T420 w/ Optimus performance?

I am heavily considering purchasing a T420 with the Nvidia Optimus 4200m graphics but I am concerned about its performance on battery life. I have read that the T410s suffered significant penalties related to this because of Optimus. I like the T420 because you can get about 10 hours with the 9 cell but I am concerned about the inability to fully control with the discrete graphics turns on. It would be really great if someone with this system setup could comment on its performance -- specifically concerning battery life with WiFi on and screen at near brightness while doing simple tasks. I am a grad student and I mainly read powerpoints all day but I like to do my occasional media-related activities.

Also, if someone could enlighten me on how the setup between a Sandy Bridge proc and Radeon discrete graphics is handled? I heard the Optimus setup is software controlled and that AMD graphics work differently through some physical switch setup.

Thanks!!

 

Your "occasional media-related activities" may not justify the cost and troubles of discrete GPU with Optimus.

If you seriously care about battery life and do not game or work on heavy graphics/video design applications, the Intel integrated GPU should be powerful enough.

 

Not to mention that, all things considered, the Sandy Bridge chips pump out pretty respectable numbers on their own, at least adequate enough for "occasional media-related activities."

 

I do prefer a discrete GPU for future-proofing. And for the extra $180 it would cost me through my school pricing I don't think it would hurt to get it if there is not going to be a huge impact on battery life. My "occasional media-related" activities do sometimes include editing high definition video files and some role-playing games. While these are not the primary indications for use, I feel that a discrete GPU should warrant some consideration.

 

Sure get it, my T61 NVS 140m worked well until this year. Getting it can't hurt you (can turn it off via bios) other than $180. Thou, the performance difference does not justify the cost (the intel HD 3000 is pretty good). I cannot say how the intel HD 3000 would preform on editing HD videos however. Depending on the quality, I predict with either graphics cards it will take a long time and sluggish.

 

I would recommend against getting the 4200M for most people. Yes, with Optimus you don't really pay a battery life penalty (since you can disable it and it's off by default for browsing and many other activities). But the $180 would be better spent on an SSD or more memory, both things that you're likely to really notice.

The one exception would be if you use non-game applications that are GPU accelerated, like Photoshop or some video editing programs. Most of these applications don't support Intel GPU acceleration, so you might see a big benefit from having an NVIDIA GPU.

 

Several web browers are now gpu-accelerated too, it seems? Are these also better with the dedicated gpu? i.e. the Intel HD3000 doesn't act as a separate gpu with these gpu-accelerated browsers?

 

The GPU acceleration in browsers works fine with the Intel HD 3000. GPU video acceleration also works great with the HD 3000, as does GPU acceleration for Flash.

It seems that I was wrong about Photoshop, too - it also supports acceleration with Intel graphics.

What doesn't work is anything that uses OpenCL, CUDA, or that depends on a specific GPU brand. There aren't a lot of apps like this, but there are some.

 

thank you, bsoft! wonderful feedback!
for many of us, the HD3000 will be just fine. to have the dedicated gpu would be nice, but the HD3000 closes the gap with basic mobile gpu's quite substantially - and should reduce system heat even further.

 

Are there any reviews available for the Optimus variants of 420/420s ?

I've got my mind set on a 420s, aside perhaps for some mild gaming, i don't really need discrete graphics, i can totaly manage without it. However, i need a fast CPU and the fastest one around, the i7-2620M, only comes with optimus pre-configured.

The problem is that the optimus variant pulls an extra 200$ from my pocket for the base config (w/o i7). Should the 3d performance gain that optimus brings to the table be substantial, i'd see a point in spending this money. If not, i'll settle for an i5 processor and that's that!

Most forums and previews i've read state that the NVS 4200 should increase graphics performance by 50%. On the other hand, i've read that Optimus should be on par with the HD3000 chipset. None of those statements are backed up by numbers & benchmarks.

Thanks!

 

Notebookcheck has benchmark lists for the majority of chipsets out there. In 3DMark06, the NVS4200M scores 4796 compared to the HD3000's 4224. As for real-life game performance, there are few comparable data points available, but apparently they run Anno 1404 on low with framerates of 101 and 43, respectively, StarCraft 2 on low with 149/79 and on medium with 30/21, and FIFA 11 on medium with 109/60 and high with 74/36.

I leave it to you to judge these numbers for yourself, but at least they are numbers.

EDIT: Here is Notebookcheck's in-depth review of the Intel chip: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-3000.37948.0.html

 

I've read the benchmarks posted by notebookcheck, the systems used in testing can vary greatly and the numbers can therefore be influenced by other differences in the machine config...

Also, and i might be wrong on this, the resulting differences seem to be a bit inconsistent. Some tests show performance boosts of up to 40% in favor of nVidia while others list the hd3000 chipset as being the leader by 2-3%.

The best comparison chart would be a range of tests performed on a optimus machine toggling the discrete graphics on and off.

Also, i'm a bit concerned about the battery life. I really cannot understand why the i7 option is only available with discrete graphics...it makes no sense.

Thanks for the reply!

 

If you read the in-depth link about the Intel chip, you'll see references to tests on the same machines but with different games giving very different results, with the HD3000 being ahead in some cases and behind in others. It may very well be a question of certain games being written in a way that plays to a certain chip's strengths, whereas others do not. However...

...I certainly agree with this. =)

 

I have the T420 with Optimus myself.

What you don't need Optimus for:

-Video encoding/decoding, web browser acceleration, Flash acceleration. Intel HD 3000 graphics are not your father's integrated Intel graphics --they support hardware acceleration of Flash, IE9, and Firefox 4. They also support HD video decoding. Further, Intel's new Quick Sync video technology means that its own CPU/GPU combo do a great job of video encoding and transcoding as well, provided the software application you pick supports it (and more are coming out all the time. QuickSync with a Core i5 can beat out previous-generation quad-core processors under the right circumstances.

What you can decide if you need/want Optimus for:

-Light gaming will still be faster under Optimus. GPU acceleration of apps like Folding@home or other crunching software that supports GPU acceleration (although this isn't a graphics workstation, so you won't get workstation performance). Apps that support nVidia's CUDA technology. Heavy (as in, you spend a couple hours a day or more on it) Photoshop work.

I've only had my T420 for a day, and I can already say that when the nVidia GPU is being stressed, the air out the side vents is hot, or at least uncomfortably warm to hold a hand near. I haven't done any temperature testing, but I probably will mention it in passing on the Lenovo forums to see what others' experiences are. It could also be that I'm causing the Turbo to spool up on the Core i5, and the heat is from both the CPU and GPU.

I'm thinking based on what you (the OP) have told us, that the integrated graphics will be fine for you, to the point that if Optimus were the only option available in your config, you could turn it off in BIOS and go integrated only.

 

Found some interesting stuff on notebookcheck. The reviewed two new lenovo machines, a discrete graphics t520 equipped with an i5 processor and t420 machine equipped with an i7 processor. Both machines have roughly the same config.

For future reference, here are the links:

Review Lenovo Thinkpad T520 Notebook - Notebookcheck.net Reviews

Review Lenovo Thinkpad T420 Notebook - Notebookcheck.net Reviews

@jazdc: Thank you for your time! as i'm not really in a hurry, i'll ponder on it a bit more. Either way, i'm really looking forward to joining the 420s owners thread

Thanks!

 

I was in the same boat deciding between the Optimus vs Intel GPU on my T420s. In the end I went with the Intel for a few reasons:

1. Possible stability issues in regards to drivers. You have an Intel processor, chipset, NIC, etc all designed to work together. When adding a third party chip (Nvidia) there MAY be slight issues that pop up randomly (standby/resume may not work, occasional lock ups?). I like to compare it to car stereos. A good factory stereo is enough for most people. Some may prefer to add an aftermarket stereo to gain a few bells and whistles but then may cause some other issues (more power draw). The factory option is enough for most users.

2. Heat and battery life. I think most of us like cool laptops with a long battery. This would be better with the Intel chip.

3. Is it necessary? A previous poster asked when was the last time you said to yourself "I wish I had a faster GPU". If that is never or seldom, then the Intel chip is probably better.

4. Lastly, something not mentioned is futureproofing. I believe when Windows 8 comes out, the Intel driver would be included in the Windows package but not so sure of the Nvidia option. Native Windows installations usually include the most common GPUs like Intel and not the more rare ones like the Nvidia NVS chips.

The sad thing is that in 6 months, a new Intel GPU will be released that will outperform both the current HD 3000 and Nvidia chip. The current Intel chip outperforms the NVS 3100 that was released on the T410s with the discrete chip option.

 

How do i submit benchmark results to notebookcheck?


4200m:
Using nvidia verde drivers as lenovo's are crap. Full optimus support for 4200m is built into the verde mobile package that supports 520m/540m.

3dmark01, 14591
3dmark06, 5500ish.
GTA4, high settings, 1366x768, avg 31 fps
Live for speed, everything cranked to max, 60fps (vsync limited)
Battleships Forever, 60
Will test supcom FA and crysis.

 

Notebookcheck has a useful list of GPU benchmark results. The 4200M is currently at #113 while the Intel HD3000 is at #159. You will see that while the 4200M is about 50% faster for the PCMark Vantage benchmark, the difference for 36Mark06 is much less (but hover the mouse over the score and see the range of values measured). You can click on the entries for individual GPUs to see more details including some gaming test results.

John

 

I have the 4200M in my laptop. I used BIOS to choose "Integrated" and "discrete" graphics and compared the WEI under both situation. I don't see any real difference, definitely not 50% increase the the graphic scores.

 

I've tested my T420s (i5-2520M + Intel HD + 2 x 2GB RAM) and get the following results:

3DMark06 : 4764 3DMarks
3DMark Vantage Overall: P2043 3DMarks
3DMark Vantage Graphics: 1619
Cinebench R10 32bit: single CPU = 4076; Multi-CPU = 8891; OpenGL = 5823.

These are generally towards the upper end of the range of notebookcheck scores. Can someone test the NVidia GPU on the Optimus version of the T420s?

John

 

WEI is very subjective. So are many benchmarks, unfortunately.

The best way to test is with real-world applications. Light to moderate games which take advantage of a GPU's range of features. Image editing applications that rely on rendering, both 2D and 3D (POV-Ray would probably be a good one). Possibly a few developer simulations like Valve's Source particle simulation.

The most modern of laptops can handle Windows Aero so well, it's no longer a big deal for them. WEI doesn't truly stress a graphics card enough to make a good measurement, except for possibly to weed out the weakest ones.

 

haha, yup, I agree... for me, I only play Civilization IV. I think it will play just fine with the integrated graphics and don't see any significant reduction in the performance...