T61 graphics

Message

ctgilles · #1 Post by **ctgilles** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:16 pm

I am selling my T43p and getting a T61.

However, I still have some questions:
What performance has the Intel GMA X3100 GM965 on the 15.4"?
What performance has the NV Quadro 140m on the 14.1"?

I am still unsure of screensize, but I definately want a decent graphics card to be able to play some games (normal resolution, no crazy detailed settings)
Can anyone advise?

dsfinley · #2 Post by **dsfinley** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:59 pm

I can't translate these 3D performance numbers into a prediction of the actual gaming experience (I've blasted an asteroid or two on cloudy observing runs, but that's about it....) but here are some results I found when comparing the two graphics options. Judicious googling of the graphics ID along with names of some of your favorite games should no doubt produce plenty of actual in-play reviews.

Per http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Gra ... 844.0.html

nVidia NVS 140M 3DMark03: 5244
intel GMA X3100 3DMark03: 1726

From http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871 ... 958,00.asp
NVS 140M: 3DMark06: 1186
GMA X3100: 3DMark06: 516

The tests are described here: http://www.futuremark.com/products/

Meanwhile, may I broaden this conversation a bit with a question that may be applicable, to wit:

Does anyone have any information about possible ongoing problems, perhaps to do with nVidia-Santa Rosa issues?

Lenovo has pulled the XP option from the custom build listings for T61/R61s with nVidia graphics, and is now working on some XP/nVidia problems: http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=84

If you search the global IBM site for (FX) 570M, the short listing refers to the NVS 140M + FX 570M driver, but following the link, you get to the May 25 driver which is stated to only be applicable to the 140M.

On the Dell side, the D630 and D830 were announced with an NVS 135M discrete graphics option. If you do a google search of Dell's site, though, none of the current custom build pages include the 135M as an option, but google's cached build pages from before mid-May do!

What's going on?

sb37 · #3 Post by **sb37** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:34 pm

Keep in mind that *proper* x3100 drivers haven't been released yet by Intel. These should substantially increase 3d performance when they do get released, and will bring directx 10 compatibility. Release is slated for August, although nobody really trusts Intel's driver release dates at this point.

codwif · #4 Post by **codwif** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 5:43 pm

Well, I have the nvidia chipset T61, and playing WoW at full resolution is no problem. The only other game I've tried so far is Civilization IV and that was smooth as well. If I find time to try anything else, I'll let you know.

Tholek · #5 Post by **Tholek** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 12:54 am

Will WoW even work on the X3100?

ctgilles · #6 Post by **ctgilles** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 1:50 am

The Intel drivers are utter crap (especially support and Linux)

sokos · #7 Post by **sokos** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:30 am

Tholek wrote:Will WoW even work on the X3100?

Generally, embeded Intel GPU's are crap for games (run at a decent resolution and have some essential effects on)

If you want to play some games on your free time, go for the Nvidia GPU. Just my €1

#8 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:36 am

dsfinley wrote:Per http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Gra ... 844.0.html

nVidia NVS 140M 3DMark03: 5244
intel GMA X3100 3DMark03: 1726

For some perspective from the T60:

ATI X1300 3DMark03: 3200
ATI FireGL v5250 (aka X1700) 3DMark03: 7200 (!)

and the X31's ATI Mobility Radeon doesn't even have a benchmark, but I fully expect it to be somewhere well down in three digits.

meditate2001 · #9 Post by **meditate2001** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:38 am

at notebookcheck.net the nvidia quadro is listed as an directx 10 device, is this correct ???

Tholek · #10 Post by **Tholek** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:13 am

sokos wrote:
Tholek wrote:Will WoW even work on the X3100?
Generally, embeded Intel GPU's are crap for games (run at a decent resolution and have some essential effects on)

If you want to play some games on your free time, go for the Nvidia GPU. Just my €1

Oh, I know. I just wanted to know, as an example, if it would run at all, even at a lesser level.

#11 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:22 am

Tholek wrote:Will WoW even work on the X3100?

WoW even supports the old GMA 900, so if it's not supported today, I would really expect that soon. It's not as graphic-intensive as some other games, and the X3100 has respectable 3D support now.

jjesusfreak01 · #12 Post by **jjesusfreak01** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:58 am

meditate2001 wrote:at notebookcheck.net the nvidia quadro is listed as an directx 10 device, is this correct ???

Some models are, but some arent. The Quadro FX1600, 570, and 360 are, and I have heard that the NVS140 is based on the newer processor. Its probably the equivalent of an 8200 or 8400. Keep in mind the X3100 is also DX10 compliant (when the drivers are released), so being DX10 compliant really says nothing other than it has a unified shader architecture, and supports the DX10 features.

BTW, it is rumored the T61ps will ship with FX570 cards, which I believe are the equivalent of either 8600s or 8800s (more likely the former).

#13 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:53 am

jjesusfreak01 wrote:BTW, it is rumored the T61ps will ship with FX570 cards, which I believe are the equivalent of either 8600s or 8800s (more likely the former).

The FX 570 specs (128-bit interface, 22.4 GB/s) match the 8600 GT very closely.

agarza · #14 Post by **agarza** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 10:34 am

If you want to play quite new games go for the 140M. T61p video card would be very powerful, this should sound like a biased opinion, but I think NVIDIA cards perform much much better than ATI cards. And I think Lenovo switched to NVIDIA because now ATI is part of AMD, and Thinkpads do not use AMD processors, right

Dead1nside · #15 Post by **Dead1nside** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:04 pm

With regards to Nvidia cards outperforming ATI cards, it's all relative. Last generation (X1000, 7xxx) they were pretty much even but AMD's acquisition of ATI has led to some growing pains and teething problems as they unify a strategy, I expect that ATI will crawl back into the lead in the next generation.

Nvidia seems to have won crucial business from HP, Lenovo, Apple - AMD's in trouble, it's not the leader in any market now.

The 140M seems to perform almost as well as the FireGl 5250 based on 3dMark 05 scores.

I expect that the 570M 256MB will be very fast, capable of playing the latest games.

Troels · #16 Post by **Troels** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:07 pm

Official statement (source: http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=80 , Matt Kohutt, May 15th 2:54PM) states that Lenovo liked nVidias road-map better, than what ATi has in sight. At the point where they decided which GPU solution to use, ATi had just cancelled their March or April presentation of the R600, because it was not finished.
As a large company like Lenovo or Apple, one would choose whichever is more low-cost and will not have supply issues. nVidia has had the 8800 GT for quite a while and even released a budget version. So that would have been the ideal choice afterall, since they know what they were doing with their mobile chipsets. Goes to show what happens if one doesn't reach the dead-line.

That being said, the V5200 and V5250 is still faster than the 140M if you don't need DX10. But yes i agree, nVidia does offer great performance but have not been keen in implementing their mobile monsters in small form factors.

Dead1nside · #17 Post by **Dead1nside** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:18 pm

The V5200/5250 is faster, but by a significantly reduced margin. It makes the 140M a very attractive option, I wander how powerful the T61p's GPU will be.

#18 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:24 pm

Dead1nside wrote:The 140M seems to perform almost as well as the FireGl 5250 based on 3dMark 05 scores.

Whats the 3DMark05 score for the 140M? Notebookcheck only lists a 3DMark03 score for it.

jjesusfreak01 · #19 Post by **jjesusfreak01** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 4:07 pm

Dead1nside wrote:The V5200/5250 is faster, but by a significantly reduced margin. It makes the 140M a very attractive option, I wander how powerful the T61p's GPU will be.

I could have sworn I saw a chart that showed the v5250s scored near a 1600 in 3dmk06, and the 140s about 1800...

Dead1nside · #20 Post by **Dead1nside** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 4:26 pm

Perhaps, I was referencing 3dmark05 scores.

#21 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:10 pm

Dead1nside wrote:Perhaps, I was referencing 3dmark05 scores.

Where can I find that?

#22 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:13 pm

jjesusfreak01 wrote:
Dead1nside wrote:The V5200/5250 is faster, but by a significantly reduced margin. It makes the 140M a very attractive option, I wander how powerful the T61p's GPU will be.
I could have sworn I saw a chart that showed the v5250s scored near a 1600 in 3dmk06, and the 140s about 1800...

See also my post above:

nVidia NVS 140M 3DMark03: 5244
ATI FireGL v5250 (aka X1700) 3DMark03: 7200

I have not yet been able to fin 3DMark05 scores for the 140M.

Dead1nside · #23 Post by **Dead1nside** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:48 pm

I had a quick look in my history but was unable to find it at present sorry. It's a big long list of mobile GPUs benchmarks. If I read it correctly it indicated that the FireGL 5250 scored 5500 whereas the Quadro 140M scored 5000. But then again it didn't list what the other components were.

I'll have another look tomorrow.

EDIT: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

I used the 5200 and the NVS 140M, they're only 250 or so apart, but that does not go in line with the FireGL Mobility 5000 getting 6000

EDIT2: I was also looking at the wrong column, the only data that exists for the 140M is 3dmark03 benchmarks, not 3dmark05 as I previously stated.

T61 graphics

T61 graphics

T61 graphics

Re: T61 graphics

Who is online