Y50 Thread

Well it doesn't have an ssd and is way bulkier..

 

I updated the driver but it's still the same. It's not that simple though. The driver looks at the screen model, which is set to "supported resolutions" that are reported by the manufacturer. These supported resolutions are either defined by Samsung(assuming that is who made the panel) or Lenovo. All the Intel driver does is look at the model and give you the list. There's a way to view the supported resolutions for each monitor by going into the Intel Control Panel -> Options -> Click on Information Center in the upper left drop down menu -> Save. A text file will report the supported resolutions. For this machine, it only has 3840x2160 @ 48Hz. So in order to have different options, we would need to trick the driver into thinking the display is a different model. I'm not sure how to accomplish that.

The only other options I can think of are to wait and see if they release a driver that either unlocks custom resolutions or adds higher refresh rate options. Lastly, we can try to find a way to disable Optimus and see if the Nvidia driver can work on its own. I have tried to disable Optimus by disabling the integrated graphics, but the Nvidia driver isn't recognized after that.

 

The base model Y50 that we're talking about doesn't have an SSD either.

 

This here pretty much sums up why we can't edit our own screen settings: https://communities.intel.com/thread/25904

I can go into the registry and view all the registry entries for the EDID, however I'm not allowed to have an EDID override to add my own custom resolutions. I suppose I could change the EDID to another monitor but I've never experimented with that and don't know all the consequences or if it will even work. Until Intel opens things up, 48Hz is what the Y50 panel will be stuck at. Seeing that the post goes back to Sandy Bridge days, I don't think Intel is opening things up anytime soon. Most we can hope for is for them to change the supported resolutions. That's something that we would probably have to bug Lenovo about. If nobody gives them pressure, they won't change a thing.

 

Hi guys, ive been doing a little research and this seems a very good laptop for what im after. However its not yet available in the UK, does anyone know the scheduled release for europe and UK? if anyone has anything has to add on the laptop please let me know , its more for budget gaming i want this and the specs look great for such an attractive package

 

Welp, looks like I'll be waiting for the g551...

 

So since you have the y50 UHD do you think the 48hz thing is enough to prevent someone from purchasing?

 

Depends on what kind of gamer you are. If you play fps games on multiplayer, you will have a clear disadvantage over 60 and 120 hz players. I'm used to 120fps on my desktop, so even 60fps is a pretty big drop for me, let alone another 12 frames. I think many will agree that 40fps and higher is good enough and totally playable for other types of games though. On a brighter side, I would argue that 48fps capped is better than 60fps with random drops to the mid 40s. You won't stutter as much and it will be smoother looking on average. I've intentionally dropped the frame cap for some games to prevent stuttering before.

For example, I played a save from Skyrim that was a dragon fight. I use this save to compare the performance of different machines. On the Y50, I had minimal frame drops from 48fps on 1080p Ultra settings with zero AA. With the Razer Blade and Ghost Pro(both 870M), I had frame drops to the mid 40s and it clearly stuttered. The Y50 barely stuttered because it was always at the lower framerate. So in that case, I almost preferred the Y50 because it was an overall smoother performance(not to mention less hot on my lap). In short, if you're not a fps gamer, this laptop is still a great buy.

 

what's your stand on this? are you gonna keep or return it

 

its probably cuz you're not a little who needs a 110% gamut display that is beyond IPS with 4k resolution and native size.. obviously exaggerations but I feel like all these people saying "this screen is so crap... wahh wahh" need to realize that maybe they have been exposed to very high quality screens and compared to the complete screens and average this screen is not "that" bad.... looking at pictures it looks better than the screen I'm using right now since that one has all the white's as a nice beige/off-white yellow.

 

Haven't decided yet. Probably going to keep it as long as the keyboard and trackpad don't annoy me too much. I don't play fps on a laptop, so 48fps isn't the biggest issue to me. I'm really on the fence with the keyboard. It might just take some getting used to. For some reason the mini shift key bugs me on this laptop but not on my Asus. The trackpad is only so-so to me so far. I've certainly seen better. The trackpad is much better than the Ghost Pro though. Really, if I was in a rush to get a laptop, this is the best bang for the buck. I'm not in a rush though so there's still the NX500 and GX500 I'm eyeballing. I have a feeling those will be more expensive though.

 

I still don't understand why 4k display is so big deal in such small screen :/ In 15,6" FHD in my opinion is max You need. More over gtx860 is too weak for gaming in such resolution so anyway You have to go down to play games. Sorry 4k make sens in minimum 24". Of course is only my private opinion.

 

Hey guys ... I've been trying to do some research on the 48 vs 60 FPS when it comes to FPS gaming. Would anyone have a link to a discussion or article that details the level of impact 48 vs 60 gives? I've spent a bit of time researching, and have pretty much come up with squat. The general consensus I've seen online is that unless you are an EXPERT gamer on a certain game, 48 vs 60 is not going to provide any sort of advantage/disadvantage. And even as an expert in a certain game, the advantage is going to be minimal. From reading this thread, most seem to be saying that 48 vs 60 for FPS is going to be a huge disadvantage, but I'm just not finding the correlating evidence online. Any help would be appreciated.

 

Thanks for bringing that up Klickonline. I have the exact same question, especially with FPS as long as you are getting >30 FPS it should be playable and not sure if you can actually tell the difference between 48 and 60 and not sure if this actually matters to the FPS gameplay.
Would love to hear what people have to say.

 

Idk, when I was messing (trolling) with my friend's y510p I liked the keyboard a lot. y50's keyboard, if not defective, which yours isn't, is pretty much the same except it's tilted down at an angle because of the chassis design. if you would have any problem besides defective keyboard, it's probably because of the keyboard tilt.

the main problem with gx500 is not because of expensiveness, but rather timing. I would not recommend anyone to buy laptops after Q3 because you can just wait for next year's product. gx500 and nx500 are certainly nice products but if they don't get released before september then it's kinda pointless, wait a few more months and you get 5th gen broadwell and 20nm maxwell along with other upgrades. if they'll be released earlier, it would be much better

 

Switch your search to differences between 120hz and 60hz for first person shooters. There's a few threads and youtube videos discussing it. Most will agree 40 and up is adequate. Experts will say 60 is their minimum and power players will tell you that they play even better above 90fps. I did a lot of research on it before I bought my 120Hz monitors

 

everything in 5 min

 

I feel like the keystrokes have a little less travel than the y510p. Could be just be. I haven't typed on that keyboard in some time. Yes, the tilt is noticeable though. I think once I get used to the different placement of my hands I will like it a lot more.

 

It's not just FPS gaming.. Most pro FPS players tend to buy 120 Hz monitors on a desktop PC as it really helps you strafe and aim in games like CS:GO.. I myself used to be heavily into first person shooters back in the day, but lately I've been more into console gaming. Anyways you see a huge difference in all genres of gaming in 60 fps as opposed to 30 or 48 fps.. Just look up some animated Gifs on the differences.. You can look at both PC and Console gaming and see the advantages.. Fighting games in particular are a MUST for running 60 FPS as frame data follows 60 FPS exactly in that particular genre.. So not being able to have 60 FPS for something like Ultra SF IV is a HUGE disappointment..

 

Actually I came across those articles as well - consensus seemed to be that only an expert gamer may get an extremely minute advantage 120 vs 60. Maybe it was old info - but one of the articles stated that most online FPS games would interpolate anything above 60 as well, which would kind of be pointless I think?

 

Games in general are much better in 60 FPS as oppose to lower.. Especially RTS and Fighting Games.. You usually see major differences in 120 FPS for first person shooters..

 

I have yet to see one article that says 120 FPS provides a major difference vs 60 - the articles I've read either say a minimal difference, or no difference (not in terms of how it "looks", but rather actual gameplay - ie being able to actually play better) .. Looking for someone to link to some actual fact gathering articles versus the general consensus for us to send something in to Lenovo.

 

That isn't the consensus, and it isn't just about expert gamers. Even casual gamers, who already are at a disadvantage skill wise would suffer even more if they are handicapped by lower framerates. The general consensus is that anything below 60 FPS for first person shooters (which most people do play) is not ideal, even for casual gamers. 60 fps is the minimum, the experts you are referring to want well above 60 fps. It is quite difficult for the human eye to notice any framerate increase past 60 fps, but up and until that point, its noticeable for most.

I really am not that picky actually, but a 48 fps cap would automatically mean I won't be purchasing the 4k, I might actually consider the FHD touch version instead, so I would rather compromise the screen than the framerates, and I am a casual gamer.

 

You have to see 120Hz to believe it. It's so smooth that you don't even know what you're missing until you try it. It's to the point that I can tell when the Nvidia driver updates and I forget that I have to recreate my 120Hz profile. I notice it right away. Everyone is different though. I found that my threshold of noticing the difference lies around 90Hz. Past that, I can't tell. Now, does that mean 48 Hz is no good? Of course not but it's still less than 60 and some people might notice and care. I'm the type to lower my graphics settings so I always get a smooth 60fps(and 120fps on my desktop). I'm sure I could get used to 48 but I won't know until I try it out a couple days.

 

You need to actually play the games on two different monitors as you will see a huge difference yourself.. Also check out some animated gifs on 30 fps vs 60 fps.. There is a HUGE difference..

Yes exactly! When it comes to gaming.. Frame rate>>>>>>>>resolution!

 

Great video! Keeping that one bookmarked.

 

This website was very useful to me when I was trying to figure out if 120Hz made a big impact. It's also how I found out my threshold. You can also use it to determine what your framerate really is(like how I got the panel to get 60fps when using the generic windows driver)

Compare frames per second: which looks better?

 

This is the video that convinced me to buy a 120Hz monitor last year

60hz vs 120hz Battlefield 3 Test - YouTube

It doesn't prove anything but he has a lot of good points, which I was able to validate after using the 120Hz panel. He also discusses input lag, which also might be a factor with the IPS screen. I don't have a CRT anymore so I can't accurately measure the input lag of the y50 panel.

 

60 hz is just the bare minimum for monitors these days really. I would just feel wrong purchasing a laptop that doesn't have the capability of outputting such a basic standard. It may not improve performance for some, but it certainly does for others, and I think that there's been enough evidence to dispel the "you can't notice it anyway" arguement-you certainly can. Whether or not that translates to actual gameplay performance varies, but simply seeing the difference? Almost everyone that is in the market for a gaming laptop probably can, and having it capped at 48 will certainly offer a worse overall experience than at 60.

 

And like I said.. Genres like Fighting are a MUST for 60 Hz/FPS.. If you are not able to play something like Street Fighter, Tekken or King of Fighters in 60 FPS you are at a HUGE disadvantage.. Consoles will even downscale the resolution below 720p so that the game will run in smooth 60 FPS..

 

What is it with LENOVO and screens with the Y50?
It's either a average FHD screen with bad viewing angles or you get a 4K screen that looks great but has low refresh rates and really hurts you if your into FPS/Fighting games.
They have to rethink the screen issues, it's pretty sad to improve the situation you have to swap out a screen yourself and possibly voiding your warranty.

 

So it really sounds like a driver issue - a few folks have said that the screen should definitely support 60Hz in the lower resolutions, so it's most likely not a display issue. It sounds like (hopefully) something that can be fixed with a driver update. Those expecting to have 4K resolution at 60Hz I think had unrealistic expectations - yes there are a handful of 4k displays @ 60Hz on laptops, but that's not the norm currently, and chances are the graphics couldn't drive 4k @ 60Hz anyway.

 

Hi Brian,

Im a dota 2 player and I can say that 48 vs 60 fps is a big deal. Its a big advantage if you can smoothly perform actions in high frames. 48 is too choppy or distracting actually when youre in clashes.

And that small distraction in clashes can lead to game changing loses easily.

Sent from my HUAWEI P6-U06 using Tapatalk

 

I cannot think of one multiplayer game that interpolates above 60. Doing so would also take more coding with no added benefit that I could think of.

I also wouldn't call the advantage "extremely minute". With the screen that I have on my desktop (120hz with lightboost, backlight is strobed to hide the pixel transitions to remove any additional motion blur caused by the transition), I am able to see motion much more clearly. With a 60hz screen, I wasn't able to jump around a target and keep a clear view of it. Now it's much easier.

I looked into forcing the refresh rate of this laptop's screen higher, but couldn't find anything. The screen it connected to the Intel card. Trying to change the refresh rate through one of the Nvidia tools won't work. Using CRU, I couldn't get the rate changed without the laptop getting errors when trying to boot into Windows.

 

um no, the bare minimum for the monitor these days is 30hz except you'll be seriously annoyed by it. 60hz is nowhere near a minimum, it's a common standard that we accept.

also you guys are kinda harsh on Brian, he's just trying to find solid evidence to convince lenovo for a change that we all want.

Linus did a comparison video two years ago on 120hz vs 60hz, you guys watch it yourself and think w.e. you want but I think this solid enough evidence

 

Brian, I recommend you (and anyone else interested in framerates) check out the website:

Blur Busters | Everything Better Than 60Hz — including 120Hz, 144Hz, 240Hz, LightBoost, ULMB, Turbo240, G-SYNC, and more.


Tons of information.

 

Yes, no one here is really interested in gaming at 60 fps at 4k since the 860m is not strong enough to support that anyway, we all just want to be able to scale down to 1080p and be able to enjoy at least 60fps, with this machine you can't even do that at 720p let alone FHD.

 

They have to cut costs somewhere, and unfortunately, they did it on the screens..

Sent from my HUAWEI P6-U06 using Tapatalk

 

It'd be fantastic if we could actually get official word from Lenovo on the refresh rate issue with the 4k version. All these screen issues are the only things holding me back from pulling the trigger. It's maddening to check this thread every couple hours trying to get any information.

 

My apologies if I came if as harsh. Wasn't sure if I was one of them.

 

Right. I actually expected this 4k to downscale to 1080 with no issues on having atleast 60hz, but since it wont, its really a downer..

Sent from my HUAWEI P6-U06 using Tapatalk

 

Its not really an issue, its probally just how the type of 4k screen Lenovo decided to put in the Y50. A 4k panel with 48hz, even if its downscaled to 1080p. I guess potential owners would just have to live with that if they really want to.

Sent from my HUAWEI P6-U06 using Tapatalk

 

It's an issue if a gaming laptop can't output 60fps on any resolution. Whether the issue is the screen itself or a driver.

 

Im thinking its an issue if the screen can but wont because of drivers. But IMHO it looks like the screen type lenovo uses is a really natural 48hz type.

Sent from my HUAWEI P6-U06 using Tapatalk

 

that's basically impossible, no one makes controllers at 48hz for FHD, if it's the screen's problem then
1. you should be able to tune it down to 1080p and get 60hz because the only reason for the screen to be 48hz is that it can't handle that much data at 4k

2. Xentar will not be able to get 60fps regardless anyhow

 

I do hope things can get sorted out, its kinda tough for potential owners to deal with all these in the beginning and shelling out $1.5k

 

I'm sorry my friends but what all new games are you planning to run at 1080 very high (0 or 2AA) @48Hz ?
I've checked a few benchmarks and dont see anything other than dota or tomb raider going past that.....

 

To many people (including me), refresh rate and frames per second are much more important than ingame visuals. I'd gladly drop a few settings if it means I can get framerate up to match the refresh rate. The higher the better.

 

Yup, I'd rather drop a few details here and there on the graphical settings to reach that 60 fps

 

Hey guys can I ask how does this current Y50 compare to the Msi GE60 Apache Pro?? I'm tied between these two.