Advice on new T

[ajmccann]

I've been browsing...and thought maybe you experts would throw a little advice my way:

I last had a Thinkpad in 1994 - dx4 processor:) My current laptop is a PIII-400 Dell that I leave at school (I teach at a wifi-happy university...the laptop is a 3lb ls400 that I use for presentations and internet).

I have a desktop that I use for a wide variety of light computing: photoshop, MS access, dreamweaver, spreadsheets etc. I'm at my computer 5 to 10 hours a day, every day.

I had been spec-ing out T41s...and now the T42 just hit.

I want to replace my desktop and will use the the new laptop primarily in my house and some travel (the lightweight Dell will stay at my office so I don't have to carry a computer on my bike).

I figure on spending between $2k and $2.5k...it's not quite so much a money thing as getting the right machine. For instance, I've been reading some users concerns about the larger footprint of the 15".

So I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on T41 vs. T42, video RAM (32 or 64), footprint/weight, system RAM (is 512 enough?) etc.

I'm also curious why the T41 is being 'downgraded' to a Radeon 7500 rather than 9000 (not that I know what the difference is).

On my desk I'll run dual monitor with a 19" CRT, so I also wondered if the resolution has to match on both monitors (i.e. do I have to run 1400x1000 on the CRT...which isn't possible...).

Thanks for the help in advance.

[K. Eng]

I can answer your questions

15" v. 14": If you absolutely need a lot of pixels, get the 15" 1600x1200 screen. The 15" screen is also a FlexView display, which has ultra wide viewing angles and better brightness & color than a normal LCD panel. If you don't need this, the 14" SXGA+ screen should be fine. The XGA panel is a good choice if you have poor vision like me. I don't know about the footprint of the machine, but from the pictures I have seen the 15" models aren't that much bigger than the 14" ones.

32 MB v. 64 MB video: This only matters if you play 3D games or run CAD programs. More memory is necessary especially in games with lots of textures.

Radeon 7500 v. 9000: The Radeon 7500 has hardware support for DirrectX7 and a 2x3 pipeline design (2 pixel pipelines, 3 textures units per pipe). The Radeon 9000 has DirrectX8.1 hardware support and a 4x1 pipeline design. In practice, the Radeon 9000 is about 25% faster than the 7500 and can support far more 3D visual effects. From what I understand the 7500 consumes slighly less power than the 9000.

The resolution doesn't have to match if you run dual monitors. The ATI hydravision software manages this pretty well.

[ajmccann]

Thanks for the reply...

I do not want to play games on my thinkpad...

Glad to hear you can run different resolutions.

So I still wonder why the new T's have gone *down* in 32mb video...from 9000 to 7500.

[csv96]

The video cards have NOT been downgraded. T42's come with one of three video card options. You can choose a model with the card you want.

32mb ATI Mobility Radeon 7500
64mb ATI Mobility Radeon 9600
128mb ATI FireGL T2 (Radeon 9600)

The 32mb ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 and 64mb ATI FireGL (Radeon 9000) are no longer available except on T41's and T40p's.

[Mofongo]

The Radeon 9600 is 2.5 times as fast as the 9000, plus it has DirectX 9 support. Even if you don't game alot, over the next few years the slowness of the 9000 will be noticable to you (more so than the difference in video RAM). There are "reliable" rumors that the next version of Windows will require DirectX 9 support. Now this is probably a couple of years off, but if you plan on keeping your Thinkpad this long, this may be a consideration.

There are a few T42 models that have the Radeon 9600 that are in your price range.

Mofongo

[hhy2k]

I have to disagree with the the following:

"The 9600 is 2.5x faster than the 9000"

I have a 9000 and It scores 7600 points on 3Dmark01. A 9600 scores about 9000 points out of the box; this test uses features both cards have. On 3Dmark03 the ATI 9000 scores 1200 and the 9600 scores double. Even this is not 2.5 times. This test has some directx 9.0 features. I think it all depends what you use the chip for. In heavy 3Dgaming application I never heard about more than 30-40% FPS increase from a 9600 than a 9000. Sure if I run only tests with features the 9000 does not have, it'll give me a significant difference, however in gaming performance with some common sense this is not the case as all these features just a small part of the games.

my dime[/quote]

[awolfe63]

Get the 2373-3VU. It is an educational model that has everything you need in your price range with DVD-burning, the largest available disk, and good graphics/speed/memory/warranty.