Questions about configuring my new T400/T500?

I'm trying to configure my new T-series laptop and wanted some advice on some of the features. I'll be using the laptop mostly for personal use (internet, casual gaming, email, occasional documents/presentations for work). I've narrowed down most of what I want but had some more questions that the Lenovo site didn't fully explain. I'd appreciate any advice on the following topics.

1) RAM: I'm tired of waiting forever for my T41 to open programs, even simple ones like Internet Explorer. I was thinking of getting either 3 or 4 GB RAM on my new computer. Will there be a big difference in performance between 3 vs 4? I typically run multiple internet browsers and Outlook simultaneously as well as background programs such as firewall and Norton anti-virus.
2) OS: Should I choose Windows 7 32 or 64? It looks like 64 runs faster but that some programs will have trouble running in this OS. If I'm only getting 3 GB RAM, it looks like there is no advantage to getting a 64 bit system, right? And if I get 4 GB, the 32 bit system should be able to handle this too?
3) Display: Both the T400 and T500 have the WXGA with LED for $19 more than the WXGA CCFL. The T400 has the WXGA+ with LED for $48 more than the base WXGA CCFL and the T500 has WSXGA+ with CCFL for $71 more than the regular WXGA CCFL. Is it worth the extra money for the WXGA+ on the T400, and if I choose the T500 is it worth getting the WSXGA but losing the LED?
4) Wireless card: ThinkPad WiFi vs Intel WiFi Link. I have Cox internet and it their highest speed internet only runs at 28 Mbps, so is there any advantage to having the Intel WiFi Link since I can't use the 300 Mbps bandwidth?
5) T400 vs T500: I was thinking of getting the T500 because it's not that much more expensive and has better specs, but I've heard it is pretty big. Does the 1 inch difference in width make that big of a difference? How do the T400 and T500 it compare in size to the old T series (i.e. T41)? The T500 also has a better graphics card, but since I only do casual gaming (nothing really graphics or memory intense), so does the better graphics card matter that much?

Thanks in advance for helping me!

 

1.- For most users, I would think 3GB is plenty. I'm running on 2GB and it's fine.

2.- I would still recommend getting Windows 7 64-bit, regardless of how much RAM you have. 64-bit compatibility issues are few and far between, and are usually only problems if you have an old device with no 64-bit driver, or if you use old 16-bit programs (they won't run on 64-bit).

3.- On the T400, I recommend choosing either the WXGA High-Nit LED display, or the WXGA+ LED. The WXGA High-Nit, while limited in screen real estate, has great color reproduction and viewing angles. The WXGA+ LED display is plenty bright enough for most people, though, and provides more screen real estate. On the T500, I highly recommend the WSXGA+ CCFL display, as WSXGA+ has much more screen real estate over WXGA. Plus, the WXGA LED screen on the T500 has, in general, not received high marks.

4.- I'd say the main advantage of the Intel WiFi Link cards are better signal strength and lower power consumption. Bandwidth-wise, network cards don't limit your Internet speed, but they can limit your local network file transfer speeds.

5.- It does make a difference. If you will not be playing intensive games, or do not particularly need the screen real estate of the WSXGA+ screen, I would go with the T400. Carrying around my T500 all day can get tiresome, especially if it includes the power brick.

 

I agree with Midnight Sun. I'll add my 2 cents though.

Buying your own Ram and installing it would be cheaper. Buy your Thinkpad with 2 Gigs in 1 stick, then buy 1 stick of your choice of 2 GB Ram. Viola! 4 GB of Ram, which is really only useful if you go 64 bit. If you're not, 3 GB would be fine for most users.

I love WSXGA+ on my W500. If you are going for the T400, get one of the LED screens.

It sounds like you don't have a wireless N router, so you don't need the Intel cards per say. It would be a future proofing move. They also do use less power than the Wireless G Thinkpad Aeros cards.

The T400 really is comfortably portable. It's not a chore to carry my (T500 based) W500, but yeah it's bigger. The 9 cell battery is a little awkward too. I needed the graphics card though I think the the T series is the most portable 15.4 inch laptop besides a MacBook Pro. Also Thinkpad's default power adapters are some of if not the smallest power adapters available. Whichever one you choose, don't bother with Lenovo trying to upsell you to a slimmer power adapter. The default 90 watt adapters are less a brick and more a chip.

 

Thanks for all the advice so far. One more question: I was thinking about getting the T9600 processor (2.8 GHz, 6MBL2) for $114 more than the P8700 (2.53 GHz, 3MBL2). After doing more research I'm wondering if I need that kind of power. Is there a noticable difference in performance between the two?

And regarding the hard drive, I was thinking about getting a 250 GB 5400 RPM drive, but I'm wondering now if I should do the 160 GB 7200 RPM for the same price? I constantly run out of space on my T41's 40 GB hard drive, but I'm not sure that I would need 250 GB of space and maybe would rather have the higher RPM of the 160 GB drive if it makes a big difference compared to the 5400.

 

Stick with P8700 as you probably won't notice the difference.

I'd choose the 160G 7200rpm drive. If you really want more space, just choose the cheapest option of HDD and buy a bigger drive from somewhere else.

 

Go 160GB 7200 and P8700. The 7200 rpm drive will feel noticeably faster for several technical reasons, especially a lower access time. You'll likely get a little more battery life with the P processor. The T9600 is a nice speed boost, but reading your stated needs I seriously doubt the T9600 is needed. You won't tax the P8700.

 

Agree with the above posters. Just a few comments:

Was true half a year ago, when RAM prices were cheap. However, now, 2GB sticks of DDR3 SODIMMs cost around $45 or $50, so it may be about the same, if not cheaper to go with Lenovo's upgrade price. Make sure you check the prices before you buy.

I believe the Thinkpad BGN WiFi options are Realtek cards, not the better Atheros cards, but yeah, that's still true.

 

2GB RAM is sufficient for your described needs. Having said that, with the low cost of RAM I would install Win 7 64 bit and get at least 4GB as Win 64 bit doesn't have the 3GB RAM limit which Win 32 bit has. This will future-proof your ThinkPad a bit more.

Other than that I would say that if you really care about application launching speed, extra RAM will not really help (unless you lack RAM - which you won't with 2-4GB RAM). Instead you should consider getting a SSD. However they are still very expensive compared to HDDs so it really depends on how much you are focused on launch speed, boot times, etc.

Personally I think my SSD is the best performance enhancing hardware I have ever had. In addition, it runs very cool and obviously dead quiet.

As for the CPU, I would not spend the extra money on the 2.8GHz. The P8700 is plenty fast. The only thing you need to think about is what casual gaming will entail. If you suddenly feel like playing a new 3D game, then expect the integrated 4500 graphics to struggle. So depending on the type of games you want to play, you may want to consider getting dedicated graphics.

 

I was definitely going to get the dedicated graphics. Does this make a difference as far as whether I should get the P8700 vs T9600?

 

No. The P8700 will be plenty for your needs - such an expensive upgrade is not worth it. If you really want increased performance for more money, I would instead advise you to put that money towards an SSD upgrade, which would increase your Thinkpad's performance much more noticeably.

 

Yep, SSD makes more difference than new OS, more ram, or faster processor (for most things). But if that is off the table for price reasons (unless you need more than 250GB storage, there should be no other), go for a little more ram. Even in 32bit, 4GB is noticeably faster than 3GB. 64bit Win7 with 4GB ram is substantially quicker with 64bit apps than 32bit Win7, but it can add issues (depending on program) not in 32bit. If you don't mind more possible issues in exchange for top speed for the hardware, it is awesome. Almost as awesome as moving to a SSD...

Whatever you do. move to Win7. It is much much sprightlier than WinVista. Just get an "upgrade", and it comes with 2 DVD's -one for 64bit and one for 32bit. So you can try both out before deciding which to keep. Store all your data files on a separate partition and/or an external HDD, and do a "clean" install to Win7 32/64, from your present Vista OS. Then install the Win7-specific Lenovo programs for your machine.

 

^^^Windows 7 is better, faster, yada-yada-yada. I'd just caution I doubt he even needs to worry about that, he's getting W7 now if and when he buys a Think Pad. I doubt he'd even really appreciate 64 bits and there are a few (incredibly minor) compatibility issues that may or may not concern him.

But Vista on an SSD isn't bloated... I'm considering W7, i just don't know if I want it right this second. But thats me

Sigh... prices rose and I'm not familiar with what Lenovo is asking right now. Maybe I should have sprung for another 2 gig stick to get 4 GB even though I currently use 32 bit. Oh well... not a big deal.

I think SSDs are a bit beyond our prospective consideration right now. But you are right. Mine is worth far more than its (tiny) weight in gold

 

I doubt anything over 2gb is going to make your system faster. Especially considering your usage is not taxing. "(internet, casual gaming, email, occasional documents/presentations for work)."

I would probbaly go with one 2gb stick and then if the need arises add in another stick on my own.

In the old days more ram used to be a good cheap way to increase performance, now most people don't need more than 2gb be it 32 bit or 64bit.

Lenovo ships Samsung SSD's. I have one and have found performance in terms of speed to be rather mediocre. They do have a major benefit of significantly increased battery life.

 

Could you post the model number and i.e. HD Tune results. I am thinking you have one of the first generation Samsung SSDs.

Below are a few screendumps of my Samsung SSD results.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=439217

It is not the latest version, but the generation before that. Nonetheless it is VERY fast. Much faster than the first Samsungs.