T61 15.4 Wide with Discrete or Integrated Graphics? (Pic)

[Ed H]

I just ordered a T61 with the Intel GMA x3100 integrated graphics and am wondering if I made the right decision. I will be using it with Vista Home Premium for business apps as well as with photo editing software like photoshop elements. It will most likely never be used for 3D gaming. I can cancel the order and redo with the NVIDIA Quadro NVS140 graphics if I would be better off.

Anyone using the integrated graphics that wishes they had the NVIDIA setup?

Thanks

[Pascal_TTH]

No need to change your order. Intel X3100 is good enough for your use.

[ryengineer]

If power consumption (battery life) was not an issue, you should've gone with discrete graphics.

[Volker]

2D graphics has stagnated for years --- all chipsets are basically faster than anybody needs. The only area where performance still matters is 3D-acceleration.

Photoshop uses 3d hardware to accelerate some functions. The nv140 is faster but has less texture memory. Its definitely better for games but I'm not sure if it is the better choice for PS.

In any case you need an external calibrated monitor for serious photo work.

[Ed H]

Well, I canceled the order the day after it was placed intending to re-order with the discrete graphics card. Lenovo kept telling me that it takes several days for the cancellation to take effect and just sit tight. Now I find out that it did not get canceled and it has shipped.

So, the question is whether it is worth it to return it and re-order or not.

Also, am I correct in assuming that the T61 Integrated graphics will run Vista Home Premium OK?

Thanks

[hdahl]

All modern software is 3D, it's because all modern software is made using Windows Presentation Foundation which is always 3D and ordinary 2D looking user interfaces are displayed using 3D mechanics.


Best regards,

Henrik Dahl

[Volker]

modern software is made using Windows Presentation Foundation which is always 3D

Though there is still software fallback for unsupported cards where you'll run effectively in 2d mode.

In any case, both the integrated and discrete graphics choices do provide 3d acceleration, and I guess that both can render the desktop many times faster than the eye can see. The 3d speed gets critical when you need many overlapping polygons and render shadow effects, that is, 3d games.

[hdahl]

modern software is made using Windows Presentation Foundation which is always 3D

Though there is still software fallback for unsupported cards where you'll run effectively in 2d mode.

In any case, both the integrated and discrete graphics choices do provide 3d acceleration, and I guess that both can render the desktop many times faster than the eye can see. The 3d speed gets critical when you need many overlapping polygons and render shadow effects, that is, 3d games.

Yes, this I completely agree in. In fact showing 2D UI using 3D mechanics is typically much faster than showing 2D UI using 2D mechanics. It's obvious that flimsy 3D hardware support may ruin this. It's probably also very likely that business line software will become much more 3D tomorrow, however it's obviously not relevant to the notebook of today, because it'll obviously be old school in a year or so, within which probably only the strongest software suppliers will manage to complete the transitioning.


Best regards,

Henrik Dahl

[Volker]

What do you mean by 3D business apps? A 3-dimensional spreadsheet? As much as I like eye candy, I don't see any useful application of anything 3d in, say, a word processor. After all the underlying problem (printing something on a piece of paper) is inherently 2-dimensional.

[SHoTTa35]

i would keep the intel and cancel the nvidia. You have no need for it since you said you don't play games. Business applications wont benefit from 3D at all. Photoshop would have liked the nvidia more i think but i would assume any serious photoshopper would have an advanced dock and put a PCI-E card in there and run it on a 24" LCD calibrated to the sweet spot. Since i don't think you're that much of a serious photoshopper i'd say the Thinkpad T61 with Intel is more than you'll need. The intel card can handle Vista great no problem. The WEI scores are i think 3.5 compared to the nvidia which is 3.4. My ATI Radeon 9600 64MB gets 2.0 for Windows AERO and a 3.5 for 3D Business and Gaming Graphics. I tihnk 3.5 is great enough and this is with an old Thinkpad T42. Your T61 even with the Intel will get about the same as mine or even better.

here some examples:

T61 766416U

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7300 @ 2.00GHz: 4.9
Memory (RAM) 0.98 GB: 4.5
Graphics NVIDIA Quadro NVS 140M: 4.0
Gaming graphics 375 MB Total available graphics memory: 4.6
Primary hard disk 17GB Free (37GB Total): 4.4
Windows Vista (TM) Business

and Intel x3100

My stats:

Memory 4.8
Graphics 3.4
Gaming 3.4
hard disk 5.0

I haven't got the hang of it yet to know how good that is.

[Tragik]

Personally, I preffer integrated graphics over descrete. it will allow battery to run longer, it will run most of the applications. the only down is in low resolution.

[stator]

I purchased the T61 with the Intel GMA, and like you wondered if I should cancel, or return. However, I kept it because of the battery life and there does not seem to be any speed concerns for me.

I am not a gamer, but mostly business apps and some graphics for business.

It is probably better to put the money for the 4MB cache CPU first.

[Pascal_TTH]

Two days ago, I buy a Lenovo 3000 N100 for 480 € (650 $). It comes with Windows Vista, Celeron M530, 1 x 512 MB, Intel GMA 950, Hitachi 80 GB 5400rpm.




After I had a second 512 MB memory module, it performs very good (perhaps too good) :



I really wonder about Vista performance numbers...

MOD EDIT: Picture warning added to the 1st post.

[Volker]

The intel X3100 (integrated) graphics uses up to 224MB of system RAM, a.k.a. shared memory. So adding memory lets the computer partition off more ram as video memory, thats why you see a speed increase.

Now I'm speculating, but Business graphics (2.0->5.1) probably just counts the video ram. Memory speed (2.9->4.5) is increased because 2x512 can run in dual-channel; speed gain ~ 8% but the vista performance index is apparently widely non-linear Finally, game graphics (3.0->3.1) increases minimally because the video ram speed also increased.

[danny_isr]

so basically it's faster then the Nvidia FX570m 128M yeah that makes you wonder about this benchmark .....

[baldingunixgeek]

I have the intel x3100 in a 15.4" T61; I've been quite happy with it. Under linux I can run the openGL compositing window managers (compiz/beryl) for eye candy with excellent performance. I've also tried running some older games, and they work fine, though I'm not much of a gamer. I get better than 4 hours of battery life (9-cell) with wifi on and 50% brightness (again, running linux). The intel has an actively developing open-source linux driver (vs. nvidia) and that was important to me.

I think you'll be happy with your choice! All in all, this T61 is big step up from my old R40 -- stouter build, cooler, quieter, etc. Even the screen (LG), though it does have some of the oft-mentioned backlight bleeding, looks pretty good to me.

[Volker]

I completely agree with baldingunixgeek... I'm also running linux x86_64 on a 15" T61 (*), and compiz renders the desktop at around 100fps. Nice and smooth eye candy

edit: (*) and Intel X3100 integrated graphics, of course.

[Ed H]

Thanks for all the advice. I am going to stay with the integrated graphics that I ordered. Should have it in a few days. I'll report back on how it is working out.