Time difference between Shanghai and Luang Prabang
Luang Prabang is 1 hours behind Shanghai.
Local time in both cities
Shanghai · China
00:57
ChinaLuang Prabang · Laos
23:57
LaosLuang Prabang is 1 hours behind Shanghai.
still the previous day
Time zones
| Shanghai | Asia/Shanghai · UTC+08:00 |
|---|---|
| Luang Prabang | Asia/Vientiane · UTC+07:00 |
Shanghai does not observe daylight saving and stays on UTC+08:00 all year.
Luang Prabang does not observe daylight saving and stays on UTC+07:00 all year.
Hour-by-hour conversion
Calculated for 2026-09-22 local time in Shanghai. The two places start and end daylight saving on different dates, so another day can give a different result.
| Shanghai (source) | Luang Prabang (target) |
|---|---|
| 00:00 | 23:00 prev day |
| 01:00 | 00:00 |
| 02:00 | 01:00 |
| 03:00 | 02:00 |
| 04:00 | 03:00 |
| 05:00 | 04:00 |
| 06:00 | 05:00 |
| 07:00 | 06:00 |
| 08:00 | 07:00 |
| 09:00 | 08:00 |
| 10:00 | 09:00 |
| 11:00 | 10:00 |
| 12:00 | 11:00 |
| 13:00 | 12:00 |
| 14:00 | 13:00 |
| 15:00 | 14:00 |
| 16:00 | 15:00 |
| 17:00 | 16:00 |
| 18:00 | 17:00 |
| 19:00 | 18:00 |
| 20:00 | 19:00 |
| 21:00 | 20:00 |
| 22:00 | 21:00 |
| 23:00 | 22:00 |
Other common differences from Shanghai
FAQ
- How many hours apart are Shanghai and Luang Prabang right now?
- The answer at the top of the page is calculated for the current moment and states which side is ahead. The gap changes during the year, because the two places usually start and end daylight saving on different dates.
- Is this difference the same all year?
- Not necessarily. Shanghai uses Asia/Shanghai and Luang Prabang uses Asia/Vientiane; if either observes daylight saving, the gap shifts during the year. Use “Convert a specific date and time” below to calculate it for a given day.
- How do I read the conversion table?
- The left column lists each whole hour in Shanghai; the right column is the local time in Luang Prabang at that same instant, with date rollovers marked. On the day clocks jump forward, some hours do not exist locally — the table says so instead of showing a plausible but wrong value.