Lenovo W540 Announced today

+1

I wish a cow would gallop. I wish a bazaar would look neat and rational. Installing a different display panel is no design innovation.

 

I wouldn't bring camera sensors into this discussion.

(In any event, a digital camera's "image quality" depends on 4 major factors: lens, image sensor, pixel density for the area of the image sensor, and in-camera processing algorithms. Pixel density alone means nothing. Claiming "20 megapixel camera" is nonsense. Here, a "pixel" is an individual light sensor. A high pixel density in a relatively small sensor only introduces more noise.)

 

Obviously Lenovo, HP, and Dell would not be offering "retina" type displays if no one wanted them. The millions of people who own and use "retina" MacBook Pro notebooks and "retina" iPads already know how clear and easy on the eyes a HiDPI display is. It is obvious from the large numbers of people who gave up on Windows notebooks and their glacial rate of evolution, that Lenovo, HP, and Dell needed to start listening to customers instead of continuing shipping low resolution screens that are hard to read for many people. Sure, some people are okay with these low resolution screens. But many people aren't.

The sad truth of the matter is that without HiDPI screens on the market and customers complaining about scaling issues, Microsoft just won't ever fix the problems with their scaling design/implementation. They did make some steps in Windows 8.1, but apparently there's room for improvement. So Lenovo, HP, and Dell are having to put the HiDPI screens out before they really work well, so that there is customer/market pressure on Microsoft to stop sitting on their hands.

 

Actually, for Lenovo, it is innovative. Just ask all the people who are sick of low quality Lenovo displays. Maybe you haven't owned and used many Thinkpads, but it's been a long time since Lenovo offered an IPS panel. And the HiDPI panel for the W540 is an IPS panel.

 

I lost count a long time ago.

 

The fact that we have retina class displays on smartphones, laptop displays, and now some desktop displays provides all their proof that is needed to show that many, if not all, people can see and appreciate HiDPI displays for their intrinsic clarity and ease of viewing.

You may not like HiDPI displays, but saying tens of millions of people are in the wrong because they wanted a clearer, more legible, display... and bought a device with "more megapixels", i.e. a HiDPI screen... well, good luck with that.

As for the resolution of the human eye, which most scientists look at as a marvel of nature, I'd suggest you do some research, starting perhaps with this:

---

How many megapixels equivalent does the eye have?

The eye is not a single frame snapshot camera. It is more like a video stream. The eye moves rapidly in small angular amounts and continually updates the image in one's brain to "paint" the detail. We also have two eyes, and our brains combine the signals to increase the resolution further. We also typically move our eyes around the scene to gather more information. Because of these factors, the eye plus brain assembles a higher resolution image than possible with the number of photoreceptors in the retina. So the megapixel equivalent numbers below refer to the spatial detail in an image that would be required to show what the human eye could see when you view a scene.

Based on the above data for the resolution of the human eye, let's try a "small" example first. Consider a view in front of you that is 90 degrees by 90 degrees, like looking through an open window at a scene. The number of pixels would be
90 degrees * 60 arc-minutes/degree * 1/0.3 * 90 * 60 * 1/0.3 = 324,000,000 pixels (324 megapixels).
At any one moment, you actually do not perceive that many pixels, but your eye moves around the scene to see all the detail you want. But the human eye really sees a larger field of view, close to 180 degrees. Let's be conservative and use 120 degrees for the field of view. Then we would see
120 * 120 * 60 * 60 / (0.3 * 0.3) = 576 megapixels.
The full angle of human vision would require even more megapixels. This kind of image detail requires A large format camera to record.

Clarkvision Photography - Resolution of the Human Eye

 

I don't even remember the model numbers. But I do remember how the screens went from 4:3 to 16:10 to 16:9 and their quality declined and also how the keyboards got worse and worse over time, especially after IBM sold their PC division to Lenovo. In days past, IBM offered some of the very best displays and arguably, the very best keyboard, that you could get in a notebook.

So I am really happy that a good display is finally going to be available for the W540. I'm not so happy about what looks like continued regression of the keyboard and TrackPoint/trackpad. But I will reserve judgment on the latter until I get to try it myself.

 

Well, when they went from 16:10 to 16:9 the resolution declined a bit on the W-Series, but the quality of the panel was better than before (the AUO FHD Display on W510-W530 is much better than the dark WUXGA panels used in T61p and W500 qualitywise).

Well, thats still the case. Try and find a better keyboard on a current Notebook than the current ThinkPad Keyboard.

The difference to the old IBM days is: Finally the hole lineup and every ThinkPad size gets high quality displays (12.5" FHD IPS on X240, 14" FHD IPS on T440p/T440s, 15.5" FHD++ IPS on W540/T540p). Back with IBM, only the X-Tablets (X41) and the 15" T- and Rxxp (like the T60p or the R50p) models had good display. Especially the 14" models always had bad-displays.

 

Boy, do we need to be educated on pixel whatever? Do we need to be reminded that, lately, only the AUO B156HW01 V.4 FHD screens on ThinkPad 15.6" models are worth looking at? Hmm.

I wait to personally eye and use the new W540 display (if I care to touch a W540 at all) to say whether it is "good." I'm old enough NOT to get excited by names and numbers alone.

 

What is "obvious" to you is not necessarily obvious to all. The number of people who own a product do not necessarily attest to its superiority, especially without any comparison factors. And you're not even talking about the whole product, just one aspect of one component.

Low resolution screens tend to be easy to read, as text appears larger. What people don't like is low quality screens (low brightness, poor viewing angles, bad color representation, etc.). While typically low quality screens also have low resolution, that is a correlation and does not imply all lower resolution screens are low quality.

Companies release products to make money, not to force a software manufacturer to change policies. You are correct that there is definitely a market for ever-higher resolution displays. My post was written to provide a counterpoint to the perspective that everything should have ultra high-resolution displays and those who say anything different are standing in the face of progress. In other words, everyone buying a computer has different priorities, and there's no need to disparage anyone who has different priorities than you do.

 

Obviously.


I ask that the HiDPI evangelism be stopped. We're already well-informed, thank you.

 

Like you said, it's impossible to know in advance. While a pixel doubled retina class display can be very good, there is no guarantee that what Lenovo ships is of high quality and works well. The W540 is a strange set of compromises and it makes me wonder what Lenovo is up to. The battery life appears very bad for a Haswell-based notebook, for instance. As Windows has notoriously buggy Thunderbolt drivers, I wonder why Lenovo even added a power hungry extra chip for this. But the new HiDPI screen may be good, so that is a positive.

As I have not used Windows 8.1 on a HiDPI display, I am hoping that the display clarity and legibility for the W540 is as good as what one gets with a retina MacBook Pro. I'm sure that once enough HiDPI displays are in customers' hands, then any issues with apps and/or the OS will get fixed reasonably quickly.

 

Most of the time, text is the same size as on the low res equivalent screen, the text is just sharper and easier to read. This is because a base resolution is scaled up for the HiDPI display, i.e. for pixel doubling, the HiDPI display uses four small pixels to display what was one larger pixel before scaling.

I think it's fairly obvious that I'm not claiming every HiDPI screen ever made is easier to read than every LoDPI screen ever made. But, in general, it will be true. Just ask anyone who uses a retina class smartphone if they'd want to go back to a low resolution screen.

It'll be funny to revisit threads like this after HiDPI screens are commonplace for Windows notebooks and the Windows HiDPI bugs are fixed. Just as with the retina MacBook Pro, people will wonder why it took so long and how amazingly good the screen clarity is now.

 

Resolution is a bit more complex topic, particularly related to the human eye. It's a shame links like that show up high in the Google output (I particularly love the precision, 576!, not 570, not 580 megapixels ), but it does not make the statement less absurd. You can produce a gigapixel image with 10mp camera and telephoto lens, but that does not make that camera resolution equivalent to 1 gigapixel. There is also a huge number of silver halide crystals in 1mm square of photographic film, but scanning 1mm2 of, particularly color, film isn't going to come up with too impressive real, artefact-free, resolution. Some research, starting with at least Wikipedia about eye and its construction, might be useful. Or even a practical experiment: get up somewhere high, look around for as long as you need, and then compare how "576 megapixel-equivalent" naked eye recorded details compare to, say, details visible at Panoramic Photography | Panoramic Images | Hi-Res Images | GigaPan .

There are also people who produce video equipment and content, and practically need to calculate at what distance should a user be from a TV to notice the difference between 720p and 1080p, or 1080p and 4K. These also come up quite high in Google output, and are a lot easier to verify in person in the comfort of one's own home, w/o any reading and research.

As to millions of people who "see" things, well, marketing and the wisdom it pours over the ears of uneducated consumers is very literally eye opening, particularly when easily understandable "More is better" is the motto, be it MegaHertzs or Megapixels. Also, millions of people enjoy vast benefits of homeopathy, aromatherapy and extra picture clarity from "oxygen-free" $1000/meter HDMI cables and want 100MP cellphone cameras, some of them at the same time.

Anyway, all my point was that screen megapixels are, indeed, important. But once you have enough, like 150+ ppi screen in a laptop, there'd better be other, real, benefits of going beyond that, coupled with few disadvantages. In a today's laptop these benefits are yet to be seen, and disadvantages, particularly when using not so modern applications, are there and are very visible to the naked eye.

 

I second this. We can throw around all the numbers we want 8*8/2 - (a + y) ^2 = MC2 - the time it takes the Universe to collapse to a singularity - honestly... who cares. The Ultimate judge of how good a display is and if it's worth the money will be my own eyes.

I agree it's much easier for display manufacturers to market higher resolution displays to the masses as "Better" because the number of pixels is greater and we all know more means it must be better... - however I am firmly in the camp that quality not quantity is what really matters.

I still find it amazing that Sony and others are trying to sell 4K resolution TV's for $10,000+ when there is almost no native content to show on these displays. I would much rather they focus on making affordable OLED TV's which have much better colour reproduction, dynamic range etc, but what's easier to sell... a 50inch 1080P OLED TV or a 50inch 2160P (4K) LCD TV? Most would say the 2160P TV must be better because of the higher resolution but people who are informed know that is not necessarily true.

I do however appreciate a good high resolution display and hope the new IPS hi res display on the W540 will be awesome and unlike a 4K TV where there is almost no native content available, I can think of plenty of way to fill a 2880 x 1620 W540 display, as long as the quality is there . I'll have to wait to read the reviews or hopefully get to see one with my own eyes.

 

You're thinking media, I'm thinking productivity. The biggest advantage to ultra HD displays is the ability to multitask on them (especially important for monitors, but also relevant for a 15.6" workstation laptop). With the new screen I will appreciate the clarity in running programs side-by-side (two columns). The current 1080p offerings almost get the job done but there are many instances where the clarity just isn't their for my tasks, requiring zooming in and out on either side to accomplish anything.

As for media content, pretty much any new high-end desktop GPU can drive 4K gaming (no, not at max AA, but still) which is quite attractive given the current state of that market and huge new games currently in the works. Also, standards like HDMI, 100GB BR, video compression, and new 4K cameras will hit affordable hardware by the end of next year...may as well have the displays out by then to take advantage.

 

A High DPI screen will be probably IPS, which guarantees that at worst will be far far better from the sh(*^ panel that I have to deal with everyday on the $1400 T430.

 

so what can you set the resolution at in windows? Can you actually max it out at 2880 x 1620?

 

Of course you can max it out at 2880 x 1620, but I am surprised lenovo didn't go for the superior 2880x1800 display like the MBP, allowing a nice 16:10 ratio. There is also the option of running it at 1/4 resolution at 1440x810p for excellent scaling, but that's not enough for a 15.5" display IMO...ughh can't wait for the 4K version in 2 years.

 

Any idea just which NVIDIA Quadro GPU will be in this monster?

 

Based on what's in the W520 & W530, they will probably include the K1100M & K2100M. Typically, Lenovo has left the more powerful Quadro cards to Dell & HP's 17" workstations.

 

I know its purely guessing at this point but in what pricerange should we expect the W540?

 

Can't see why it's going to be more expensive than W530, so couple of months after release I'd guess around $1000 for the most basic model, about $1300-1500 for a reasonable configuration, and $3000+ with the most expensive CPU, factory-installed 32GB RAM and SSDs etc.

 

maybe it won't throttle down the cpu on battery ??

 

If so, that might partially explain the drop in battery life, although the higher-resolution IPS screen could probably do that on its own.

 

^^^^^^ This.

A very-high-resolution IPS panel *will* have an adverse effect on battery life, no matter what...

 

From the CNET Japan, it is going to be K1100M and K2100M 関連画像 - CNET Japan

 

I received my new work laptop earlier today, which is the W530 and it has the K2100M in it already.

Pretty happy with it so far! Intel Core i7 2.8Ghz vPro + 8gb RAM.

 

What is the benefit of the 2880x1620 screen? Do people actually use this screen at native resolution, or do they pretty much always scale it? Right now I use a 15" 1680x1050 screen, and I'm thinking 1080p is pretty much as small as I'd want to go, because the fonts get too small to read comfortably. I understand windows 8.1 is better at scaling than past windows versions, but is scaling really any different than just setting your screen resolution to something other than the native resolution? Another way to put it -- is there any benefit to the 2880x1620 screen if all I would most likely do is run it at 150% scaling, effectively making it 1920x1080? I will be running SolidWorks mostly.

 

Another question, what is known about the battery situation of the W540? I saw that it has both the internal and external batteries, like the T440 series. What I am curious to know is if the high capacity external battery will extend out the bottom, raising the back of the laptop up, or if it will extend out the back like my T61p did. It seems with the new hinge design that the T440 would have to extend out the bottom, because as the display is laid flat it covers the rear face of the laptop, which is also why there are no ports on the rear face of the T440 series. The W540 (and T540p) still have ports on the rear face, and keep the old hinge design, so I'm wondering if anybody knows if they keep the old high capacity battery style as well.

 

Ah nice, is it a W530?



Sent from my baked potato

 

Wait....what? You got a k2100m in your w530? Score. Does that mean your mobo is different too?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

I think internationally the k2000m is called the k2100m, at least in some parts of the world.

 

No. The original name of the Quadro K2000M was Quadro 2100M, aa the successor to the Quadro 2000M used in the W520. I guess they changed the name because the K2000M was a new GPU gen (Kepler = K).

 

Sorry guys, it is in fact a 2100M. Not sure where I had gotten the K from lol. I think I was a bit too excited when I got it a week ago...




Sent from my baked potato

 

I heard the w540 was supposed to be released October 29th but obviously it wasn't so does anyone have any idea when it will be released?

 

Not the W540, only the T540p (it is now on sale in Germany since yesterday, and should be on sale pretty soon in the USA, also, the HMM and userguide of W540/T540p are now online). The W540 should follow a bit later, maybe end of November.

 

Are the K2000M and 2100M the same? (I guess not)

Also, I take it the 2100M is newer than the K2000M... right?

 

Quadro 2100M = Quadro K2000M. They are the same. See: Google Übersetzer

 

Ah that makes sense!

Wicked, thanks for that mate. I'm kinda gutted I didin't get the Extreme i7 CPU with my W530. However, the Intel Core i7-3840QM Processor (8M Cache, up to 3.80 GHz) that I do have is still really potent.

Loving my machine so far, it's a proper workman's work horse!

 

2100M = the old name for K2000M

They're the same. K2100M is different

 

W540 will be orderable on 11/04/2013 through distribution.
Regards, Lenovo Partner Assist

 

Quadro K1100M > K2000M!!!!
NVIDIA Quadro K1100M - NotebookCheck.net Tech

 

It has the same number of shaders and uses GDDR5 VRAM instead of DDR3 like in the K2000M, so it makes sense that it could be slightly better.

 

The K1100M might be slightly better than the K2000M, but it has to push a LOT more pixels on that higher-res display.

 

found this on the lenovo website

 

Hey,

If one is not interested in super high res screen and doesn't care much about newer graphical card, does it make more sense to get a W530 instead? All I care is CPU, and 3820QM seems to be good enough. Otherwise 4800QM would've been my option...

PS: Trying to pick a machine for a web developer.

Thank you.

 

I'm running an old AMD Phenom with integrated graphics (at 1600 x 900, if you were wondering), and my machine can handle any web design/development task I throw at it. Firebug does lag sometimes when I'm flipping between too many tabs, but it's not that bad. Uniserver is always running, but that doesn't cause any lag whatsoever. Don't worry about your CPU or GPU when it comes to web development. The base W530 is more than enough.

In your field, however, a higher-res screen is not a bad idea... especially if you have anything to do with design. Coding is a joy on my HD+ screen, but it would be even better at a higher resolution, and as for design -- well, that's just self explanatory. Kind of hard to design a site suitable for FHD displays when you don't have one yourself.

 

You got my hopes up!

 

Yeah, me too. I apologize. Meanwhile, a US salesperson just got through telling me that the w540 would not be available until January 2014. I really wonder about Lenovo's internal communications.