Is it still worth to buy T60?

[radiator]

I'm wondering is it worth to buy (very cheap) T60. 100% working. All I need it for is net browsing.

[Dawnbreaker]

I'd totally go for it. T60 are still very useful machines for everyday tasks like browsing the net, watching a movie, or skype chats.

[Medessec]

T60s are a brilliant buy. If it runs Windows, all parts are working(no odd, funny noises, no slowness or boot errors, glitches, etc.) and it's battery holds a charge, then it's a steal at anything less than $70, a good buy at $100, and reasonable at $150, depending on condition. ATI-graphics ones are far more capable and go for a bit more.

The 14" models will be mostly cheaper and nicer to own, they have mostly the same hardware performance-wise, and no other disadvantages other than screen size and options. Parts for them are also cheaper and easier to find, and most consider the smaller size a huge leap on mobility.

ALL T60s will do okay web-browsing. However if you want to be totally sure, or if you watch a lot of HD videos and play Flash games, I'd buy an ATI-graphics one. Beware of the higher power consumption and hotter temperature profile, and different cooling parts(if your fan fails, or goes noisy.) Most will agree 1024x768 is too small of a resolution for web-browsing, if you don't want that small of a resolution, be sure to steer clear of XGA-screened T60s.

[dr_st]

However if you want to be totally sure, or if you watch a lot of HD videos and play Flash games, I'd buy an ATI-graphics one.

To be honest, I am not sure the ATI GPU does anything to help video/flash decoding. Maybe only the FireGL versions on the T60p do, and that's a maybe.

A higher-end CPU may provide more benefit overall.

With that said, the vast majority of the nice configurations with 15" IPS screens are ATI anyway.

[86turbodsl]

I don't believe the ATI chip does much on flash or decoding. At least it didn't with any installs of Windows XP or Linux i've tried.

[axur-delmeria]

I don't believe the ATI chip does much on flash or decoding.

It doesn't. Only the Radeon HD 2400 series and later had the Unified Video Decoder (UVD).

[jcvjcvjcvjcv]

Yes, but the Intel Graphics GPU will leach bandwidth from the rest of your system, so that's why it still might make sense to get one with the ATI card: to reduce CPU load and increase RAM bandwidth.

[ajkula66]

Honestly, for sheer browsing almost any *60 series unit will do just fine. I'd stay away from models with Core Solo CPUs, everything else is still passable.

[Medessec]

I don't think I've ever seen a Core Solo T60 ever, out of all the T60s I've ever owned... are they any bit particularly rare? Or are they just not passed around a lot?

I would agree though. Modern software really loves the processing headroom of two separate cores, it lets your OS run smoother while other CPU-intensive software(nowadays... your web browser) just gets passed on to the second core. A single core working all by itself kinda chokes everything, and the Core Solos tend to be very low clocked too...

[Penultimate]

I have been surprised to find that all of my (used) T60's have not only worked fine, but all had perfectly usable batteries, and have been 100% functional even given their age. Two I got on Ebay, and these I specifically wanted discrete graphics (ATI) and a 15.4" display.

I acquired 3 more T60's as a lot recently, just because it was too cheap not to buy them, and once again every single one is fully functional and even all the included batteries work great.
What is really surprising to me is, 2 of the recent lot I picked up are 'Intel' graphics models, and they support 'Aero' in Win7. These are not even maxxed out on RAM, they only have 2 gb included in them.

These are built very durable in my opinion. Something I noted is, two of my recent units are both manufacture dated " 07/10 " yet one has a top cover and palm rest that is marked "IBM Thinkpad" and the other has a silver logo that reads "Thinkpad T Series" and has no IBM logo, despite the fact they are both made in Oct. 2007.

[jcvjcvjcvjcv]

Then those are rather new T60's. My T61 is older

[RealBlackStuff]

It is not unheard off that lids or palmrests (or other items) are replaced with younger/older matching parts.
And the IBM or Lenovo stickers are identical in size and available on e.g. eBay, so swap them if you prefer.

[ZaZ]

I had an old R60e with a IPS LCD upgrade until last year until the motherboard fried. It was still a capable performer for day to day usage. Toss a SSD and whatever OS flavor you like, personally I used Linux, and it'll do just fine.

[underclocker]

I don't think I've ever seen a Core Solo T60 ever, out of all the T60s I've ever owned... are they any bit particularly rare? Or are they just not passed around a lot?

I don't think that the % of Core Solo T60's was very high. Out of dozens of T60's owned, I had one.

On a side note, at one time I considered building the lowest power/longest battery life T60 possible, and that would have included the T1200 1.5 GHz Core Solo CPU from a Mac Mini --> http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/m ... s_1.5.html (among other slow/low power options, like the Intel graphics mobo, XGA panel, SSD, etc.)

For general computing, with an SSD, I doubt that you could tell the difference between a Core Solo and Core Duo. The 14" T60 was one of the best, most reliable and solid ThinkPads made.

[Medessec]

For general computing, with an SSD, I doubt that you could tell the difference between a Core Solo and Core Duo.

You think so? I understand the SSD looses up an OS pretty good and removes quite a few choke points... but I'd still imagine a Core Solo would struggle with some modern web apps and media decoding. I can't attest to my hunches, so I'd have to trust your experience. Which is fair enough:

The 14" T60 was one of the best, most reliable and solid ThinkPads made.

Because I completely agree with this statement. Even though the 15" T42/T43 was extremely good, any and all 14" T60s I've come across can go from rock bottom to good as new, in the matter of a few hours or even 30 minutes with a seasoned tinkerer. Motherboard issues rarely happen, ATI burnouts usually only happen when the cooling wasn't properly set up. The thing comes apart like legos, and with much less screws, unlike the T43.

It may be true that you can find any odd T60 laptop on top of a pile of old, cruddy corporate laptops at a recycle center... and any normal person would look at it as garbage. But... by god; pick it up, brush it off, plug everything back in, install Windows on it, and watch it go.

[jcvjcvjcvjcv]

I don't think I've ever seen a Core Solo T60 ever, out of all the T60s I've ever owned... are they any bit particularly rare? Or are they just not passed around a lot?

I don't think that the % of Core Solo T60's was very high. Out of dozens of T60's owned, I had one.

On a side note, at one time I considered building the lowest power/longest battery life T60 possible, and that would have included the T1200 1.5 GHz Core Solo CPU from a Mac Mini --> http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/m ... s_1.5.html (among other slow/low power options, like the Intel graphics mobo, XGA panel, SSD, etc.)

For general computing, with an SSD, I doubt that you could tell the difference between a Core Solo and Core Duo. The 14" T60 was one of the best, most reliable and solid ThinkPads made.

Are you sure about that? Generally the cheaper CPU's had less power saving features, meaning their idle power draw would be higher. At least in the time of the Pentium M that was true.

[Medessec]

Generally the cheaper CPU's had less power saving features, meaning their idle power draw would be higher.

Well... The Core Solo was merely a Core Duo CPU, with one of the two cores turned off. It also has the older core that is more closely related to the Pentium M, so you may be correct... But the Yonah CPUs overall are pretty inefficient and old, compared to Merom CPUs, which didn't have a Core Solo variant.

For power consumption, you'd have to compare the Yonah Core Solo(T1300) to the other Yonah T60 CPUs, the Core Duos(T2300E, T2400, T2500). As for the newer T60s with Merom CPUs(Core 2 Duo), you'd be looking at the really low-clocked Merom CPUs(T5500, T5600) if you wanted a low-power T60. If I was making a low-power T60, I'd probably use those CPUs, instead of the Yonah Core Solo. Core 2 Duos do a much better job of saving juice than the older Core Duos.

[automobus]

old, compared to Merom CPUs, which didn't have a Core Solo variant.

Core 2 Solo U2100 is from Merom family.

[Medessec]

Okay, correction.

T60s can't take a Merom Core Solo.

The U2100 is a BGA, Ultra-low voltage spec anyways... where the T1300 Core Solo is just a cheaper, lower-performance full laptop CPU.

[Theokretes]

I'd totally go for it. T60 are still very useful machines for everyday tasks like browsing the net, watching a movie, or skype chats.

T60s can do way more than just everyday tasks-- including 3DSMax from the FireGL chip which works quite well, and reasonable amount of games too. Although the firmware of the FireGLs is of course made for CAD and not necessarily gaming.

I can run skype on my Pentium 1 at 233 Mhz running windows 98 and browse any webpage with opera on it. You do not need a powerful computer to do that stuff. Of course watching a movie it's important to have a decoder on a pentium 1 (like the Matrox Rainbow runner), but I'm just using that as a case-in-point haha.

[dr_st]

I can run skype on my Pentium 1 at 233 Mhz running windows 98 and browse any webpage with opera on it. You do not need a powerful computer to do that stuff.

If by browsing you mean "just get it to render, even if it takes 10 minutes", then yes. If you actually care about pages loading reasonably fast, I beg to differ...

[jcvjcvjcvjcv]

Don't feed the troll

[underclocker]

...As for the newer T60s with Merom CPUs(Core 2 Duo), you'd be looking at the really low-clocked Merom CPUs(T5500, T5600) if you wanted a low-power T60. If I was making a low-power T60, I'd probably use those CPUs, instead of the Yonah Core Solo. Core 2 Duos do a much better job of saving juice than the older Core Duos.

Indeed. I thought of this and have built/upgraded many T60's with the T5500 - what a great chip - fast and cool.

However, The max TDP is actually lower on the Core Solo T1200, which means that the T5500 could draw more power, and thus hasten battery consumption, see below;

Core Solo T1200 --> Max TDP: 27W
Core 2 Duo T5500 --> Max TDP: 34W

Even a Core 2 Solo T1350 had a max TDP of 31W (not even sure it would work in a T60).

(Understanding Max TDP: Typically the higher the TDP or a graphics card or CPU is the greater amount of power consumed by the part.)

Maybe we need a forum contest to build some low power T60's and conduct battery rundown tests.

[Medessec]

Maybe we need a forum contest to build some low power T60's and conduct battery rundown tests.

I'm down.

It'd actually be an interesting experiment... because modern web content usually throws old CPUs into a hard time, which is where the Core Solos would shine. Most web apps would still run smooth too. Now- if it's just being left idle, or not using a lot of CPU, the T5500/T5600 will win by a long shot. But it may not be that case all the time... this would be quite the contest!

[ajkula66]

I've got two machines from this era running 24/7/365...both on Windows 7 Pro 32.

My twin boys' R60F with Intel integrated graphics, T7200, 3GB RAM and a SSD is quite snappy for daily use. However, even very light games (Angry Birds) will not play on it. But this thing is just dead quiet 98% of the time. You have to really push the machine - open 15 tabs in FireFox or something like that - to get the fan going.

My daughter's 14" T60 (X1400/T7400/3GB/SSD) is a laptop that doesn't show its age whatsoever. Yet. I guess that's the reason why she refuses to give it up, even though I've thrown much newer machines (T410, HP 8440p) at her. As many have said, there is something about the 14" SXGA+ format that just feels perfect.

So yes, for the time being *60 generation is still a very acceptable daily driver IMO and impossible to beat at today's prices.

[Sydspapa]

I picked up a T60 off eBay around 6 months ago for $70 bucks free shipping and it is my daily driver. Goes everywhere with me. I have a T61 and the wider screen is nice to have but my T60 just feels right. It came without a HDD but I threw a 150GB drive in it and a fresh install of W7, bumped the RAM to 4GIG, only 3 usable, and it does everything I need it to do. I am running Spotify right now while browsing and IM'ing with LYNC 2013 with work with no lag or issues. It is an ATI machine. Love it.

[Cigarguy]

Love my T60 Thinkpads, by far my favourite and is my daily, monthly and weekly machines.

[Theokretes]

I can run skype on my Pentium 1 at 233 Mhz running windows 98 and browse any webpage with opera on it. You do not need a powerful computer to do that stuff.

If by browsing you mean "just get it to render, even if it takes 10 minutes", then yes. If you actually care about pages loading reasonably fast, I beg to differ...

Actually, it works better than you'd think. The Pentium 1 has 10/100 onboard so it's reasonably fast for data transfer. I also have it stuffed with some rare EDO DIMM memory (384 MB total), along with opera instead of IE4, so that helps too, especially with things like CSS and whatnot.
I'll be honest, it worked better than even I would have expected. Most people wouldn't even believe I got skype working, but I did. It's pretty cool because I can pop into a DOS game while chatting to someone on skype...

Don't feed the troll

In what way is that "trolling"? I was simply explaining how it actually is possible to do basic tasks with not a whole lot of processing power... it's an example, not a statement.

I fixed up an old R series thinkpad with windows 7 x86 on 1GB of RAM, and the folks who I gave it to were impressed by its speeds. You just have to know what the person needs out of the machine, and how to configure a computer to run fast.

My point is... a T60 has WAY more power than just to "browse the web". They're seriously awesome machines.

[DRobinson]

I don't have anything quite as old as Theokretes that connects to the internet currently. But, I just fired up my 300MHz 600E with win2k and opera to post this post. Connected via cell phone wifi hotspot and pcmcia wireless g card. It is not a hot rod, but I can certainly surf the net well enough. I think even a T4x is still a reasonable daily driver machine for average use these days. A T60 is a screamer for a lot of people. I recently sold a 1.83/2GB/SXGA+ t60 to someone who had never owned a laptop before. They thought the machine was the best thing ever. Honestly, unless you are doing serious computation stuff or gaming, you will not need anything more. I need to get some dinos on the net.

[dr_st]

Actually, it works better than you'd think. The Pentium 1 has 10/100 onboard so it's reasonably fast for data transfer. I also have it stuffed with some rare EDO DIMM memory (384 MB total), along with opera instead of IE4, so that helps too, especially with things like CSS and whatnot.
I'll be honest, it worked better than even I would have expected. Most people wouldn't even believe I got skype working, but I did. It's pretty cool because I can pop into a DOS game while chatting to someone on skype...

While I fully agree that it might work better than one would expect after some tweaking, I still don't believe it can be made to work adequately. Reason: I have such an old system myself, even one that's quite a bit more powerful (AMD K6 @475MHz), and I've even tried Opera on that machine, and still the browsing experience was far from acceptable, except on very low-resource sites.

We must realize that the internet itself has gotten much heavier this past decades. Whereas once it was more or less 99% plain HTML / text, nowadays it's plenty of complex scripts, frames and other stuff that make rendering more complicated and thus resource-demanding.

Getting Skype to work is cool, though. Although just for playing a DOS game while chatting, it's simpler to just use DOSBox on a modern PC.