New specs on T410, T510, and W510

They aren't switching to glossy.

 

So it's basically a slightly modified 8400M? I would forget about buying a new Thinkpad if that's true.

 

Well, the "N10M" core mentioned above is apparently some kind of 9400M integrated low-power core (ION?). I hope that's not the real big "workstation dedicated GPU"?!

 

Rumors, rumors, rumors... I want the CES - NOW!

 

i doubt that Lenovo will be using affected nvidia GPU given what has happened in the T61 and R61.... no one in their right mind would do that.

 

WXGA covers both 1280x800 and 1366x768. WXGA+ is 1440x900.

1600x900 is called WXGA++ (by Sony) or 900p (Dell)

N10M is another name for the G210M...and the G310 is likely a rebrand of that card (just like the desktop version). ION doesn't work with Arrandale CPUs because of the integrated IGP and ION 2 won't be set up to work with anything other than a Pineview Atom at launch (CULVs should come later).


The reason why Lenovo (and many other companies) are going with Nvidia at CES is because ATI didn't have any low-end 40nm GPUs ready for launch when these notebooks were being designed. You'll see more ATI cards later on in 2010.

 

Bittersweet. Happy I bought the T500 now for 16:10, sad that they're not offering it anymore.

 

only the 65 nm and 45 nm Nvidia GPU was affected by the manufacturing defect.

 

I just blew up my bottom panel to 120 pixel height (normally 30) to see what it'll be like to downgrade from 1200 to 1080.

 

Do another 30 pixels, as you will have a panel on the 1080 screen, too

(mine would be 260 pixels + a fraction of their current height. now that's scary! )

 

I am specifically wondering about the NVS 3100M. I want to know whether or not the next gen W510 will have real graphics horsepower or not. To me, it would be nice to have or at least offer a GTS 250M or GT240M or equivalent Quadro cards.

Well, that poster did say the NVS 3100M is basically a derivative of the NVS 140M, basically just a rebadge. I would assume that the manufacturing problem has been fixed by now at the very least, and we should be able to worry more about whether or not the graphics are actually worth something.

 

Nvidia's Chip contract manufacturer TSMC have already stopped making the old Nvidia GPU, they have moved to the 40nm design. Also, all the 45 nm and 65 nm GPU that Nvidia had was affected..... i highly doubt that Nvidia was going to reproduce the old NVS 140M given that it is already superseded in design.

 

I am not too worried about Nvidia graphics cards. In fact I think I would much prefer them because of better OpenGL drivers.

I am mostly opposed to the 16:9 aspect ratio because when I plug into a 16:10 external monitor the transition would be very sketchy. I want my laptop to stay 16:10!

 

G 310M is a rebadged G 210M according to "leaked" screenshots.



[Via Notebookcheck.com]

 

lead_org if you don't like dedicated graphics than what do you do with your so many Thinkpads? Nvidia seems to do two things today, one do the Nintendo, do something else than everyone else, and finally keep trying to deny that ATI is not the king right now. Its starting to really bother me that nvidia keeps re-branding cards for three-four years it really wrong, and not "its meant to be played."

 

so basically that poster is wrong? it's not really a derivative/rebadged NVS 140M? Do you have any guess as to which core the NVS 3100M is based?

Ok, now provide the NVS 3100M screenshots

 

i did not say i didn't like dedicated graphics card, i just don't like the fact that the Nvidia GPU in the T61 and R61 is going to fail on me without any forewarning, due to the manufacturing defect. I have sold all my Thinkpad R61 and T61 with the Nvidia GPU.

 

Nvidia have already started using 40 nm fabrication, one would think that this will be what they are using for the new upcoming gpu.

Nvidia is not going to give problematic GPU to laptop manufacturers knowing that it will come back to bite him down the line.

 

Well obviously.

But what is the NVS 3100M? Does anyone know or do we have to wait?

 

Not knowingly, of course. Or are you suggesting that last time they knew beforehand their chips were garbage?

 

2518 CAM LENOVO T410 I5-520M 2GB, 320GB, 14.1"WXGA, DVDRW, 5700MHD, BGN, XPP(W7), 3YR
2518 CGM LENOVO T410 I5-540M 4GB(2X2), 320GB, 14.1"WXGA+, DVDRW, NVS3100M-256MB, AGN, W7, 3YR

4314 2ZM LENOVO T510 I5-520M 2GB, 320GB, 15.6"HD, DVDRW, 5700MHD, AGN, W7, 3YR
4314 34M LENOVO T510 I7-620M 4GB(2X2), 320GB, 15.6"HD+, DVDRW, NVS3100M-512MB, AGN, W7, 3YR

4319 2KM LENOVO W510 I7-720QM 4GB(2X2) 320GB 15.6"HD+ DVDRW NVS3100M-1GB AGN W7 3YR
4319 2LM LENOVO W510 I7-820QM 4GB(2X2) 320GB 15.6"FHD DVDRW NVS3100M-1GB AGN W7 3YR

Considering that you see T510 systems with a Radeon HD 57xx graphics, and the all the W510 systems have the NVS3100 i think we can safely assume that the nvidia option is atleast as fast as the ATI offering, which means it has to be more than simply the 310M. The two closest Nvidia offerings to the 57xx are the 260M (faster) and the 330M (slower).

 

5700MHD is most likely just the integrated Intel.

 

If the nomenclature is anything related to what they used in 2009, then the N10M could actually be a updated GT218 core (which was used in the NVS210M...ewww), so a NVS310M seems likely to be N10M. What's confusing is while N10M = GT218 in their 2009 40nm chips, they only used the NS suffix with the GT216 core. So the N10M-NS would potentially be either??? The question remains though whether the NVS3100M is the same as the NVS310M.

http://www.guru3d.com/news/nvidia-40nm-mobile-gpu-lineup/

 

Ahh, well scratch that logic then...

 

Current Intel integrated graphics is 4500MHD, so yes, the 5700MHD is most likely the next gen. of Intel integrated graphics.

 

They probably found out after the GPU went into full production... there is nothing wrong with the chip silicon or the circuit itself, but rather the solder material used in the bump.... they used lead-free bump material (Nickle-Silver mixture) as per RoHS requirement, but that bump material has problem dealing with high current flow.... it leads to electromigration.... the software that the CPU and GPU makers use for circuitry design can automatically pick up design faults that will lead to electromigration problem.

So as long as they no longer use the same bump material (now they have switched to the Hitachi type, and no longer have this problem), then the problem should no longer come back to bite us.

 

What will be the update to performance for integrated graphics? Also will the t410 be as light as the T400s? I think i might choose ati myself this time. Idk time will tell.

 

Rumors: the IGP (45nm) will be notable faster than its predecessor, but the 9400M (ION) will still be on top. As it's integrated in the CPU, it also could draw less power, but who knows.

 

I just now ordered a W500. I was holding out for a W510 with an Core i7 CPU, but I'd rather have a WUXGA display than a FHD even if it means giving up LED backlighting. And I really want to keep using my Advanced Dock, which the W500 supports. I run currently run five 1920x1200 monitors off my T60p with a video card in the Advanced Dock; the Series 3 dock won't support that. It feels like every generation of Thinkpad is straying farther from the original reason why I fell in love with Thinkpads: expandibility.

 

you can do that using the lenovo usb2dvi converter.

 

I use 1920x1080 to see the 16:9 ratio on my 24in LCD and the top to bottom resolution is scary to say the least. Granted its all my xbox can produce and Im fine with that since I dont do anything but game and movies on it. But computers are for other things then playing a game or watching a movie. This 16:9 craze seems to not care about those of us that require our machines to do more then watch movies. I wish the OEMs would realize this and at least keep 16:10 in the business models or offer and upgrade path to this ratio as I would pay for it...

Yet another re-badging done by nvidia what a surprise. As each generation comes out my disdain for nvidia grows.

 

I want in the W510:

LED Backlit, >= 250 nit, 4:3 1600x1200 or 16:10 1920x1200
Hybrid graphics with a more reliable and better supported driver
Better OpenGL support for CAD in the drivers
Graphics that are at least 2x more powerful than current W500
8GB DDR3
Core i5 / i7
Less than 1" thick (CFRP chassis?)
Less than 5lb
Intel 160GB SSD

NO 16:9! I won't touch it. You know how annoying it is to hook up to a 16:10 external monitor with 16:9 primary screen.

 

http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?lndocid=MIGR-73700

Confirms T410, T510, and W510.

 

@Paul386: nice

Additional news from Germany:
T410: http://www.notebooksandmore.net/product_info.php?products_id=11498
14.1inches / 16:10 , 1440x900 Pixel / ~ 210 cd/m²
T410s: http://www.notebooksandmore.net/product_info.php?products_id=11499
14.1inches / 16:10 , 1440x900 Pixel / ~ 256 cd/m²
T510: http://www.notebooksandmore.net/product_info.php?products_id=11497
15.6inches / 16:9, 1600x900 Pixel / ~ 210 cd/m²
W510: http://www.notebooksandmore.net/product_info.php?products_id=11501
15.6inches / 16:9, 1920x1200 Pixel / ~ 270 cd/m²

1920x1200 is not 16:9...but why would they use 16:9 screens on 15" models, while the 14" ones are 16:10?

Other thoughts...
All units: 2*USB + 1USB/eSATA?

No DisplayPort on T410?

T410s: no ExpressCard?
WXGA+ MultiTouch LED TFT?

W510: USB 3.0
uses "nVIDIA Quadro FX880M"
TrackPoint + Multi-Gesture TouchPad

 

1920x1200 and 16:9 is indeed inconsistent. PLEASE let it be 16:10.

Quadro FX880M? Sigh.. nvidia's renaming-stuff-division strikes again...

 

i don't know
i'm conflicted about this
staying with 16:10 likely means they'll stick with the absolutely crappy screens they are using now
going 16:9 at least offers a chance they'll switch to a decent screen

 

By those specs it'll be LED and ~ 270 cd/m² brightness. That would definitely be new.

 

What is the FX880M?

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_310m_us.html

Main | Features
GPU Engine Specs:
CUDA Cores 16
Gigaflops 73
Processor Clock (MHz) 1500 MHz
Memory Specs:
Memory Clock (MHz) Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3)
Standard Memory Config Up to 512 MB
Memory Interface Width 64-bit
Feature Support:
NVIDIA PureVideo® Technology* HD
NVIDIA CUDA™ Technology yes
OpenCL yes
HybridPower™ Technology* yes
GeForce Boost yes
Microsoft DirectX 10
Bus Support PCI-E 2.0
Certified for Windows Vista yes
PowerMizer Power Management 8.0
Display Support:
Maximum Digital Resolution 2560x1600
Maximum VGA Resolution 2048x1536
Standard Display Connectors VGA, Single Link DVI, HDMI, Dual Link DVI, DisplayPort
Multi Monitor yes
HDCP* yes
HDMI* yes

 

Im suprised that W510 will have screen ratio of 16:9.
I dont like that T510 will have same ratio.

It looks like I have to buy t500 now

 

Darn - USB 3? What are the odds of the W510 supporting SATA 6.0? That will give this beast future support for the upcoming Micron/Intel 6 gbps SSDs!

 

What is this FX880m? Why don't they use ati any more?

 

I am glad for Nvidia graphics. Nvidia has better OpenGL drivers. My W500 now is 50/50 with CAD software. Some stuff it works with but other programs it just glitches. I know that isn't a problem with the Quadro drivers because my desktop at work has a Quadro and runs all the CAD software just fine.

However Lenovo can count me out if the aspect ratio is 16:9!!!!!!!

 

Is the aspect ratio that big of a deal if they offer full hd 15" screens?

If so, who cares - it's a good resolution to have with plenty of vertical space, and the screen quality improvement over the current 16:10's lenovo uses will be welcomed.

 

Yes... High quality external displays use 16:10. It is really annoying to hook up a 16:9 laptop to a 16:10 external display.

 

Sure it is.

Well, most of the TP users?
http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/General-Discussion/Survey-Your-Ideal-Business-Laptop/td-p/133360/page/4

I've got a 1400x1050 screen. So FullHD means 30 more vertical pixels. At the cost of 520 more horizontal pixels which increases weight, cost and power consumption, while decreasing pixel size (it's 15.6" diagonal!), contrast and brightness (okay, it's an LED screen, so it's just more power for the backlight)
For me, most of the time Pidgin is docked at the right, using about 300 Pixels of space. So ~1000 Pixels of width are perfectly okay for surfing, word processing and other every day tasks. Maybe I need a brain upgrade to be multitasking / 2 windows-at-a-time capable...
And when it comes to 1080p movies, I won't use a TN panel at all, especially not at that size.

 

It's also physically shorter, and for people who dislike small text, it ends up decreasing their real estate whether or not the resolution is large. 6000x2000 won't help a 3:1 display which might have a vertical height of 12cm. Whether or not they offer higher resolution, the physical size is still going to decrease.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but according to those charts less than 10% of the people that took the survey thought to mention wanting a 4:3 Aspect Ratio and less than 5% thought to mention wanting Sufficient Vertical Height.

Then there's the 15% or so of the people that want Legible Text and GUI which would generally mean lower resolutions and/or larger screens.


So that would be the opposite of most. For most TP users that took the survey resolutions didn't seem to be even worth commenting on. It's only a vocal minority that's upset enough to bring it up.

 

Well, I didn't participate, so I don't know the exact form they had. When you compare the "screen" results to the "keyboard" diagram, you can see a huge amount of comments about screen matters.
The flexing keyboard so many users of recent TPs are complaining about is not mentioned very often, about 6% including other "premium" wants/needs. Most users are quite satisfied.
But 8% (or let's say 12%, because vertical height correlates with the aspect ratio) of all volunteers want 4:3 back. And that's their #1 priority, even more important than a "premium" IPS/MVA/PVA screen which was also very popular. Strange enough, there are people that want a glossy screen, but very very few mentioned a 16:9 ratio, so that it was not enough to create a bar for that desire.
So virtually no one wants a 16:9 screen really really bad, but a noticeable amount wants 4:3

55% mentioned that there is a need for screen improvement, another ~37% are willing to pay extra money for a premium screen with IPS, PVA, OLED technology with vivid colors and a good viewing angle. So for "most" TP users screen matters are a topic to comment on. Indeed, it's not 4:3 that is the #1 on their wish list.

 

I think most have given up 4:3 and have fallen back to defend 16:10. And that seems to be lost as well.

In/after the 2010 updates, you just won't get any 1200p height on a 15" screen any more, no matter what width. And I think that's not progress.