Thinkpad T410 (Arrandale goodness!)

Lenovo T410 Notebook 2518CGM (AUD$$2,840.40)
Core i5 540M(2.53GHz), 14.1" WXGA+, 4GB-RAM, 320GB-HDD, DVD-RW, WiFi-n, Win 7
http://www.techbuy.com.au/p/131916/NOTEBOOKS_14.1/Lenovo/2518CGM.asp

Processor: Core i5 540M (2.53GHz)
Display: 14.1" WXGA+ <-16:10 or 16:9 ??
Memory: 4GB-RAM
Graphics: NVS3100M-256MB
Storage: 320GB-HDD
Optical Drive: DVD-RW
Communications: WiFi-n
Operating System: Win 7


----------
Lenovo T410 Notebook 2518CAM (AUD$$2,448.50)
Core i5 520M(2.4GHz), 14.1" WXGA, 2GB-RAM, 320GB-HDD, DVD-RW, 5700MHD, Wifi-n, XP Pro (w. Win 7)

http://www.techbuy.com.au/p/131883/NOTEBOOKS_14.1/Lenovo/2518CAM.asp

Processor:Core i5 520M (2.4GHz)
Display:14.1" WXGA
Memory:2GB-RAM
Storage:320GB-HDD
Optical Drive VD-RW
Graphics:5700MHD
Communications:Wifi-n, XP Pro (with Win 7)

 

But wait, there's more!!! For those who prefer sore arms/backs and shoulders with their 32nm Westmere Arrandale goodness, there is:

LENOVO T510 I7-620M 4GB(2X2)320GB 15.6inHD+ DVDRW NVS3100M-512MB AGN W7 3YR (431434M)
AU$2,867.58
http://www.notebookdeals.com.au/product.asp?productid=291933

OR

LENOVO T510 I5-520M 2GB 320GB 15.6inHD DVDRW 5700MHD AGN W7 3YR (43142ZM)
AU$2,390.16
http://www.notebookdeals.com.au/product.asp?productid=291932

Ask Santa to delay his trip from the North pole for a month or so!

 

I hope the screens are all LED this time. And that NVS3100M is a mystery. Could it be a new Nvidia series not yet revealed, or just rebranded old stuff? It's probably not a performance card. I am surprised they didn't go with ATI.

 

It's the low end nVidia business/workstation card. They all have the NVS designation. It should be a die shrink of the current cards, so hopefully 40nm, but don't expect much from the 64-bit card.

 

Im still seeing 16:10 ratio posts for the new t series. Im wondering how some say 16:9 and others say 16:10. Truthfully Im waiting for the actual release to make a full opinion on it. I just hope if they do go 16:9 that 15.6 and larger have quad core, full keyboard with numpad and it would be nice to keep ATi discrete options as I have grown quite fond of having a cool and quite laptop.

 

14.1" comes in 16:9 size and 15.6" too... But I guess we'll see in a month.

 

i wonder if the notebookreview guys have one yet

 

14.1 and 15.4 are 16:10

14.0 and 15.6 are 16:9

So slightly different. Personally if I HAVE to get the new ratio (and I know I will have to one day) 15.6 is pretty spot on with the availability of the most powerful hardware, 1080p screens and easily able to have a numpad.

 

Would be good to see how battery life is on these i5 systems paired against a T400 with similarly clocked CPU's and GPU's.

Edit:and with the same cell battery

 

There are 14.0" 16:10 screens and 14.1" 16:9 ones too.

 

Mhm there are also W510. Altogether hefty price tags. And unfortunately probably really old (but renamed) NVIDIA cards.

LENOVO W510 I7-720QM 4GB(2X2) 320GB 15.6inHD+ DVDRW NVS3100M-1GB AGN W7 3YR Lenovo 43192KM
Check Availability
AU$3,822.42 US$3,543.38 Add to Trolley
LENOVO W510 I7-820QM 4GB(2X2) 320GB 15.6inFHD DVDRW NVS3100M-1GB AGN W7 3YR Lenovo 43192LM
Check Availability
AU$4,586.31 US$4,251.51 Add to Trolley
LENOVO W510 I7-820QM 8GB(2X4) 500GB 15.6inFHD DVDRW NVS3100M-1GB AGN W7 3YR Lenovo 43193DM
Check Availability
AU$5,350.18 US$4,959.62 Add to Trolley

 

Wow quad core in the new W510! Finally getting better competition for the M4500 and 8540W (who's predecessors already supported quad cores)!

 

Please link these laptops.

 

Why would Lenovo use such old graphics cards for the new models?

 

Maybe it's due to the fact that manufacturers say 14" but mean 14.1". I was referring to many of Asus' notebooks for example the K40IJ is marketed with 14.1" screen but sometimes they just say 14" for short, like how some 15.4" and 15.6" screens are just 15"? I'm not sure of the actual panels, so 16:9 might be made in 14.0" screens but it's hard to say based on reported specs...

http://1toppc.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=K40IJ-D2

They are new GPUs...

 

I know everyone's moaning already, but does anyone actually know what gpu core the NVS3100M is?

 

Would appear to be an NVIDIA chip—and that makes me sad. ATI supports the open source community far better than NVIDIA—mainly by releasing hardware documentation—and I’d rather my money go to them. In fact, I will LIKELY NOT BUY this machine if it uses NVIDIA’s chip. That’s how strongly I feel about this.

 

Here is Quadro line with NVS in the title.
http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html
That does not answer what core that is, but it is in line with what Lenovo has used in the past (switching between Quadro and FireGL).

 

These W510 models are listed here:

http://www.notebookdeals.com.au/search.asp?searchkey=Lenovo+W510

T410 with NVS3100M- 256GB
T510 with NVS3100M- 512MB
W510 with NVS3100M- 1GB

Looks like the NVS3100M card is here to stay, switchable to/from the 5700MHD (on-chip GPU).

Also notice the WXGA and WXGA+ codes listed on the T410 models.

16:10 - 1440x900 and 1280×800
16:9 - 1680x1050 and 1360×768

Could this mean that the 16:10 ratio will be around for one more generation on the 14" Thinkpads?

 

Must be whatever decent NVIDIA currently has available and uses max 35W of power. GT215 or GT216 core??

 

16:9 sucks.

 

I just wish they could stick in better gpus in these laptops. But oh well, it's a business laptop after all.

 

exactly
they design these for business consumers

 

I would guess its the GT216 (230M/240M/330M). Perhaps the NVS3100 is simply a gpu core (hybrid?) designation, which is why all three laptops have the same spec. I would assume the version in the W510 should be the successor of the Quadro FX 770M. So hopefully its the 230M in the T410, the 240M in the T510 and the 330M (in Quadro FX 970M flavour) in the W510.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-240M.17654.0.html

There's no way its a rebranded 210M as its been speculated here, that would be a step back from the v5700 right now.

 

Yeah some ads are deceiving.

I hope the ratio does stick around for another generation. But just an FYI 1680x1050 is a 16:10 ratio as 1600x900 is the 16:9 variant. It is common to compare the 1600x900 to 1440x900 and that is incorrect. The right comparison is 1680x1050 vs 1600x900, and the only resolution where you gain horizontal res with 16:9 is 1360x768, but your still losing vertical pixels.

Here is the right comparison:

16:10 standard :: 16:9 standard
------------------------
1280x800 :: 1366x768
1440x900::...............
1680x1050 :: 1600x900
1920x1200 :: 1920x1080
...............:: 2048x1152
2560x1600::...............
------------------------

Agreed.

They are business laptops as you said, I just wish they would stick to an intel/ati setup as that is my favorite combo for CPU/GPU thus far.

 

I don't see how comparing 1650x1080 and 1600x900 makes sense. In this case, 16:9 loses out in both dimensions, and if we compare screens with such resolutions but identical DPI, then 1600x900 will be smaller! (if you do the math, the diagonal length of the latter screen is 92.7% of the former, if we assume identical DPI).

For useful numbers:
15.1" 1650x1080 would then be equivalent to 14" 1600x900 (if being precise), so this means that 1600x900 actually makes more sense as a resolution on 14.1" screens.

 

Its hard to compare the ratios to begin with, but comparing them as close as possible my chart is the correct one. 16:9 loses ~10% screen real estate when compared to 16:10. so comparing 1600x900 with 1440x900 implies its a gain of ~9% in the favor of a smaller resolution ratio which is impossible.

When comparing 1680x1050 (16:10) and 1600x900 (16:9) the loss is ~8.2% going from 16:10 to 16:9, which is why doing a direct comparison isn't 100% accurate. But still feasible for rough comparisons, thus supporting my chart above.

 

I think it depends on screen size. For example, the Sony Z and Dell Inspiron 14z have 1600x900. Before, 13/14" maxed out at 1440x900, so in this case 1600x900 is a nice gain in resolution. However, say in 15", where 1680x1050 was more common, a 1600x900 screen would be a loss on both vertical and horizontal resolution.

 

14" LCD has been available in 4:3 at 1400 x 1050, for example on the Panasonic Y series.

 

Oh yeah forgot 4:3 aspect ratio But Panasonic is easily 4-8x the price of most notebooks and almost the only 4:3 notebook still available...

 

long life to my t61p with 4:3 ratio

I really hope that new t410 will have 1600x900 resolution

 

I placed an order for a T400 last week, and this screen size issue is making me not regret getting an end of line machine, even though I would've preferred getting an Arrandale.
I am still barely over the move to 16:10 , so this whole 16:9 is better, HD res blabla is just driving me nuts.
On 4:3, 15" notebooks had good dimensions for a not too portable/not too un-portable notebook with comfortable high res, 16:10 made 15.4" too wide, and for me the 14.1" and 13.3" (now with full sized keyboard) more appealing, obviously with 1440x900.
16:9 ... hopefully 14" will have 1600x900, but I am not so sure about how the overall dimensions will work out in every day use.

800 pixels vertical is too little, 900 is barely OK ... 768, are you kidding me.
Currently on my desktop I have 1920x1200 which is great, on my 1440x900 laptop I have the taskbar on the side to reclaim some vertical res.
I am currently also playing around with CULV 11.6" 1366x768, and even though it's quite nice to pack that much pixels and processing power in such a small package with a more or less decently sized keyboard, I really cannot get over the resolution. Last night I was working in MS Word, and I had to go to full screen mode to get some work done.

It's pretty sad that even business line notebooks feel like they are geared towards being entertainment machines rather than productivity tools. I actually wouldn't mind paying more for a 4:3, if they were still available today.

 

Laptop manufacturers for most part are no longer interested in capturing a niche market, since their profit level on each machine is too low. So the only way to make money is to sell the laptop to the mass market for a low price, and use cost effective parts only........ We have to remember that Laptop on most parts are nothing more than a commodity......

 

Man to think i have a lot of laptops, great deal with showing us the infomation, i think that 16:9 is better when it goes up to seventeen point threes and eighteen point fours, those are nice and are better to see a film better but sucks when surfing the net and reading and writing pdfs, papers, to wide with of the ratio, a 15.6 is just a waste of time.

 

Is there something that consumers can do? I highly doubt it.
There's only so much we can do so we all have to accept it sooner or later.

 

No there is nothing we can do much, its going to be forced anyway, but i don't find it professional to have a 18.4 screen or 15.6 screen.

 

Also, I think lenovo could sell 4:3 thinkpad models today in sufficient numbers. The problem is that since no one else is marketing 4:3 screens, no one is manufacturing them in quantity, which makes them impossible to spec at prices that people would be willing to pay.

 

Exactly. The masses of people are blindly gobbling up the new ratio screens due to being fed poor information about HD.

Nothing we can do with the majority of consumers deaf dumb and blind as they are.

 

What I love is the claims from LCD manufacturers, that those 16:9 increase your working area!!!

 

How come nobody has noted the following:

NVS is a 2D GPU for multiple display - http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html
FX is the 3D GPU for CAD - http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadrofx_family.html

If the W510 is to use the NVS line, then Lenovo just made the worst mistake ever, and their workstation is a paltry competition versus the M4400 (the predecessor M4500 with FX1800?) and the 8540w (same GPU as M4500?).

I see this move rather strange and illogical if you ask me. NVS cannot compete against FirePro, FireGL and FX in the 3D area.

 

Higher end MOBILE (you linked to the desktop versions) NVS models have the same core as their Quadro FX counterparts. http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro_nvs_notebook_techspecs.html

There's no reason to think that this situation wont be similar to the last time when Lenovo used nvidia graphics in the T61/p series with the former getting NVS gpus (NVS140) and the latter getting their Quadro counterpart (570M).

 

Sorry, wrong link..

But the point is that the NVS series on the CAD W510? I find that strange.

 

And they most likely wont... for the reasons outlined above and because then the T510 and W510 will be nearly exactly the same.

 

Your link doesn't really prove your point. Mobile Quadro NVS GPUs are the lower end workstation GPUs, as in the link, the most recent ones have all been 64-bit. While the Mobile Quadro FX GPUs are the higher end workstation GPUs, at 128-bit and 256-bit. Most likely, the laptops linked do not have full specs revealed either because the seller doesn't know the full specs or because of NDA reasons.

 

The NVS 140 is deffinitely not the 570M... To put it into simpler terms,the NVS 140M is based on the 8400M GS, the 570M is based on the GDDR3 8600M GT.

 

Yes, you're right, they aren't the same because of tweaks, clockrate and memory interface, but the base design of the silicon is the same. The design differences between G84M and G86M aren't large, they are in the same family and just variants of one design. The only difference besides clockrate and mem bandwidth between the 8400M GS and the 8600M is that the latter has twice the number of shaders, but otherwise the same architecture.

But to my point, I am saying the W510 is going to have a different than the T510 and people shouldn't be getting their panties in a rustle over it. I will be the first to eat crow if they actually put the worst variant of the NVS/Gxx chip in the W510, but I'd be willing to bet they wont.

 

If you look at it a bit more it might reveal something to you. NVS 320 is based on the G84M core which is the same as the Quadro FX 770M which is the CURRENT midsize workstation GPU offering. In fact, its even faster than the M770M because its shaders are clocked higher. Which is my point. Don't rag on the NVS until you know exactly which variant and permutation it is of Nvidia's latest core.

 

Yes, all the G8x and G9x cores are based on the same architecture but that doesn't mean that the NVS and FX are equal. With half the shaders disabled and it half the memory bandwidth, even if you clock the shaders higher of the low end GPU, you will never reach the performance of the higher end GPU. I've already explained that the site might not have specified the corrent GPU for certain reasons, but the fact doesn't change that if the W series does use a current NVS model, it will be considered a low end GPU - it doesn't matter what you say about which variant or permutation the core is, because it will still be inferior to any of the current FX line.

 

Well, NVS are Quadro, I think you meant NVS and FX. ^^

Indeed what chupacabras says could be valid, but NVS3100 is the core then? Pardon my ignorance, but which core would that be?

If it is a new GPU that website not only has the Tx10 that are not announced but a soon-to-come GPU that hasnt been announced either...2 founds on one? What are the odds..

 

Yeah, sorry was tired and typo'ed - been corrected now to be consistent.