Hi guys! I'm sure this has been talked about on and off a lot before. I've tried searching but it seems disabled? So I will humbly ask my questions here:
What's the difference running 2gb vs 4gb (EDIT: RAM that is, of course) on this machine? I will be doing gaming predominantly and some Maya things as well, though nothing really fancy (I am just learning atm). Also basic Office stuff and some programming as well.
Also (LCD issues aside), screen resolutions. 1900x____ seems very monstrous. On the one hand, it seems sweet, but it also sounds like a sore on my eyes if everything is too tiny on screen. I get headaches easy staring at a monitor all day, so whatever I can do to help my comfort is important.
These are important questions to me, more on the screen res than the ram, because of the price differences. WUXGA is $130 more. 4gb vs 2gb 1 dimm is effectively $110 more between the ram and Vista 64x, though I know I can get ram from another source.
The price difference doesn't seem worth it to me on either count, but I'd really like to get opinions from current owners. Thanks a lot! Looking forward to picking up this great laptop.
EDIT: Some forum members have talked about owning a 9 cell battery.. Lenovo's only offering me 6 cell.Isn't it quite a bit heavier with a 9 cell, at any rate?
-
Vista is much more effective than XP when using the DPI to make things bigger if you get the WUXGA screen.
I have 2GB on my R60 and Vista Business. It seems to run pretty good, but I'm not a gamer nor do I run Maya. -
Do you think if I went to a brick and mortar store and compared WSXGA+ screens to WUXGA ones that I'd get a good idea of what I want?
And my thing about the RAM is I don't know how greedy Vista is while gaming. If it's a concern (especially at all) or not. Or if it's mostly helpful for a lot of multitasking.
If it's just a multitasking thing, predominantly, then I don't care and will upgrade down the road.
And, at least even the 6 cell battery looks pretty good on the lifespan. This will be my first laptop, I don't know if I'll need the extra battery time or not. Doubtful that I'll be away from an outlet for more than 2.5hrs though. -
1. 2GB VS 4GB
If you'll install XP(32 or 64bit), 2GB is good enough for gaming etc.
If you'll install Vista 32bit with 2GB ram, it's barely enough for gaming and video editing.
If you'll take advantage of Vista 64bit, 4GB will be the best. I am using Vista 64bit. When playing COD4, I notice the OS uses 3GB memory.
2. 1680x1050 vs 1900x1200
Personally, I am very comfortable with 1680x1050.(Except you'll use 1900 for graphic editing).The fonts are not too big or too small for my eyes. Plus, most 1680 LCDs are from LG and 1900s are from Samsung. -
1. I'll be using Vista regardless so, well, hm. I'll wait on some more opinions, though this is the one I've heard before for RAM.
2. I'm not big on graphic editing. This doesn't strike me as the most optimal laptop for that, anyways, though I suppose there's always intense texture work (which I surely won't be doing very intensely). If the 1680s mostly being from LG is true, I'm practically sold just on that. -
My brother opted for 1920x1200 on his t61p, but he's getting kind of tired of it now. Plus his panel has loads of backlight bleed which drives him crazy. I don't know if there are any good 1920 panels anymore TBH.
I personally couldn't use anything higher than 1680x1050 on a 15.4" screen, but it does depend on your eyesight and what you'll be doing. -
Poor eyesight, and I'll be staring at it a lot.
The backlight bleed would drive me bonkers. I read at minimal it's a little on the bottom with the LG models in a dark environment. I could probably live with that.
Thanks for the help with personal insight. I'm fairly convinced 1920's not worth the extra cost. I could just take that money, get Vista 64x and buy 4GB of ram for myself and I'll be set. -
Without adjusting fonts, WUXGA on 15.4" would be pretty small, but on 17" is nice. The DPI is roughly the same as 1920x1200 on 17" as using 1650x1080 on 15.4" and I'm happy with that because switching between them 2x per day is much easier on the eyes.
I bought 3GB because the price was right and Vista 32bit can only use 3.2GB of RAM anyway. I can always swap a 1GB stick for a 2GB stick if I move to 64bit in a year or two. -
A tip: Ask yourself whether you would buy 600DPI laser printer if the 1200DPI one was offered for a little more?
Also, you'll always be able to replace memory when necessary. Updating a screen is not so easy (yet possible).
Not to mention you will enjoy a genuine HD quality with WUGXA... -
The problem with the WUXGA is not the resolution but the quality of the screen, since most of them are made by Samsung (regardless the brands like HP or Dell or Lenovo). The screen is only 150 nit so it's rather dim thus not for everyone. If you want a good screen, stick with the WSXGA+.
-
However, it works well outdoor.
As always, the choice mainly depends on your experience/preference - I opt for WUXGA because of mine. -
For 2D or 3D graphics work, a physically larger/high resoultion external LCD would improve productivity better than any 15.4" (or 17") laptop screen.
That said, very few laptops have truly stellar screens and they all tend to be hulking desktop replacements...like Toshiba's highest-end 17" Qosmio "laptops" for example. -
The 4GB ram kits are only $80 at newegg, so it's pretty cheap to get.
-
text look way too small for me with 1920x1200 on 15" monitor
T61p 15": 2GB vs 4GB .. WSXGA+ vs WUXGA
Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by LouB, May 6, 2008.