Thinkpad Screens - I have a dilemma

[AlanHorne]

Firstly, I will say that my tastes are likely not in line with most people on this forum. I am currently using a Dell 8500, which I got almost three years ago pretty much only because of the screen. I crave screen real estate, and my 8500 has a 15.4" WUXGA (1920x1200) and honestly, I wouldn't mind if the pixel pitch was even smaller and the resolution higher. But - my laptop is aging and my wife needs a computer, so I've decided to buy a ThinkPad and send her my 8500 with my prized screen. The problem I've come across is finding a ThinkPad screen that I will be happy with.

I see that ThinkPads (the T-series, anyway) only come in 4:3 ratio and the highest resolution available is UXGA (1600x1200). This would be the logical choice if I was shooting for maximum resolution and minimum pixel pitch (though the resolution is lower than the 1920x1200 I'm used to and the pixel pitch is a tad higher.) However - with this purchase I have other considerations as well.

My 8500 is no lean machine - I estimate that it weighs a good 7+ pounds, and the footprint is rather large (roughly 14.2" x 10.9" x 1.5".) I am looking to get a smaller machine, so the footprint of the 14.1" ThinkPads is appealing - but then, I am limited to getting the 1400x1050 screen which has an even higher pixel pitch and lower resolution than the 15" 1600x1200 screen. I know that many people on this board have complained that their 14.1" 1400x1050 is too small to read - but considering what I am used to, I think I may be disappointed that it isn't small enough.

The other issue dealing with size is the battery life - I see that the 14.1 models have a good half-hour+ more battery life. I may not even notice the difference, though, since I'm used to getting less than two hours on my current machine. (It really is dismal - I pretty much have to plug it in wherever I go.)

I guess I should mention its intended application as well, as that may have some bearing on others' advice. I am a game programmer, and so I spend most of the time on my computer simply typing text and such. I don't really play that many games these days, but I do have to be able to run/debug projects I'm working on and so a big concern is shader compatibility. I looked up the FireGL T2, and it supports vertex/pixel shader 2.0, but I'm not sure what the cards offered on the 14.1" chassis are capable of. In the end, usually the newest graphics card is the best for me to get (which is a point for the 1600x1200 model.)

I guess my question is - are there any other people like me around here that have a 14.1" screen, and if so - is the reduction in resolution/pixel pitch justified by the smaller footprint and increased battery life?

edit: oh, another slightly unrelated question -
my current laptop has a P4-M 2.6 GHz and is almost three years old, but I see that all the ThinkPads have much lower clock speeds. Am I missing something here?

[christopher_wolf]

Welcome to the Thinkpad Forums

I also have a Dell, Widescreen Business Model (Same resolution that you stated) ; it does have a pretty good screen and I do use it sometimes, but not when going mobile. My work involves some serious processing and rendering power; that said, my T43 does a pretty good job of everything. I was looking at the 15" T43p for awhile; but then I decided to go with the 14.1" T43 since I wanted more battery life and slightly less weight. As an example of what I run on a day to day basis, I have coded a program for research that uses OpenGL, and is quite resource intensive since the matricies can get as large as 100x1000, and run that alongside several instances of PyMol...Sometimes while compiling other versions of my program as well as running MATLAB continuously. I found that the 14.1" SXGA+ was pretty good. Yet, if you aren't going to be that mobile, you might be better off going with the 15" UXGA screen. Even for all that, I find that I didn't get much of a difference between Widescreen and 4:3, although I am used to both formats.

About the CPU, that is a Pentium 4-M; not a Pentium M. There is a difference between the two; if I recall correctly, the T30 used a P4-M as well. The Pentium M, however, gives you better battery life. If you have enough memory, you won't much notice the 0.6GHz or less difference whilst compiling code; 1GB and higher should do the trick.

[DIGITALgimpus]

I'd personally recommend maxing out the RAM (1.5-2GB). I do some open source work (mostly Firefox these days), and have found the more RAM the better (less swap on the HD the better off you are). Especially if you like to be able to do something while your compiling rather than watch the makefile spew text all over your window.

Also a 7200RPM drive will give you a little extra edge in compile times, though modern 5400RPM drives do have a higher density now so it's not as big. For most uses you wouldn't notice it, but for compiling, there is a little difference. I got stuck with a 5400RPM drive, and do plan to eventually upgrade ([censored] 2010 error).

Just my $0.02.

[dr_st]

I guess my question is - are there any other people like me around here that have a 14.1" screen, and if so - is the reduction in resolution/pixel pitch justified by the smaller footprint and increased battery life?

That's a question nobody but yourself will be able to answer.

I am an owner of a Thinkpad T42 with a 15" 1400x1050 screen. You would probably find this resolution too low. In your case, I see number of reasons to go for the 15" UXGA 1600x1200 screens:

1) Since you define yourself as someone who "craves screen real estate", the more you can get - the better, and that is the maximum you can get on a Thinkpad.
2) The 15" screens are Flexview - offering better colors and full viewing angles, unlike the 14.1" screens.
3) You claim that battery life is not crucial to you. Yes, you will get better battery life with the 14.1" models, but even the 15" models, even when you run them on maximum brightness will give you better battery life than your current laptop.
4) The size/weight difference between 14.1" and 15" is noticeable, but not crucial. Even the 15" T-series laptop weighs less than most 14.1" laptops out there.

I don't really play that many games these days, but I do have to be able to run/debug projects I'm working on and so a big concern is shader compatibility. I looked up the FireGL T2, and it supports vertex/pixel shader 2.0, but I'm not sure what the cards offered on the 14.1" chassis are capable of. In the end, usually the newest graphics card is the best for me to get (which is a point for the 1600x1200 model.)

14"/15" does not make a difference here, because the same video cards can be got with models of both sizes. In the end, whether you get the T42/p with Radeon 9600 / FireGL T2 or the T43/p with Radeon X300 / FireGL V3200, you're going to have Shader 2.0 compatibility. Regarding performance in games, all four solutions should be adequate with the order of ranking being roughly X300 < 9600 < T2 < V3200 --> best.

my current laptop has a P4-M 2.6 GHz and is almost three years old, but I see that all the ThinkPads have much lower clock speeds. Am I missing something here?

Yeah, the newer laptops use Pentium M CPUs, which are far more efficient clock for clock than Pentium 4-M CPUs. I have a 1.8GHz P-M which is roughly twice as fast as my 1.8GHz P4-M, so do your calculations. Any Pentium M CPU from 1.6GHz and up should outperform your P4-M 2.6GHz (which, incidentally, is the fastest P4-M ever made). If you get something like 2GHz P-M, the difference will be easily noticeable. And like said by previous posters, the P-M CPUs will consume less power and heat up less.

[AlanHorne]

Thanks much for all of your replies, they have certainly helped me - I think what I have decided on is a T42, model 2379RKU.
( http://www5.pc.ibm.com/us/products.nsf/ ... p/_2379RKU )

With my wife's military EPP I can get it for roughly $2350 with 4-year depot service tacked on and no office suite. I figure I can pick up an educational MS Office somewhere else for cheap since I'm about to start my last semester of my M.S.

I'm sticking with the T42 because I have heard complaints about various aspects of the T43s - plus, the processors are a little cheaper (slower FSB.) Thanks for the tip on the processors - I didn't notice the subtle name difference between the P4-M and the P-M.

I think that if I choose anything but the 1600x1200 screen I'll be a little disappointed - and even if the 15" is a little bigger/heavier/more power-hungry than the 14.1", it's still a big improvement over my current machine in all of those aspects.

Again, thanks to everyone. Hopefully, I'll feel more welcome on the ThinkPads.com forum within the month.

[RonS]

Excellent choice! You will love that computer for years.