overall Score	255	247	258	635
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16) – Overall Time	391.577 s	404.455 s	386.614 s	157.296 s
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (FP16) – Image Generation Speed	24.474 s/image	25.278 s/image	24.163 s/image	9.831 s/image
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8)
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8) – Overall Score	3,598	3,521	3,575	7,693
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8) – Overall Time	69.478 s	70.985 s	69.911 s	32.495 s
Stable Diffusion 1.5 (INT8) – Image Generation Speed	8.685 s/image	8.873 s/image	8.739 s/image	4.062 s/image
Stable Diffusion XL (FP16)
Stable Diffusion XL (FP16) – Overall Score	173	177	268	646
Stable Diffusion XL (FP16) – Overall Time	3,448.478 s	3,379.388 s	2,230.563 s	928.747 s
Stable Diffusion XL (FP16) – Image Generation Speed	215.530 s/image	211.212 s/image	139.410 s/image	58.047 s/image

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 measures general system performance across everyday work such as web browsing, video conferencing, spreadsheets, writing, photo editing, and rendering. Higher scores are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 scored 7,945 overall in PCMark 10, about 6% behind the Pro 7 14 Intel’s leading score of 8,438. The four laptops were much closer in Essentials, where the Pro 5 14 scored 10,751 and only 230 points separated the entire group. Its Productivity score of 13,821 was also close to the other systems, while Digital Content Creation showed the largest difference at 9,158. For everyday office work, the Pro 5 14 performed much like the other Dell models, but it lost some ground when PCMark moved into photo editing, rendering, and other content-creation tasks.

PCMark 10 (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Overall	8,268	8,237	8,438	7,945
Essentials	10,870	10,783	10,981	10,751
Productivity	14,322	14,366	13,992	13,821
Digital Content Creation	9,852	9,792	10,610	9,158

Geekbench 6

Geekbench 6 measures processor performance using a mix of common tasks, with separate scores for single-core and multi-core workloads. Higher scores are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 performed very well in Geekbench 6, scoring 2,968 in single-core and 16,874 in multi-core. Its single-core score was only 21 points behind the Pro 5 16, while the multi-core score was the highest in the group and narrowly beat the Pro 7 14 Intel. The two AMD laptops were more than 2,000 points behind in multi-core performance, giving the Core Ultra X7 368H a strong result in workloads that can use all 16 cores.

Geekbench 6 (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Single-Core	2,989	2,888	2,862	2,968
Multi-Core	14,348	14,768	16,787	16,874

Cinebench R23 and 2024

Cinebench measures how quickly the processor can render a complex scene, with separate tests for single-core and multi-core performance. Higher scores are better.

The Cinebench results were more varied, although the Dell Pro 5 14 performed well in both single-core tests. It scored 2,010 in R23 single-core and led Cinebench 2024 single-core with 122. Its R23 multi-core score of 16,915 placed second behind the larger Pro 5 16, but its Cinebench 2024 multi-core score of 807 fell behind both AMD systems. The Core Ultra X7 368H provided excellent short-duration and single-core performance, while the Pro 5 16’s larger chassis gave it an advantage during longer multi-core rendering workloads.

Cinebench (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
R23 Single-Core	2,029	1,946	2,043	2,010
R23 Multi-Core	18,764	15,173	14,640	16,915
2024 Single-Core	119	105	116	122
2024 Multi-Core	1,055	847	683	807

7-Zip Compression

The 7-Zip benchmark measures how quickly the processor can compress and decompress data using multiple threads. Higher GIPS scores are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 recorded 89.4 GIPS in the 7-Zip compression benchmark, placing it just 0.8 GIPS behind the Pro 7 14 AMD and 8.2 GIPS ahead of the Pro 7 14 Intel. The larger Pro 5 16 led the group at 103.9 GIPS, benefiting from its 12-core, 24-thread Ryzen processor during this heavily threaded test. Among the three 14-inch laptops, however, the Pro 5 14 was very close to the fastest result.

7-Zip (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Total Rating (GIPS)	103.9	90.2	81.2	89.4

y-cruncher

y-cruncher measures how quickly the processor can calculate large numbers of Pi digits, placing a heavy load on the CPU and memory. Results are measured in seconds, so lower times are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 completed the 1-billion-digit y-cruncher test in 29.405 seconds, followed by 90.719 seconds at 2.5 billion and 204.685 seconds at 5 billion. It was the faster of the two Intel systems at every test size, completing the 5-billion-digit workload nearly 36 seconds ahead of the Pro 7 14 Intel. Both AMD laptops were faster, with the difference increasing as the calculation grew larger.

y-cruncher — seconds (lower is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
1 Billion	25.160	25.199	34.775	29.405
2.5 Billion	73.320	79.393	104.586	90.719
5 Billion	163.768	177.776	240.554	204.685

Blender 5.1.1 (GPU)

The Blender benchmark measures GPU rendering performance using three different 3D scenes: Monster, Junkshop, and Classroom. Results are reported in samples per minute, so higher scores are better.

The Intel Arc B390 in the Dell Pro 5 14 produced excellent Blender GPU results, reaching 366.6 samples per minute in Monster, 312.6 in Junkshop, and 244.4 in Classroom. It led the Pro 7 14 Intel by 45% in Monster, 65% in Junkshop, and nearly 60% in Classroom. The difference was even larger against the two Radeon 890M laptops, making the Pro 5 14 the best option in this group for Blender GPU rendering.

Blender 5.1.1 GPU — samples/min (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
monster	129.8	140.9	253.6	366.6
junkshop	103.1	122.0	189.3	312.6
classroom	91.1	105.6	153.0	244.4

V-Ray and LuxMark

LuxMark measures GPU compute performance by rendering complex scenes through OpenCL while V-Ray GPU measures how quickly the graphics processor can render a scene using the V-Ray engine. Higher scores are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 also led all three GPU compute tests, with 3,287 in LuxMark Hall, 1,585 in LuxMark Food, and 919 vpaths in V-Ray GPU. Its LuxMark scores were far ahead of the other laptops, including a Hall result that was more than 50% higher than the Pro 7 14 Intel. V-Ray produced a smaller gap between the four systems, although the Pro 5 14 still finished 58 vpaths ahead of the Pro 5 16. These results add to the strong Blender numbers and give the Arc B390 a considerable advantage in GPU rendering and compute work.

GPU Compute (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
LuxMark — Hall	2,125	2,042	2,168	3,287
LuxMark — Food	982	1,050	880	1,585
V-Ray GPU (vpaths)	861	784	775	919

SPECviewperf 15

SPECviewperf 15 measures graphics performance using viewsets based on professional applications for CAD, 3D modeling, rendering, engineering, and medical visualization. Higher scores are better, although performance can vary considerably between applications and graphics architectures.

The Dell Pro 5 14 produced a more application-dependent set of results in SPECviewperf 15. Its Arc B390 led Blender (21.19), Enscape (14.28), Maya (82.42), and Unreal Engine (38.77), with especially large gains in Maya and Enscape. The two Radeon 890M systems were faster in several engineering and scientific viewsets, including CATIA (10.27), Creo (32.53), Energy (10.78), Medical (22.96), and SolidWorks (23.60). The Pro 5 14 performed best in the rendering and content-creation applications represented here, while the AMD laptops were faster in several CAD and technical workloads.

SPECviewperf 15 (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
3dsmax-08	23.21	24.69	9.58	20.21
blender-01	19.89	20.85	9.11	21.19
catia-07	20.16	21.21	5.27	10.27
creo-04	44.27	45.70	18.27	32.53
energy-04	25.39	25.08	3.68	10.78
enscape-01	8.02	8.29	6.22	14.28
maya-07	48.67	53.64	49.54	82.42
medical-04	65.45	60.50	9.91	22.96
snx-05	51.67	51.84	37.74	46.22
solidworks-08	33.12	32.02	11.86	23.60
unreal_engine-01	26.61	26.29	21.36	38.77

SPECworkstation 4

SPECworkstation 4 measures workstation performance across CPU, graphics, storage, AI, product design, engineering, financial services, and other professional workloads. Higher scores are better, while DNF means the system did not complete every workload required for that category.

The Dell Pro 5 14 led the CPU (1.19), Storage (1.76), Product Design (1.64), and Productivity and Development (1.10) categories in SPECworkstation 4. Its Graphics score (1.68) placed it well ahead of the Pro 7 14 Intel but behind both Radeon 890M systems. The Pro 5 14 also tied the Pro 5 16 in Life Sciences (1.34) and came within 0.01 of it in AI and Machine Learning (1.36). The Media and Entertainment workload (DNF) did not finish on the Pro 5 14 or either AMD system.

SPECworkstation 4 (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
CPU (subsystem)	1.09	1.00	1.08	1.19
Graphics (subsystem)	2.36	2.41	0.82	1.68
Storage (subsystem)	0.89	0.55	1.68	1.76
AI & Machine Learning	1.37	1.29	1.18	1.36
Energy	1.24	1.13	0.90	1.18
Financial Services	0.98	0.88	0.78	0.78
Life Sciences	1.34	1.08	1.04	1.34
Media & Entertainment	DNF	DNF	1.16	DNF
Product Design	1.34	1.18	1.41	1.64
Productivity & Development	0.78	0.72	1.04	1.10

Storage Performance

3DMark Storage measures how an SSD performs during gaming-related tasks such as loading games, installing software, saving progress, and moving game files. Blackmagic Disk Speed Test measures an SSD’s sequential read and write speeds using large media files.

The 1TB SK hynix PCB01 Gen5 SSD in the Dell Pro 5 14 reached 8,609.6MB/s read and 8,747.3MB/s write in Blackmagic Disk. It had the fastest read speed in the group, while its write result was only 187.2MB/s behind the Pro 7 14 Intel, which uses the same drive. The Pro 5 14 also scored 3,144 in 3DMark Storage, placing just behind the other Intel model and well ahead of both AMD laptops. Buyers working with large files or storage-heavy applications should see a substantial improvement over the slower drives installed in the two AMD systems.

Storage (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
3DMark Storage (score)	2,477	894	3,259	3,144
Blackmagic Disk — Read (MB/s)	4,758.0	3,103.4	8,398.6	8,609.6
Blackmagic Disk — Write (MB/s)	5,166.5	4,034.3	8,934.5	8,747.3

Battery Life

The PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test repeatedly runs common office tasks until the battery reaches the test’s cutoff point. Longer runtimes are better.

The Dell Pro 5 14 lasted 26 hours and 48 minutes in the PCMark 10 Modern Office battery test, the longest runtime in the group. It ran 30 minutes longer than the Pro 7 14 Intel, more than seven hours longer than the Pro 7 14 AMD, and over 11 hours longer than the Pro 5 16. The test was run in Balanced mode at 50% display brightness, giving the 70Wh battery and low-power WUXGA display an advantage during office use. Actual runtime will vary with workload and brightness, but the result gives the Pro 5 14 plenty of battery life for long workdays.

Battery — PCMark 10 Modern Office (higher is better)	Dell Pro 5 16 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 12C)	Dell Pro 7 14 (Intel Core Ultra 7 366H 16C)	Dell Pro 5 14 (Intel Core Ultra X7 368H 16C)
Runtime	15h 22m	19h 28m	26h 18m	26h 48m

Conclusion

Among the four Dell laptops we tested, the Pro 5 14 Intel produced some of the most impressive results. Its Core Ultra X7 368H led Geekbench 6 multi-core and Cinebench 2024 single-core, while the Arc B390 was the fastest GPU in Blender, LuxMark, and V-Ray. Dell also equipped our build with a quick SK hynix Gen5 SSD, and its 26-hour, 48-minute battery result was the longest of the group.

Though the larger Pro 5 16 AMD was faster during several sustained CPU workloads, both Radeon 890M systems performed better in many engineering and CAD viewsets. The Pro 5 14 was much stronger in Blender, Enscape, Maya, Unreal Engine, and GPU compute tests, making it better suited to users whose applications benefit from Intel’s latest Arc graphics. Its 64GB LPCAMM2 module can also be replaced or upgraded, unlike the soldered memory used in many thin business laptops.

Our review build costs $5,492, placing it very close to the Pro 7 14 Intel and well above the larger Pro 5 16 AMD. The final choice will depend on which features a company values most, since this configuration combines excellent battery life, fast Gen5 storage, replaceable memory, Intel vPro, ControlVault 3+, and three years of next-business-day onsite support. Businesses looking for a compact Intel laptop with strong graphics performance and better serviceability should find plenty to like here, while those running long CPU renders or AMD-favored CAD software may prefer one of the Ryzen configurations.

Product Page: Dell Pro 5 14

The post Dell Pro 5 14 Intel Review: Core Ultra X7 368H and Arc B390 Graphics in a 14-Inch Business Laptop appeared first on StorageReview.com.