*HP EliteBook 8530p/w Owners Lounge *

Well that's good to know, but even without downclocking their might be some performance loss. I once put a more powerful PSU in a desktop and suddenly the graphics card was performing around 10% better while the clockspeed wasn't changed. Maybe you can run some benchmarks to be sure.

 

I ran 3Dmark 2006. Got the same score, around 5100 so there seems to be no performance loss.

 

What the next update of these notebooks SHOULD include:
RGB LED/Dream Color Display option (most important!)
DDR3 Ram (future-proof, faster)
Backlit Keyboard (convenient)

Other:
USB 3.0 (coming out soon?)
SSDs (at cheaper prices...)
Windows 7 (by the end of this year?)

P.S. Still trying to decide between the HP Elitebook 8530w and the Dell Precision M4400.

The Dell seems to have far more issues though.

By the way, it seems that the temperature and fan noise is much greater with the nVidia GPU (Quadro FX770). It appears that the Ati runs much cooler and offers better performance overall.

 

Much cooler, yes. About the better performance it depends. I don't know how the firegl handles CAD, but in games the firegl is much slower than quadro fx 770. Though this quadro is so hot i'm starting to wonder if it is worth the extra 25% performance.

 

i have had some laptops with ati and nvidia cards lately, and the nvidia laptops are faster when it comes to gaming with directx. but when it comes to opengl in professional apps , the ati cards seem to be faster.

can you run the specviewperf 10 on your notebook ?
http://www.spec.org/gwpg/downloadindex.html

this benchmark will show you the opengl performance of your graphics card, and it wil definetly show if you system( graphics) is running stable .

 

All benchmarks for FX770 and V5700:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Graphic-Cards-for-Pros.13824.0.html

This info is taken from reviews of M4400 and Thinkpad W500

It seems the V5700 beats the FX770 Maya and Solidworks, The 3dMark06 score is terrible however (2150 vs 5365)

 

thanks for the info mate.

concerning the 3dmark score, something must have gone totally wrong with the test systems configuration.
the fireglv5700 is equivalent to the hd3650 mobility, so it´s 3dmark06 score should be the same.

and i am not sure if those specbenchmark values are absolutely correct.

i have driver modded my hd2600 a while back to a fireglv5600 mobility ( i know the equivalent is firegl v3600m...)

and the results und xp64 for the specviewperf were these :

3dsmax-04 : 34.96
catia-02 : 34.22
ensight-03 : 23.91
maya-02 : 108.95
proe-04 : 34.05
sw-01 : 70.82
tcvis-01 : 21.30
ugnx-01 : 18.17

so it seems the firegl v5700 compard the the firegl v5600m has "only" become faster in the unigraphics benchmarks.

 

I think it is important to mention that both the poor 3dmark performance of the V5700 and the slower performance of the FX770 in Maya are probably caused by the drivers. FX770 and V5700 are very new cards and vendors are not very fast when it comes to updating drivers. I think in the long run the V5700 will catch up with the 3650 and the FX770 will outperform the V5700 in all benchmarks because it is technically a faster card. Probably it can already outperform the V5700 today if you take the time to do some experimenting with modded desktop quadro drivers.

 

The 3dMark06 score can't be that low for the Ati FireGL V5700. They must have made some sort of mistake...

 

According to Notebookcheck:

"The figure shows a huge difference between Mobility Radeon HD3650 graphics and CAD optimized FireGL V5700 graphics card. The professional graphics card is in all fields better than the consumer version and can outperform it by much. The biggest difference is thereby in the 3D graphics program Maya."

They made a mistake with the 3dMark06 scores. The Ati FireGL V5700 score is 3851, which is very similar to the HD3650.

 

Yes I saw it too, they just made a mistake when making the table. But still one important notice, the resolution was only 1280x800, so it's not a very good score. The M4400 scores 6019. The FX770 is still greatly preferable when it comes to games.

 

In the next update, I hope they will offer more options for the GPU.

 

i don´t think so.

ati´s cards are better in opengl shading and wireframe acceleration. it´s the same picture for the last 3 or 4 generations of graphics cards from nvidia and ati :

-nvidia is mostly better in d3d and gaming experience
-ati has the better opengl performance

the fx770 is the professional equivalent of the 9600 series, which again is just a die shrink ( manufacturing process), so it´s performance won´t be too far away from the fx570.

same thing for the firegl v5700(hd 3650) and the firegl v5600 (hd2600).

 

The radeon 2600 is techincally faster than the 3650. At least in games.

 

compared to the 3851 points in the syntetic 3dmark06 bench my hd 2600 gets around 3500 points.

what the real world difference is i just can guess, but as a many reviewers stated some months ago the hd 3650 should have a 10% improvement in performance.

the table says 5363... and so does the review at notebookcheck...

edit:

have just seen that the tested dell precision did have a wxga+ panel with 1440x900. unless the people at notebookcheck did use an external monitor this test seems to have run on a smaller resolution than 3dmarks06´s standard testing resolution of 1280x1024. so we just can guess that the real result should be around what the 9600 m gt is getting tested with the resolution of 1280x1024.

 

The Ati does only beat the FX770 in solidworks and maya, not the other benchmarks. But i agree it is a very efficient card considering the lower TDP and heat production.

Probably true, but is it done by the card or just brilliant programming from Ati?

Schoko, I can make a few things sure about the FX770, because I own a 8530w myself (T9400+4GB+FX770)

In 1280x800 I get 5852 in 3dMark06. So the only thing you need to reach 6000 is a better cpu or just a better driver.
In 1280x1024 I get between 5200-5300. (don't remember exactly)
I can test all these resolutions because my screen is 1680x1050

It's another mistake from notebookcheck, but their reviews are fine. They compared 1280x800 scores in the review and messed up the table. It's true the FX770 is exactly a 9600m GT DDR3 since the scores are very similar when looking at reviews from the new macbook pro. DDR3 really makes a big difference. Therefore the ati3650 disappoints me, because even with DDR3 it doesn't get higher then 3800 in 1280x800. A 9600m GT DDR2 would be faster.

 

Both the FireGL Mobility V5700 and the HD 3650 GDDR3, which are almost the same card, get about 3900 points in 3Dmark06 at the default 1280x1024 resolution. For comparison, the Quadro FX770M/9600M GT GDDR3 get about 5200 under the same settings. The scores will vary slightly depending on the CPU, drivers etc.

The W500 has been out for a while, and there are enough benchmarks in the Lenovo section. Here is a thread with 3DMark and SPECviewperf 10 benchmarks:
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=311572
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=315910
(Just to note, that the V5700 is misidentified as the HD3650, that's way it says Radeon there, not for other reasons.)

The HD 3650 GDDR3 also gets about 4400 at 1280x800 in case you are interested.
- http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4565

The same configuration from the review at 1280x1024.
- http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=3867751&postcount=24


None of the these cards are really new anymore, so there could be a little debate about their performance in synthetic benchmarks as you could imagine.

 

I think I'm going to quit on using any info from notebookcheck from now on.

The specview results in this review seem very strange to me. The V5700 and FX770 are both faster then the high-end FX3600 in all benchmarks. (Is this another notebookcheck failure). I hope to do some specview benchmarks on my own FX770 somewhere in the next few weeks (first need to download 600MB) and compare them with the scores from this user review.

 

I noticed Laptopvideo2go released new drivers for HP Quadro mobile workstation (179.44). I have no idea how they could release this faster then HP but I tested the drivers and performance was almost the same as 176.56.
3dMark06 score was better then 179.28 (Geforce drivers). So I recommend these drivers as the best overall for HP/Compaq mobile workstations.

Here are my specviewperf 10 benchmarks for xp64 (176.56):

3dsmax - 29.89
catia - 36.33
ensight - 27.85
maya - 59.66
proe 33.43
solidworks - 48.18
kvis 18.11
ugnx - 17.45

Here are my specviewperf 10 benchmarks for xp64 (179.44):

3dsmax - 29.07
catia - 35.67
ensight - 27.49
maya - 59.68
proe - 32.80
solidworks - 48.46
kvis - 18.69
ugnx - 17.46

It is at least clear to me the FX770 will never beat the V5700 in specviewperf.

 

Since the Elitebook 8530p/w does not have an option for a Dreamcolor display, would it be possible to replace it with the Flexview IPS screen from the IBM Thinkpad T60? The screen size is the same (15.4 inches). The only thing that worries me is the screen bezel...

 

No, the IPS screen is a standard 15" (4:3) panel.

I posted some more explanations in your other thread...

 

I'm new to the forum and have some questions that I hope someone can help me with. I have a new 8530w with the FX770 and have seen some comments about testing SolidWorks on this setup. My problem is that I loaded SW08 sp5.0, then restarted and I lost my nvidia drivers all togther. I reloaded the drivers from HP and it worked fine with SW08 one time until I shut it down and restarted....no drivers. I uninstalled SW08 and still have the same problem, the drivers won't stay. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Hey Jer-man, get the drivers from SW site. I have 07 on the same setup as you. Works like a charm.

 

I just realized I was only looking under nvidia card driver at the SW site when actually it is under HP and the individual computer. I think I will give it one more try. Thanks

 

my,low scores with specveiwperf with the old 8510 with Shocko modded drivers , with all the 8530 problems looks like I'll be waiting to buy

3dsmax-04 36.74
catia-02 36.06
ensight-03 23.91
maya-02 108.55
proe-04 35.73
sw-01 72.55
tcvis-01 21.52
ugnx-01 18.12

 

I wonder if anyone can help.
Im considering to downsizing my LCD fro WUXGA to WSXGA+ mainly for gaming reasons. I dont like the fact that i have to struggle with the native resolution for a game to look nice without setting it to a lower resolution of say 1440x900. It then looks blurry compared to WXGA+ native resolution which would look better.
My ideal Resolution is around 1600x900, 1600x1200, 1680x1050 for quality and decent frames and if the native resolution is that then it will give even more frames.
So is it worth it and is there any advantages and disadvantages between WUXGA and WSXGA+? and if i rang up hp would they do it for free with my warranty since it is more of a downgrade?

 

I have a 1680x1050 and I do actually have the same problem as you.
Of course it depends on the games you are playing, but I think for the newest games it is better to downgrade to 1440x900. I think you should better buy a cheap external monitor for games. A matte screen is not an ideal gaming screen anyway.
A last note: My 1680x1050 is so sharp I cannot understand why a WUXGA screen is needed in a 15.4" package.

 

I know the specs don't have it listed, but has anyone tried a 500gb drive? The HP tech support said they did not know if it would work or not.

 

its true i had an 8510p with 1680x1050 and played timeshift. Gorgeous it was. when i sold it and 8510w with wuxga. still gorgeous. no major difference. maybe just more viewing area. but yea id rather downgrade really.
Can i downgrade with warranty anyone....

As for the 500gb hard drive. im sure it should work. after all we are using the latest laptop so why wouldnt it.

 

I agree, you would think with the latest you would be able to use at least a 500 gb. However, after 45 min. on the phone with 3 different people (last one tech support), they say it is not in the specs, so may not work.

This say 500 gb in the html page, but HP says that's a mistake.
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF25a/321957-321957-64295-3740645-3329741-3782310.html

Their Quick specs .pdf - says max is 250gb 5400 rpm or 320gb 7200 rpm
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/13094_na/13094_na.pdf

Didn't know if someone had already tried a 500gb and results.

 

I don't see any reason why a 500gb drive wouldn't work as long as it is a 2.5" SATA II drive. 99.99% sure a 500gb would work no problem.

 

You can use a 500 GB drive in the 8530w for 100% sure. I have currently a Western Digital Blue installed (500GB, 5400RPM). I highly recommend this hard disk because it is faster and then the (7200RPM!) hitachi that shipped with my 8530w. My Vista hard disk performance index increased from 5.4 to 5.7!
The WD blue is also very quiet.

 

Yes although it improved alot over your previous drive. what size was it? cos you 500gb maybe slower, but its cos of the HUGE!!! space on it which when benches. its really smooth for it to read.
My 320Gb gets 5.7 aswell at 7200 rpm. so id assume a 500gb 7200rpm would achieve 5.9

Alos i need advice in to do with buying ram in the future to upgrade...I have 4gb ram and it scores 5.3 on vista. not bad really considering after checking it out with cpu-z i found out that its cl6. so it would of been higher scored if it was cl5 or cl4. And then to my suprise i found out this is jut one stick of ram HP left me with a spare slot
But if i want to buy another 4gb ram what one shall i buy?

 

i just bought this for my 8510
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produc...&cm_mmc=TEMC-RMA-Approvel-_-Content-_-text-_-

 

some quality ram there thats perfect for 8510p. i need something abit faster. pc6400 but some good one. Thanks for recommendation tho.

 

Wow. This thread has grown quickly.

When can we expect OLED displays? Sometime in the next year or so?

 

Yeah that makes sense, my previous drive was 250GB. I also have to say it was a hitachi. I know HP ships the 8530 with Hitachi and Seagate. Maybe the Seagates are better

Strange, my 4Gb scores a 5.9. RAM ordered from HP.

 

My 8530w shipped with 320Gb Seagate 7200 RPM. Windows score is 5.9.
I have 4Gb of RAM (2Gb from hp, other 2 I bought myself) and the windows score is 5.9

 

u both with ya high memory scores lol. i suppose ya quadros scored 5.7+ lol. I dont see how it scored same as the quadro 570m at 5.5.

Hey amihalceanu and ytrewqxl

What Cas latency is your rams?

 

My timings are standard for ddr2-800 for laptops:
6-6-6-18

 

WHAT!!! just cl6. mine is cl6 one dimm and i get just 5.3
Whys that you think?

 

I think 2x2 is faster then 1x4 because of dual channel.

 

i plan to buy an 8530p in the future, but how would you guys rate your screens from 1-10?
and if anyone is able, could they post some pics of theirs please =D

 

So its worth getting another stick of 4? but saying what you have reminds me that whn i did have 2x2 in the other notebooks i only got 5.1 and although is pc5300. Other people have had higher with same speed.(athlons not included cos i no they utilse ram better for some reason)


as for the other guy that has dream laptop... depends on what u want to do with ur notebook mainly but id take 8530w anyday over t500. But thats mainly cos of gpu performance of the two.
Plus the machine is alot nicer. lenovo is bland. but good at reducing fan noise.
I should no cos i owned t61p.

 

im not necessarily drawn b/w the two laptops, im kinda leaning to the 8530p for a couple of reasons(mainly build quality.forgot to update sig lol), but im wondering now about the screen before i was completely sure on getting that

 

Sisqo: Oh I didn't know you had 1 stick of ram and not 2. Dual channel improves memory scores in vista significantly compared to single channel (i tried it myself). So there's the reason for the difference in our scores.

Rikimusha: I don't know about the screens in the p, i have the WUXGA screen for my W and I'm not liking it very much. It is dark and has poor colors. Angles are good, the resolution is superb of course. I'd give it a 7/10.

 

I give the screen 8/10. The contrast/colors is good for a matte screen. The brightness is good enough for me (after uninstalling driver 179.44 ). One important thing for me is eye comfort. Compared to older LCD screens and glossy screens the 8530w screen reads almost like paper. I can work for hours behind the 8530w without feeling any eye strain. For me having the 8530w LCD for work + a large external screen for movies and games is ideal.
I mainly preferred the 8530w over the W500 because it got better critics on the screen in reviews. I also wanted the FX770 and a more elegant/portable design. I can easily place my 8530w next to a macbook pro without getting the feeling I'm walking around with a ten year old notebook. I think the build quality is not better then Lenovo Thinkpad, the case is very strong but the cooling is mediocre (something you don't have to worry about when buying an ati card).
If my 8530w doesn't live for at least 5 years I will buy Lenovo next time.

 

hmm dodgey. wouldnt of thought that about the ram.

as for the screen quality its not that bad. if its that dim, then is it because you have ambient light sensor enabled?

 

I keep the sensor disabled otherwise the screen really is that dim.
It's perfectly usable at maximum brightness it just troubles me that I have to use it like that. CCFL backlights lose brightness over time so if a 2 month laptop needs full brightness I don't want to use it in 3 years time (which I would be otherwise doing since overall seems like a very nice and durable machine).
Also my screen is a samsung, i know there is also an LG available which has higher max brightness (210 nits versus 180 nits if I am not mistaken). On the "bright" side the screen has no grain (past samsung screens were terrible in this respect).
Regarding long term usability of the screen: It is indeed nice and pleasant for long term usage as long as you don't mind the very limited color gamut. Also you should try 15.4 WUXGA before buying it. I love the insanely low dot pitch but 2/3 of the people that stare at my screen have to focus so hard that they can't use it for more than 15 minutes.

 

Well i just checked the product id and it says LGDF200. so does that mean its the LG? Im not sure what im looking for as it never occured to check all these minor things when recieving laptop. just gpu performance and fan noise is most important.

So far i think the notebook is excellent. it gets alittle too hot if i dont undervolt it from around 86-90c -75-80c. so im hoping to get engineer round and get them to put some thermal paste on to cool it down another 10c to hopefull around 65-70ish degres when gaming for long periods.