ThinkPad P1 Gen 3 Review Part II: Learn from one another

Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by song_1118, Dec 30, 2020.

  1. song_1118

    song_1118 Notebook Geek

    Reputations:
    68
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    26
    I'm sorry that my English is not good. Here is machine translation:
    There are many pictures in the original text, so it's not easy to upload them. Please see the original text:

    https://forum.51nb.com/thread-1984150-1-1.html

    Continuation
    The last part introduced the appearance of ThinkPad P1 Gen 3 (hereinafter referred to as P1G3), and disassembled it at the daily maintenance level. The preliminary conclusion reached is: the ultra-thin and hard-working P1G3, its body structure is suitable for daily The maintenance is very friendly and the disassembly and assembly are simple and easy.
    [​IMG]

    At the same time, it was found that for the models without a pre-installed WAN card, the official does not have a pre-installed antenna and SIM card slot. It is very difficult for users to install it by themselves; moreover, the vacant M.2 WAN card slot does not support the installation of M.2. It is a pity that SSD cannot be used.
    [​IMG]

    The appearance of the P1G3, when viewed from the front after unfolding, is a very orthodox, solemn and serious ThinkPad notebook style.
    [​IMG]

    Body
    The P1G3 is trying to be a thin and performance body, the screen axis can still be expanded by 180 degrees. When the screen is unfolded, the force required for the screen axis to rotate gives the author a very comfortable feeling: it can stop smoothly at any angle without using hands. Operate vigorously.
    [​IMG]

    However, in pursuit of lightness and thinness, the P1G3's screen axis uses a sunken design, and its horizontal length almost penetrates the entire rear of the fuselage;
    [​IMG]

    The P1G3's heat dissipation vent is arranged at the rear of the fuselage, facing the direction of the screen axis, which makes the author a little worried about its heat dissipation efficiency, which will be measured later.
    [​IMG]

    The material used for the upper cover of the P1G3 screen, as mentioned in the previous article, is a carbon brazing composite plastic, which retains good strength. It will be deformed when it is strongly twisted; therefore, in daily use, the screen is difficult to The upper cover was severely deformed and displayed ripples.
    [​IMG]

    The P1G3 fuselage frame is made of magnesium alloy, which has high hardness and good rigidity. Whether it is twisting the two hands on the diagonal of the fuselage, or holding the palm rest with one hand, the P1G3 fuselage is hard to see the deformation. , And can't hear the abnormal noise from the slight deformation of the organism.
    [​IMG]



    port
    The P1G3 has a thin and light body, and the number and types of ports have not been overly weakened. There is a standard SD card reader and dual USB-A ports on the right side, and a proper distance is maintained between the two USB-A. Even if two USB devices are inserted at the same time, it will not feel tight.
    [​IMG]

    The left side has dual Thunderbolt 3 and standard HDMI ports, which can connect three external displays at the same time; Thunderbolt 3 can also connect to higher-speed Thunderbolt peripherals while taking into account the USB-C device.
    [​IMG]

    Unfortunately, the P1G3 does not have a built-in wired network card RJ45 port, so the official makes up for it by equipping a USB-C to RJ45 conversion cable.
    [​IMG]


    Mouse and keyboard
    Although the P1G3 has enough space on the C surface, due to the limited thickness of the fuselage, in order to ensure the accommodation space for the ports on both sides of the fuselage, the P1G3 cannot have a numeric keypad.
    After about 2 hours of text input and daily operations, the author’s evaluation of the keyboard and dual-pointing stick system is: its layout, key feed, and comfort of pointing stick operation are still among the best in the notebook industry. It is considered to retain the reputation of ThinkPad keyboard.
    However, what I have to say is: obviously inferior to ThinkPad P71-and it's not because the P71 has a numeric keypad, but because it is thin and light, it must be thin and light.
    [​IMG]

    screen
    In the official data of P1G3, there are four types of screens available:
    [​IMG]

    The screen of this P1G3 is the third type: 15.6-inch 16:9 3820x2160 resolution, support for Dolby Vision HDR, wide viewing angle of 178 degrees, wide color gamut 100% adobe, brightness up to 600nits, contrast ratio up to 1400:1- ---It is the highest brightness and widest viewing angle among the 4 optional screens.
    Use AIDA64 to view the screen panel information. The official number is LEN4185, and the manufacturer model is MNF601EA1-2. After querying the information, this screen panel was used in ThinkPad T590 and Lenovo Legion Y740Si. It is produced by CSOT (China Star Optoelectronics) with a TCL background. I guess the cost of bulk purchase is about $65 per piece.
    [​IMG]

    As mentioned in the previous article, the P1G3 screen has been certified and calibrated by X-rite PANTONE at the factory; in the factory-installed Windows 10 operating system, there is also a pre-installed X-Rite color assistant, which can easily call multiple pre-made or customized Color configuration, self-start after booting by default----The author enters the pre-installed system for the first time, and after connecting to the network, it prompts that there is an update:
    [​IMG]

    During the test, the author kept the default configuration file called by the X-Rite color assistant at startup without processing, and turned off the X-Rite color assistant, and then used SpyderXElite for measurement.
    The measured results using SpyderXElite are as follows:
    Color gamut-100% sRGB, 99% AdobeRGB, 95% P3 and 95% NTSC-very good results, among which the gap between Adobe and the official nominal 100% is 1%. It is considered that there are errors in the author's measurement;
    [​IMG]

    Tonal response-the measured curve obtained is basically between the luminosity 1.8 and 2.2 curves, and the performance is lacking;
    Grayscale-within the range of 20~80, it can be maintained at about 6650 Kelvin, which is excellent;
    [​IMG]

    Brightness and contrast ---- The highest brightness measured is 620.4nits, and the contrast ratio is 1720:1 at this time; both are higher than the official nominal 600nit/1400:1, which is good.
    [​IMG]

    Uniformity of color brightness----Under the four kinds of brightness measured, the highest value of DeltaE is only 2.8, and the performance of color brightness uniformity is very good!
    [​IMG]

    Brightness uniformity----Under the four kinds of brightness measured, the highest brightness difference is only 9%, which is as good as the color brightness uniformity above.
    [​IMG]

    Color accuracy-the measured color accuracy DeltaE average value is very good 0.91, only one 4D over 2 is 2.15.
    [​IMG]

    Finally, SpyderXElite gave this P1G3 screen, color gamut and contrast, the highest 5-star rating;
    In terms of brightness uniformity, color uniformity and color accuracy, the three were given 4.5 stars; the hue response and white point were rated lower, 3 stars and 4 stars respectively;
    As far as the author is concerned, the screen of this P1G3 can be counted as a very good category, especially the brightness, color gamut, color accuracy and screen uniformity, which are very satisfactory.
    [​IMG]

    The author also deliberately used the 51nb WinPE system to start, and found that even without the X-Rite color assistant to call the color profile, the visual effect is also very good, and its wide viewing angle effect is no problem.
    At the same time, it has been measured under direct sunlight. In addition to the high brightness, the surface seems to have a certain anti-glare effect, so it can still maintain good usability.
    In summary, the screen of this P1G3 is very competent for image processing tasks that value wide color gamut and high color accuracy; however, its screen refresh rate is only the conventional 60Hz, which is suitable for gaming users who need high frame rates. That's a pity.
    [​IMG]


    CPU
    This P1G3 is not a customized model. The MTM is 20TJ-S07300. It uses the Intel WM490 chipset. The CPU used is Intel Core i9-10885H. Under the same system, its theoretical performance is second only to the same 8-core 16-thread. I9-10980HK; coupled with the use of AIDA64 to check the CPUID, it shows that its PL1 is 90W in 56 seconds, and LP2 is 135W in 2.44 milliseconds, which makes the author look forward to its performance.
    [​IMG]

    However, the author's actual test results are as follows:
    In the Cinebench R15 multi-core performance test, the actual score is 1461 points, which is stronger than the i7-10750H on the Lenovo Legion Y7000P and the Intel Xeon E-2276M on the ThinkPad P73, but it is actually not as good as the i7-10875H on the DELL Precision 7750, and it is not as good. I9-9980HK on DELL Precision 7740;
    In terms of single-core performance, the score is 203, which is higher than the i7-10750H on the Lenovo Legion Y7000P and the Intel Xeon E-2276M on the ThinkPad P73, and not as good as the other two.
    [​IMG]

    In the Cinebench R20 test, the multi-core performance score is 3025, only higher than the Intel Xeon E-2276M on the ThinkPad P73; the single-core performance is better, with a score of 501, second only to the i9-9980HK on the DELL Precision 7740.
    [​IMG]

    In the comparison of the score curve using Cinebench R15 multi-core performance for 50 continuous cycles, the performance of the i9-10885H on the P1G3 is fully demonstrated: the highest score is 1467.46, the lowest score is 1378.88, and the average score is 1417.93, which is only higher than that on ThinkPad P73 Intel Xeon E-2276M.
    From this point of view, the performance of the i9-10885H on the P1G3 should not be performing properly.
    how so? The author will study this in the following stress test and temperature test links.
    [​IMG]

    GPU
    P1G3 is a dual-graphics model, which can be set to run in dual-graphics or single-graphics mode in the BIOS; the Intel CPU integrated UHD graphics card does not require me to say more, of course, the focus is on the independent graphics card. The discrete graphics card equipped with this P1G3 is NVIDIA Quadro T2000 with 128bit 4GB GDDR6 video memory:
    [​IMG]

    Its theoretical performance is between the GTX 980 laptop version and the GTX 1650Ti mobile version in the NBC mobile graphics comprehensive performance rankings.
    [​IMG]

    Use the 3DMark benchmark software to test it, and the obtained graphics card scores are compared as shown below: Not as good as the GTX 1650Ti on the Lenovo Legion R7000, and very close to the performance of the AMD Radon Pro 5500M on the Apple MacBook Pro 16.
    [​IMG]

    Using VRMark benchmark software to test it, the comparison of the results obtained is as follows: It is also not as good as the GTX 1650Ti on the Lenovo Legion R7000, but a little better than the AMD Radon Pro 5500M on the Apple MacBook Pro 16.
    [​IMG]

    NVIDIA Quadro T2000 is a professional graphics card, so its professional graphics performance is the focus.
    Using SPECgpcViewperf 13 benchmark software to test the performance of its dual graphics card and single display mode, the results are compared as shown in the figure below: Its total score in dual graphics mode has exceeded the AMD Radon Pro 5500M on Apple MacBook Pro 16. In mode, the total score is very close to the Quadro P5000 on the ThinkPad P71.
    [​IMG]

    Using SPECgpcViewperf 2020 benchmark software to test the performance of its dual graphics card and single display mode, the results are compared as shown in the figure below: the total score in the dual graphics mode is also higher than the AMD Radon Pro 5500M on the Apple MacBook Pro 16. Better under the mode. However, the total score is still far away from the current mobile professional graphics card runner-up, Quadro RTX5000 on DELL Precision 7750, which is less than 46%.
    [​IMG]

    storage
    Although the two memories installed in this P1G3 are DDR4-3200, they can only run at 2933MHz under the official BIOS.
    Using AIDA64's cache and memory benchmark test module, the P1G3 was tested in dual graphics mode and single display mode, and the results obtained are as follows: the left side is the dual graphics mode, the right is the single display mode, you can see that the two modes are in , The score is slightly different, but it can basically be ignored.
    [​IMG]

    This P1G3 factory-installed hard drive has been explained in the previous article. It is Samsung PM981a 1TB. Its performance test results are many on the Internet. The author did not conduct a separate test. I believe that P1G3 should perform well in its performance and there will be no surprises. It can also be seen in the PassMark performance benchmark test below, so skip it here.

    Whole machine
    Use PCMark 8 to test the overall performance of P1G3, and compare the results as shown in the figure below:
    The total score in dual display mode is slightly lower than that of Apple MacBook Pro 16 (configured as i9-9980HK+UHD630+AMD Radeon Pro 5500M dual display), but the total score in single display mode is much higher, very close to the Lenovo Legion R7000 (configuration Ryzen 7 4800H+GTX 1650Ti);
    Although the total score in the standalone mode is still not as good as the DELL Precision 7750 (configured as i7-10875H+Quadro RTX5000), the sub-scores in Home and Work are already higher than the DELL Precision 7750, but in the Creative sub-score, it is The 7750 has a lot more with RTX 5000 graphics card.
    [​IMG]

    Use PCMark 10 to test the overall performance of P1G3, and compare the results as shown in the figure below:
    Comparison results P1G3 performed better-the score in dual display mode has suppressed Apple MBP16 and Lenovo Legion R7000, the score in single display mode, except for the extended graphics performance requirements, P1G3 distance The 7750 score is not too far.
    [​IMG]

    According to the requirements of foreign netizens, the author used UserBenchmark benchmark software to test the performance of its dual graphics card and single display mode. The results obtained are as follows:
    It can be seen that in the dual graphics mode and the single display mode, the tests of various benchmark software show that the overall performance is indeed quite different.
    [​IMG]

    At the same time, it can be seen that the biggest performance shortcoming of P1G3 is the graphics card.
    [​IMG]


    Use the professional graphics comprehensive performance benchmark software SPECwpc 2.1 to test P1G3, and the results and comparisons are as follows:
    P1G3, regardless of dual-display or single-display mode, fully surpasses the ThinkPad P71 (configured as i7-7820HQ+P5000), the main machine I have used for three years. Although it is not small with DELL Precision 7750 in most sub-scores, the total score is The gap does not seem to be much.
    [​IMG]

    Use the professional graphics comprehensive performance benchmark software SPECworkstation 3.04 to test P1G3, and the results and comparisons are as follows:
    The score also beat the ThinkPad P71 in an all-round way. Some sub-scores can be higher than 7750, but the total score is much lower than 7750.
    [​IMG]

    Near the end of the test, UL acquired Futuremark, which produces 3DMark and PCMark, and pushed to the author its latest benchmark software UL Procyon, which directly uses UL's signboard, which seems to have any new tricks.
    This UL Procyon has relatively high requirements and requires the installation of Adobe's related software for comprehensive testing of PC graphics performance.
    Using its test on P1G3, UL Procyon Photo Editing (image editing) scored 6224 points:
    [​IMG]

    The UL Procyon Video Editing test could not be completed. I tried my best and contacted UL technical support, but still no solution (I have multiple laptops, only one can complete the UL Procyon Video Editing test).

    [​IMG]

    Finally, take a look at how PassMark PerformanceTest 10.0 tests P1G3.
    I selected my own DELL Precsion 7750 and MSI WT75 test scores as a reference, and in the PassMark online database, I selected a DELL Precision 7550 and 5550 that also use i9-10885H+NVIDIA Quadro T2000 as a reference, plus The results of P1G3 under dual graphics card and single display mode are six results for comparison.

    The PassMark CPU score comparison is as follows: It can be seen that the performance of the P1G3's i9-10885H is similar to that of the 5750 and 5550, and is also lower than the i7-10875H on the DELL Precision 7750.
    [​IMG]

    The PassMark 2D score comparison is as follows: In the P1G3 single display mode, its 2D score is similar to DELL Precision 7750 and MSI WT75, which is much higher than its own, 7550 and 5550 in dual display mode.
    [​IMG]

    The PassMark 3D score comparison is as follows: The score under the P1G3 standalone mode is not as good as 7550, only 56% of WT75 and 44% of 7750.
    [​IMG]

    The comparison of PassMark memory scores is as follows: P1G3 performs similarly to 7550 and 5550, not as good as the 7750 which can run normally at 3200MHz, and not as good as the ECC memory of WT75 at 2666MHz.
    [​IMG]

    The comparison of PassMark hard disk scores is as follows: No need to explain, because the Samsung P981a used by P1G3 has always been excellent in running scores.
    [​IMG]

    Based on the above, the total score given by PassMark is compared as shown in the figure below: The P1G3 single display mode score is 7141, ranking third among the compared models, and the dual display mode score is 3877, ranking first from the bottom.
    [​IMG]


    Power consumption
    Judging from the various tests above, the P1G3, like Apple MBP16, DELL Precision 7550, 5750, which pursues thin and light models, cannot use top-performance graphics cards, but its CPU performance is also suppressed.
    As mentioned above: "Using AIDA64 to check the CPUID, it shows that its PL1 is 90 watts in 56 seconds, and LP2 is 135 watts in 2.44 milliseconds, which makes the author look forward to its performance." But the actual measurement results disappointed the author.
    So, how does P1G3 actually set the power consumption of the CPU and GPU?
    First, the author used the Stress FPU in the AIDA64 system stability test module to conduct a continuous stress test on the P1G3 CPU for 220 minutes, and the results obtained are as follows:
    [​IMG]

    From the above picture and other continuous screenshots that the author did not send, you can see:
    1. The peak CPU power consumption was 96.6 watts, which appeared at the beginning of the test, and then immediately dropped to more than 60 watts, but at this time the temperature was less than 90 degrees Celsius, and the maximum operating frequency was nearly 4.8 GHz
    2. The average CPU power consumption is 63.4 watts, the average CPU temperature is 81 degrees Celsius, the peak temperature is 94 degrees Celsius after the first minute, and the average operating frequency is about 3.2GHz;
    3. If the recorded data of HWiNFO64 is valid, the peak power consumption of the whole machine in this test is 116.3 watts, and the average value is 84.5 watts;
    4. The conclusion is that the suppression of the P1G3 CPU seems to be achieved through the temperature wall. The temperature wall seems to be set at 81 and 94 degrees Celsius, but it does not mean that the P1G3 CPU can run smoothly on LP1 if the temperature is lower than 81 degrees Celsius. 90 watts-in most of the time, it will run stably at about 62 watts, but it is certain that if the temperature reaches 94 degrees Celsius, the P1G3 CPU will immediately start to reduce the frequency and consumption, and finally the long-term stress test Under the condition of 81 degrees Celsius.


    Next, let's see what happens when we use FurMark to perform a long-term stress test on a GPU in a single display state.
    The results of the 70-minute stress test are as follows: P1G3's NVIDIA Quadro T2000 is calm, from beginning to end, its temperature is around 50 degrees Celsius, power consumption is around 35 watts, the peak power consumption of the whole machine is 133.2 watts, and the average value is 95.9 watts.
    In short, there is no fun at all, the conventional limited standard of Max-Q graphics card without compromise.
    [​IMG]

    Finally, the author used Stress FPU+FurMark for a 120-minute dual pressure test, and the results obtained are shown in the following figure:
    [​IMG]
    1. The average temperature of the GPU has reached 61 degrees Celsius, while the peak temperature of the CPU is 98 degrees Celsius, and the average value is still 81 degrees Celsius;
    2. The average power consumption of GPU is the same as the single stress test of graphics card, which is still about 35 watts, while the average power consumption of CPU is about 48 watts;
    3. However, the power consumption of the CPU is not stable, it is between 35 watts and 62 watts, constantly struggling;
    4. When the CPU power consumption is 62 watts and the temperature is 94 degrees Celsius, the operating frequency is about 3.1 GHz, when it is 35 watts, the temperature is 72 degrees Celsius and the operating frequency is about 2.3 GHz;
    5. At the same time, the CPU's PL1 is also repeated in the two values of 35 watts and 62 watts, the time interval is about 80 seconds;
    6. If the recorded data of HWiNFO64 is valid, in this test, the power consumption of the whole machine is also synchronized, constantly repeating the two values of 98 watts and 127 watts;
    7. After careful observation and comparison, the author found that the strategy of P1G3 is as follows: Under a long-term stress test, when the temperature of the CPU is lower than 94 degrees Celsius, PL1 tries to maintain 62 watts, which is about 94 degrees Celsius. If you can keep running for about 80 seconds, you will definitely adopt the method of drastically dropping PL1 to 35 watts. When the temperature returns to 72 degrees Celsius, PL1 will return to 62 watts, and so on.



    temperature
    When the above three pressure tests were carried out in sequence, the author used an infrared thermometer to record the temperature of multiple P1G3 surfaces and power supply surfaces.
    The temperature is 10 degrees Celsius at room temperature during the test. In such an environment, the surface temperature of the P1G3's power supply does not exceed 37 degrees Celsius. According to the results of the above three pressure test records, this P1G3 equipped with a 135 watt power supply is sufficient. The standard 170 watt power supply It's a bit wasteful.
    [​IMG]

    The P1G3's C surface temperature chart is as follows. Because the room temperature is 10 degrees Celsius, the palm rest temperature does not exceed 19 degrees Celsius. The highest temperature point is at the center of the C surface near the screen, reaching 41.8 degrees Celsius, and the keyboard center temperature is 33.1 degrees Celsius.
    [​IMG]

    The temperature chart of the D surface of P1G3 is as follows. The bottom of the palm rest is still good, but the area near the rear of the D surface is above 40 degrees Celsius, and the highest point is 48.1 degrees Celsius. According to the previous disassembly diagram, this part should be a P1G3 discrete graphics card. Power supply part.
    [​IMG]

    If the room temperature is 20 degrees Celsius, or if it is replaced by the author's previous brutal test on the Dell Precision 7750 in the summer, when the room temperature is at least 28 degrees Celsius, the temperature performance of P1G3 must not be so "cool".

    noise
    In addition to the CPU performance not playing well, the author is also very dissatisfied with the P1G3's cooling noise.
    Under low load conditions, the sound of P1G3 cooling fan can hardly be heard;
    Under medium load, the sound of P1G3's cooling fan is more obvious, but it will not be intolerable;
    At full speed, according to the records of HWiNFO64, the P1G3 cooling fan has a speed of nearly 4900RPM.
    [​IMG]

    The sound pressure of the P1G3 cooling fan is not low, and its audio frequency is very unpleasant, and the official “eagle wing”---owl The "Eagle" guarantees heat dissipation while flying silently like an owl. It is completely unmatched. It is a bit like the sound of a "Harrier" fighter jet from a distance when it takes off vertically...



    Endurance
    The P1G3’s battery is 80 watt-hours, and its battery life is officially marked as follows:
    The longest battery life test: MobileMark 2014: 15.9 hours, MobileMark 2018: 12 hours.
    Battery life will vary greatly due to hardware configuration, settings, usage and other factors.

    Due to time constraints, the author did not conduct a comprehensive test on the battery life of the P1G3, and only used PCMark 10 to test it once. The results are as follows: in the dual graphics state, the screen brightness is 50%, and the PCMark 10 application battery life test score is 8 hours and 24 minutes.
    [​IMG]


    P1G 3 battery charging time is officially marked as follows:
    Supports fast charging, using 135 watts of power, you can charge from 0% to 80% in one hour.
    What I said above should refer to power off and charging. The author actually measured as follows:
    Use the standard 170 watt power supply, turn on idle, keep the lowest brightness of the screen, the power is the most energy-efficient, charging from 5%, it takes 2 hours and 30 minutes to fully charge the display.
    [​IMG]


    Evaluation
    The author of this P1G3 started testing on October 20th and ended on December 3rd. However, the actual test plus the use time is about three weeks intermittently. Therefore, this evaluation will inevitably have some irregularities.
    For now, the advantages and disadvantages of P1G3 that the author thinks have been mentioned in the article, and will not be clearly listed at the end.
    [​IMG]

    The author will use the following sentences as the final evaluation:
    1. The screen of this ThinkPad P1 Gen 3 performs very well, and the brightness is the highest among the models I have tested so far;
    2. The performance and scalability of ThinkPad P1 Gen 3, although not as good as DELL Precision 7750, the comfort of keyboard and mouse is definitely much better;
    3. The performance of ThinkPad P1 Gen 3 is better than that of Apple MacBookPro 16. If you don't need a genuine MAC OS, definitely choose P1G3;
    4. After three generations of ThinkPad P1 series, apart from CPU performance upgrades, there is almost no progress;
    5. The next generation of ThinkPad P1 should "follow up" the target "imaginary enemy" and will continue to "follow up", but the four Thunder 4 plus 16:10 screen is not necessarily just around the corner.

    This is the reason for the subtitle of this article "Learn from one another/by analogy."
     
  2. SUADE8880

    SUADE8880 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    171
    Messages:
    648
    Likes Received:
    187
    Trophy Points:
    56
    This got to be the most thorough review on a laptop ever. A ThinkPad is a ThinkPad and you can tell it is from a mile away. Thank you for posting this...It will help others who are considering to buy one.
     
  3. huntnyc

    huntnyc Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    150
    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Do you think the i7 10750h would run any cooler and thanks for fantastic detailed review.

    Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
     
  4. puppet2008

    puppet2008 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    4
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    16
    It would be more appealing if the two USBC ports can be distributed on both sides, instead of being placed at the same side.
     
    vs40 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page