W530 Owner's Thread

You mean the XPS 15 L521X (2012)? Of course, you "shoud" have horrible experiences with that one. My XPS 15 L502X (2011) is great overall, especially the screen, which is AU Optronics B156HW01 V.7 (FHD, 95% gamut, subtly glossy).

The T/W530 FHD screen is the AUO B156HW01 V.4 (95% gamut, matte), brother of the above. This is arguably the best screen on any ThinkPad models today. I personally prefer the subtle glossiness of the V.7, though, as things appear clearer and more vivid.

If you are a serious visual artist, you should consider a calibrator. The W530 may be optionally configured with a palmrest-located color sensor for calibration, but since I have never used one, I only mention it and cannot comment on it. Professionals use external calibrators, which are not only more capable but may be used on different displays, not just one.

 

Cache SSDs do no more monitoring than memory does. The data to be cached is determined by what goes through your processor. The CPU is the "brains" of the computer and it determines how it runs.

 

Great.

I noticed Lenovo only allow for a 16GB cache drive when ordering, any point in buying the Intel 313 mSATA cache which is 24GB? would I see much of a performance increase in jumping from 16GB cache to 24GB cache?

 

You'd only see a performance increase if you had more than 16GB of commonly used data.

 

I'd rather install a 64GB mSATA SSD and use it as my boot/OS/programs drive. The HDD in the main bay would be used only for user file storage. You'd perceive a significant performance increase in terms of much faster system booting and program launching. (In this case, you'd set the BIOS so that the mSATA is treated as a "regular drive" instead of a "cache" associated with the HDD. Such a cache is managed by software licensed by Lenovo.)

 

I thought of doing this but looking at the benchmark results, a good SSD cache drive can actually give a large performance increase to the system, not to the levels of using a pure SSD but the increase is very large over a HDD only solution, that is once the information is cached.

This is why I was thinking of actually going with this approach until I can afford a couple of 512MB SSD's. My only concern is that 16GB of cache won't be enough and that is why I was asking if for regular use of programs like Photoshop, movies, web browser, OS etc, would 16GB normally be enough or would I be much better of to go for a 24GB Intel 313 SSD mSATA cache drive?

I need to look for an SLC SSD solution if I was to swap the 16GB drive that comes with it. I am told if the drive is being used for cache SLC is the way to go vs regular MLC NAND which you find in most of your 64GB + drives. The higher amount of read/write requests being processed by a cache only drive seems to be much more demanding on the NAND than a standard SSD simply being used for regular storage.

 

Even still, it'd be much faster to just simply use the mSATA for a SSD and not SSD cache. why intentionally limit yourself? Installing the OS / programs on the SSD (whether it's mSATA or 2.5") will give you better benchmarks than installing those on the mechanical drive and using a cache.

On top of that, cache only works if your computing behavior is "predicable" to the cache; ie, you don't change your routine much. for example, you boot Windows, then open up a Firefox window as well as a Photoshop window, then maybe you open up a few Word or Excel documents. Then, your Windows/Firefox/Photoshop/Word/Excel stuff would benefit from the cache (dependent on if you're withing the 16GB limit), but if you do something different (maybe open iTunes, and you haven't in awhile), then that program will be slowed to HDD speeds. Same for any other program/file you rarely use.

I'd just use the mSATA for a SSD and forget about it until you buy your 512GB 2.5" SSDs. As for SLC, good luck. Just about everything is MLC these days.

 

I don't understand what you mean by "enough." Relative to what? In which context? A cache is a cache: frequently used items are kept there, while rarely used items are flushed out to make space. If you plan to keep "a lot" of things there, why use a cache?

Anyway, if you insist on this approach, consider a 32GB SSD cache. I think Lenovo is being cheap when offering the 16GB cache. I also think you are being cheap )) when considering a small "upgrade."

Now, the next step up is 64GB. Ta dah! Full-fledged system installation. Why caching?

You don't need to put "everything" on a 512GB SSD. The SSD boot/OS/programs + HDD data files (say, 64GB + 500GB) combo works really well.


Personally, I can live with a 32GB footprint for Windows 7 and 16GB footprint for Linux (say, Ubuntu 12.10). On my "light workload" (without big application suites) notebooks/ultrabooks, Windows 7 and applications occupy around 22GB.

My latest Ultrabook came with 32GB SSD cache + 320GB HDD. I promptly reconfigured the system to disable the cache and put Windows/applications on that mSATA SSD.

Well, Seagate has been doing this for years with its Momentus XT line of SSD-cached HDDs (in which case the cache resides on the drive board and is managed by the drive firmware). I've tried a few of them, but the benefits are not perceptibly obvious.

 

Just thought I'd add another post to this thread. New W530 owner here, couldn't be happier. The Fn/Ctrl is proving to be a niggle, but otherwise really can't complain. I'm actually blow away.

One question, does Lenovo supply OCZ Agility4 512GB SSDs through its accessory stores? Because I couldnt find any evidence of this.

 

Haven't seen any, and I'd be surprised if they did considering OCZ's track record...

The FN/Ctrl thing is easy enough to get use to though .

 

The largest capacity SSDs that Lenovo offers are 256GB

 

There is no point in buying RAM and HDD/SSD from Lenovo.

 

Thank you all for the replies and helpful info.

@Kaso - Not trying to be cheap, just trying to find the best interm solution until I can splash out on some decent SSD drives but going from what everyone else is saying it looks like I would be better to spend the cash on a SATA SSD now rather than buying a bigger mSATA cache drive which would cost me $145 for the 24GB Intel 313 SLC NAND drive - not much less than a good 256GB SSD.

I was looking at the benchmarks for real world application and it looks to be between the OCZ Vertex 4 and Intel 520 series 256GB drives.

I will do the following as soon as my W530 arrives which should be on Tuesday.

1. Remove the Optical bay drive and replace it with my 256GB SSD drive and caddy.

2. Clone my 500GB primary HDD to the 256GB SSD using Acronis Backup 2013

3. Power off the laptop, swap the drives around. 500GB > to caddy, 256GB SSD > to Primary SATA drive slot.

4. Power ON laptop and format 500GB drive to use for storage.

If anyone sees any problems with the above method please let me know or feel free to give me any recommendations.

Now, regarding the SSD to buy, any reason why I should go one over the other? I see someone here recently mentioned something about OCZ not having the best rep? From what I have seen performance wise the OCZ Vertex 4 has been doing very well but maybe it has reliability issues?

Edit:
Forgot to ask, once I start using an SSD as my OS drive, is there any way I can restrict the mSATA cache to work on just the 500GB HDD in the Ultrabay? If not I would be bottlenecking the performance of my SSD due to it being much quicker than the mSATA cache, in which case I would remove the mSATA cache drive all together but it seems a waste if I can still use it to speed up the performance of the 500GB HDD, that is if there is a way to restrict it to only caching data from the Ultrabay drive.

 

I doubt that a mSATA cache could slow down a 2.5" SSD. What you feel as "fast" in a SSD of any kind is the random access time, which pretty much all SSDs have next to 0ms access time (well, 1ms to 4ms typically). That's why subjectively, a SATAII SSD feels just as fast as a SATAIII SSD (I have both in my laptop).

Still don't understand why you're wanting to spend so much money on a SLC drive though. Even though MLC doesn't last as long, it's still typically rated for 20GB of writes per *day* for 5 years, which is an obscene amount of usage (cache wouldn't go near this limit at all). And that's a conservative estimate. It'd be more cost effective to look at a 40GB Intel 310 or something along those lines.

 

So has anybody installed Windows 8 on their W530 yet? What can you tell me about the drivers?

 

The mSATA cache is linked to the primary drive. Once you have installed either a 2.5" SSD or a mSATA SSD as the primary drive, the mSATA cache is history.

How can you do any cloning if there is no optical drive for Acronis to boot from?

The existing HDD sits in place. The new SSD is connected to the system via SATA-USB cable. Once cloning is done, boot the system with only the new SSD in the primary bay to check out everything. Then put the old HDD in the UltraBay caddy adapter and snap the whole thing in, then format the old HDD.

 

Acronis does not need to boot from an optical drive to clone your disk. It installs some temp files on your primary drive that you are going to clone, reboots and then starts-up before the OS does, now it clones the primary drive to whatever drive you tell it, in this case the new SSD installed in the Ultrabay. I think you can also install Acronis on a USB drive and boot from that, then clone. Either way you don't need the Optical drive to run Acronis clone.

I also have a SATA-USB cable if I wish to clone without removing the optical drive from the Ultrabay but I see no reason to do it that way.

Regarding the mSATA being only liked to the primary drive, that is contradictory to what another poster said on this thread.

I was told the cache drive will cache information from both the Primary SATA and the Ultrabay SATA if I was to install a HDD in-place of a optical drive. Not sure which is correct now, does it only cache data from the Primary SATA, as you say, or both the Primary and Ultrabay data links?

@ privatejarhead - I wouldn't waste money on a intel 24GB SLC mSATA drive anymore if I was to buy a 256GB SSD. I would simply keep the 16GB mSATA that came with the laptop from Lenovo. Regarding removing the mSATA from the equation as to not bottleneck the SSD, again I have seen mixed reports.

A number of people seem to think that if you are running a fast SSD using SATA3, you should remove the mSATA cache which runs at SATA2 speeds and has a read/write speed of 220 MBs / 100 MBs vs a fast SSD which has read/write of around 550MBs / 510 MBs. That is a very big difference in maximum speed, if I am using the mSATA as a cache in this example, data that is being pulled off the cache drive would have an access speed of less than half that of the SSD.

Going by them numbers I don't see how leaving the mSATA drive in cache mode when using a fast SSD wouldn't bottleneck your performance. Unless you can force it to only cache from the Ultrabay HDD which does not seem to be possible.

 

Those people probably don't know the difference between random access times (or seek times) and read/write speeds. Read speeds (200MB/s, 550MB/s) only really matter if you are transferring large files between drives a lot, such as copying/pasting a bunch of BD-quality movies from one drive to another. For most stuff (programs, files that are a few MB big, etc) wouldn't care if your drive had SATAII or III speeds. Opening a 10MB file on a 200MB/s read drive takes 0.05 seconds and on a 550MB/s drive 0.02 seconds, in an ideal world, but can you really subjectively detect a 0.03 second difference? Not likely.

Now, random access/seek time is different. In mechanical hard drives, you would have to wait for the drive's platters to rotate around towards the read head, which is where most people experience computer lag ( Hard disk drive performance characteristics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). But on a SSD, *every* byte of data is accessible by the controller *all the time*, so practically the only limitation to a SSD's seek time is the speed of light (or very close to that). This link explains it pretty well: [Solved] How important is seek time? - Hard-Disks - Storage

 

@privatejarhead - Cheers for the info mate, what I wll probably do seeing that there will be little use in having a 16GB mSATA cache even if what you say about the performance difference is not that big, is turn the cache off and just use it as a third drive for storage, even if it's only 16GB, maybe i'll throw the pagefile on there even if there is not much use with 16GB of RAM.

I do actually work on large files fairly often, I do a good amount of editing on large photo files from a 5DMk3, when saved to .tiff these can be a few hundred MB but more importantly I transcode a fair amount of video which can easily be over a GB. In the transcode of 1-4GB files is where I think the faster speeds of the SSD could make some difference but even then I am not sure if it would be very much.

You make a very valid point regarding the real world differences between say a 200MB/s SSD and a 500MB/s drive. In the real world unless you are copying large files from one 500MB/s SSD to another 500MB/s drive, it seems like you wouldn't really see much difference.

I was just looking at the fastest USB 3.0 flash drives and the quickest seems to claim around 170MB/s (read) and tested at 150MB/s max which I imagine would be less sustained. The quickest USB 3.0 CF card reader with one of the fastest CF cards on the market can do 130MB/s, so again unless you are copying between two devices that can support 500MB/s transfer rates which hardly any peripheral devices can do and USB 3.0 can't support, there is going to be few people that will really notice the difference. - Hence I see your point.

The only area I think I may see some benefit seems to be in the transcoding of large GB video files.

 

If you want a quicker cache compared to an SSD, then you'd need to set up a RAM drive, or programs that are designed to load the whole program to RAM when the computer is running and then copy back to SSD when the system powers down. This is not something you want to do unless you have a large amount of RAM that you know you won't be using and can dedicate to the RAM drive.

 

Not to mention that it's dangerous. If you have even a little interruption in power (battery, AC), boom! Data gone.

 

RAM drive? Sigh... DOS thinking. Why use a modern OS, then? Just roll your own tricks, eh?

Windows 7 takes full advantage of available physical RAM (8GB, 16GB, 32GB, whatever) to provide SuperFetch.

 

RAM drive wouldn't be worth the hassle nor the high risk of lossing data on a battery powered laptop, not for me.

I have no problems with just using a fast SSD as my primary for the OS / common Apps and a standard HDD for storage of large files like movies and photos. Any new video or photo files I do editing or transcoding work on I will on the SSD and then move to the HDD once my work on them is complete.

The 16GB mSATA only cost me $33 as an option from Lenovo so it will either be removed or turned into a temp file drive or used for a pagefile, can't really see any major reason the keep the mSATA in cache mode once I install the SATA3 SSD.

I guess I just need to make sure AHCI & TRIM are enabled on Win7 once I swap in my SSD.

I actually see some Win7 SSD optimization guides saying to turn off "SuperFetch" on the OS when using an SSD.

Edit: Apparently Intel did the research and found it best to disable Superfetch when you have an SSD, hence it does this by default when you install its toolbox software. Makes sence seeing that windows already uses free memory for caching.

"Access a large file, and unless there is memory pressure, that large file will remain resident for future accesses. Run a program, and unless evicted by memory pressure, the program's binaries and other static data will remain resident so that subsequent launches of that process will be fast. All that Superfetch does is it tries to cache things before you access them." - Having a quick read on Superfetch, I tend to agree with this comment. If what I read is correct, I don't see much point in Superfetch with a SSD as apparently Superfetch was designed to overcome access time problems that only platter HDD's have, so it's not really needed with an SSD.

 

Windows 7 will automatically turn on TRIM on when it detects an SSD. And a lot of laptops should already be in ACHI mode, but I'd check before installing any SSD.

 

Fair enough. I was just offering Flickster another option if he wanted caching. And of course privatejarhead is correct also that doing so puts data at risk in case of power loss.

 

Does anyone know if the latest release Windows 8x64 Display Drivers from the Lenovo website will work on Windows 7x64?

Reason I ask is because the win8 version seems to be much newer. My GPU is a K2000M. I didn't know about just downloading the latest version from the Nvidia website as I want to make sure Optimus will still work and the Lenovo package has both the Nvidia and Intel drivers included.

Just not sure if you can use Win8 drivers on Win7.

 

If it doesn't say Windows 7, I would not install it.

I would install Windows 8, then install it.

 

I've been playing around with Win 8 on my W530 for the last couple of days. Drivers seem fine except that I am getting regular dropouts on my Bluetooth mouse. Sometimes it reconnects itself after a few seconds, others I have to uninstall and reinstall it from the device menu. Not sure if that's a driver problem or some other issue -- if anyone has some tips, they would be greatly appreciated. Otherwise, haven't had any problems at all.

 

For what it's worth, downloading the latest K2000M driver from Nvidia worked fine for me.

 

Thank you for the reply. I will look at upgrading the drivers if that is the case.

 

Has anyone upgraded to W8 ? I feel like it's unnecessary for me to upgrade. Will my programs from W7 work in W8 without reinstalling them ?


Sent from the future using iPhone 6

 

Most should work if you are doing an in-place upgrade, though from what I hear some will need to be run under Windows 7 Compatibility mode.

I personally never like to run an in-place upgrade of the OS, why bring across all the rubbish that collects over time on the old OS... I think it's much better to backup your applications and data, do a clean install of Windows 8 and copy your Applications and Data across.

There is some really good upgrade guides around, one by Hearsts on this forum which is actually for Windows 7 but has some very good tips that apply to both 7 and 8.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo/642274-hearsts-guide-clean-installing-windows-7-thinkpad.html

Then just make sure to have Vantage Software Update downloaded from the Lenovo website so you can apply any Lenovo applications or drivers that are required.

 

Strange enough I just did a clean install of Windows 7 pro 64 on my new W530, even with all the services running before the clean install my W530 seemed to boot faster and was more responsive. I am wondering if I should restore the factory image of my W530 and uninstall the bloatware ? The W530 seemed to be tweaked for optimal performance when it came out of the factory.

 

Shouldn't be that much of a difference, but if you want EE-like performance back, this thread is relevant.

Or, get an SSD and be blown away by the quickness of it, even without EE

 

Thanks for the link pivatejarhead and will definitely add a SSD drive to my w530 !

 

Well, if you do so, I recommend getting one from Crucial, Plextor, Intel, or Samsung. Wouldn't consider any other brand unless there's a significant discount (maybe two dozen cents per GB cheaper or more) and I'd never consider OCZ. Avoid them like the plague, if only for their tech support.

 

^^^ So, a deep discount suddenly makes "Brand X" SSD reliable?

 

Nope, but it's possibly worth it. If I could buy a 240GB non-name for maybe $90 or so, I'd get one just 'cause. I think that's what happened to WD's SSDs back last year, but I was too late on the deal :/

I'm curious how SF-2281 will work out though. I have one in my Intel 330, and most of the Brand X SSDs out there have it as well, so I'm wondering if my Intel will last longer. If not, I'll have to reconsider my SSD recommendations .

 

Just got my W530 today as a replacement for a new Sony VAIO S15 which I took back after two weeks. So far I I love it.

Vs the Sony VAIO S15 this laptop blows it away in all areas apart from weight which is a strong point for the VAIO, both have good build quality but the Thinkpad just feels so solid, like a tank. The VAIO felt like if it dropped it would never work again.

However the real reason why I sent the VAIO back was that it comes with the worst IPS screen I have ever seen, how Sony can ship that out to customers I do not know. First of all it can't display rich reds, period. Any rich red is actually shown as orange and this is no joke, for anyone who does not know just Google Image "Sony S15 Orange-gate" and be ready for a shock when you see the comparison images. I can only think that most users are ignorant of what a good display looks like so they go on blissfully thinking everything is great with their display and that is good for them but having done amature photography for many years, I couldn't stand it.

The W530 has a nice display for a laptop.

I uninstalled many of the unwanted pieces of software that came from the factory and kept a number of the core Lenovo applications.

Now it is time to clone and install my Intel 520 Series 256GB SSD which after much suggestion on this thread is the direction I decided to go rather than worry about mSATA cache. Unfortunately my HDD caddy which I ordered some 2 weeks ago is yet to arrive, it should get here any day now and then I can finally install the SSD and use the HDD for storage.

Will now take a master backup of the system seeing that it's lean and clean, before I start installing applications and begin enjoying this great laptop.

It will take me awhile to get used to not having a keypad, my old laptop was a Dell Studio 17 which I must say is also a very good unit for being 4 years old. I have dropped it a number of times and it's still with us. The keyboard on the Studio 17 is also very good, not sure how I feel about Lenovo going away from the traditional keyboard but I will have to give it time.

Does anyone know if the W520 traditional Thinkpad keyboard can be installed on the W530? - If so I guess it would just be a case of ordering one from Lenovo.

 

You don't need the UltraBay HDD caddy adapter to accomplish the cloning. I would use the SATA-USB cable (which you said you have) to do the cloning now and enjoy the SSD-based notebook while waiting for the caddy adapter.

Just a thought. You don't have to agree with it.

Not possible.

 

Unfortunately, the W520 keyboard is incompatible with the W530.

 

Ahh well, was just a thought, guess I will just have to get used to the new keyboard style.

@Kaso - Regarding the Cloning, unfortunately the SATA>USB cable is also coming with my caddy, same with the external rubber case for the internal optical drive so I can at least use it after I put the 500GB HDD in its place. It was a good idea but I guess i'll have to wait.

 

In my W530 review (first post, second link), I wrote a fairly extensive opinion on the old vs new keyboards, and I didn't have much of a problem with the new style after I actually tried it. The keys have the same area on the tops (about 1.5cm^2) and the spacing between keys is about the same (little under a cm). Only major problem is that Lenovo took away the back/forward buttons that were on either side of the W520's up arrow key, and move around some of the special function keys to odd places (PrtSc where the Menu button used to be? Really?).

 

I was looking at what Lenovo has done with this "Enchanced Experience 3" feature they promote and it looks like they have done a fair bit of optimization to try get Win7 to load and work faster and not just for HDD but also services etc.

It got me thinking is there going to be anyway for us who want to do a clean install of Windows 8 to get the same kind of tuning as EE3?

I was wondering if it is possible to buy a set of Recovery Media from Lenovo with Windows8, seeing that they are now shipping the W530 with Win8 pro. The media is not whats really expensive it's the Licence, and I can get one for $14 with the upgrade promotion. Is there a way to get the factory image (i.e. Recovery Media) Lenovo use on their Win8 W530's?

If not I don't know if anyone who has just purchased a W530 with Windows 8 Pro would be so kind as to provide a copy of their recovery media or Recovery Partition files online? Not interested in product keys, I will use my own, would just like to be able to replicate the EE3 tuning Lenovo perform on my install of Windows 8 Pro, if I decide to install it. Unless there is some other way or no real point in doing this.

 

Hi All,

Anyone here have a icc profile for the FHD W530 screen that they can share?

I know it's not ideal as every screen is slightly different but it will be much better than nothing until I buy a new colour calibrator, my old one don't work in Win7. Would be much appreciated, with the wide color space this display really needs a profile.

 

My W530 just arrived today. Is it really necessary to do a clean install to effectively rid of bloat?

Excited - this thing is awesome thus far!

 

Not really. Besides the trial AV software, there's not that much bloat on these things at all. I even kept the Power Manager and Fingerprint software since it works so well.

 

You can download a profile from the W530 review done by notebookcheck. Here is a direct link to the file:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/uploads/tx_nbc2/Monitor_25.06.2012_1.icc

I'm using this profile on my machine and it's definitely an improvement over the default settings on my screen.

 

Thank you so much for that link, the difference is night and day to the factory profile which I am told is not even calibrated but just a copy of the Standard Windows sRGB profile, definitely looks that way.

I Highly Recommend anyone who has not calibrated the FHD display to use this profile over the factory one.

Once again, thanks. + Rep given.

 

I know the feeling, only just got my machine 2 days ago and I agree, it's awesome.

Like Privatejarhead said there is no need at all to do a clean install, there is not a whole heap of bloat. I just removed things like Norton AV (I have my own AV), Lenovo Small Business Advantage, Sugarsync, Evernote, Chrome etc, just the trail software junk but there is no mare than maybe 4-5 items I had to remove so not a massive amount.

Most of the "Lenovo" labeled software is actually very useful, make sure to keep Power Management, ThinkVantage, Solution Centre and look at installing "Lenovo Internet Connection" via Thinkvantage it's a helpful wireless network scanner and connection software, better than the windows tool.

I did remove "Lenovo Splashtop", I see no point in some completely different GUI to the OS.

Also if you don't have a calibrated colour profile for your monitor and you have the FHD display, make sure to download "save as *.icc" and apply the .icc profile linked by Nibor2 above. Big difference over the stock, for the better.