Thinkpads Forum

Hey all, I am doing massive upgrades all this week...

I have the ATI Fire(Open)GL V5200 w/256MB of dedicated VRAM. Two questions: Is that baby upgradeable to 512MB at all? I am guessing no, but it doesn't hurt to ask...

Second, and more importantly, can I SWAP IT OUT with the laptop I have. Specs are in my sig, but what isn't is the fact that it is NOT embedded in the motherboard, which sort of suggests to me that it might be upgradeable?

I also want to upgrade from a Core Duo to a Core 2 Duo.

Speaking of that, please see my CPU thread here:

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 247#377247

Thanks again to all!

1. No.

2. You would need to swap out the whole motherboard. The graphics card is soldered onto the system board.

Isn't the FireGL v5200 able to use another 256mb of system ram, therefore having up to a total 512mb of vram available?

Yes but these video chipsets share system RAM. You can't physically add another 256MB of VRAM.

the video card is built into the motherboard as well as the vram for it. For extra RAM when needed it will borrow some from the main RAM. This isn't shared RAM as before with the old integrated GPUs. They only keep it when they need it and release when it's not being used.

Oh man...Alright, so I'll stick with it. It's the T60-series' best card and I'm complaining about it...I officially have to get a life. This is ridiculous...

Under XP, the limit of what the FireGL, or any other card can "borrow" from the regular RAM is another 256MB for a total of 512MB. In Vista, it is 1 full GB. All by way of Hypermemory, correct?? Mine ALWAYS takes a full 768MB from my RAM. Why is that? There must be a way to either turn that off completely, or at least lower what you want to give it. Is there?

I don't really care, as I have 4GB installed (yes, I know, 3GB is a limitation on this motherboard or whatever). By the way, it still shows 30-40% RAM used AFTER I went from 2-4GB's Same as BEFORE I put 2 more GB's Why, whyyyyy?

I re-rated Vista's WEI, and it showed 4.9 both BEFORE as well as AFTER the installation. I did check the BIOS, and it displays 4,096MB, and Vista 32 shows 3GB, and 3070MB somewhere else. Is 3GB a Vista 32 limitation? I know Vista 64, which I hopefully will have installed by this weekend, "WANTS" 4GB, and the dual channel part will make use about 8-10% of the last GB. I read that from another thread a while ago...So what's the deal here? Same (or at least VERY similar) RAM usage after DOUBLING it, and even if it only "sees" 3GB, that's still 50% more!??? And what's up with the WEI index of not changing from 4.9? Isn't 5.9 the highest???

Thanks guys!!!!

Crunch wrote:[snip]It's the T60-series' best card and I'm complaining about it...I officially have to get a life. This is ridiculous...[snip]

No it's not. The newer T60p's have the FireGL V5250...

Crunch wrote: Under XP, the limit of what the FireGL, or any other card can "borrow" from the regular RAM is another 256MB for a total of 512MB. In Vista, it is 1 full GB. All by way of Hypermemory, correct?? Mine ALWAYS takes a full 768MB from my RAM. Why is that? There must be a way to either turn that off completely, or at least lower what you want to give it. Is there?

I don't really care, as I have 4GB installed (yes, I know, 3GB is a limitation on this motherboard or whatever). By the way, it still shows 30-40% RAM used AFTER I went from 2-4GB's Same as BEFORE I put 2 more GB's Why, whyyyyy?

The 3GB limit is a limit set by Lenovo. They allocate 1GB of RAM for addressing space irregardless of what you have plugged in. Fact is oneday you might need all 3 USB ports and firewire and PCI and all that. The BIOS does that on bootup, it checks what's installed and therefore allocate stuff but you'd have to reboot to get that. Instead of doing that, Lenovo just said 1GB flat and that's that.

As for Hypermemory, as i said before, it shares the RAM when needed. When it shows a certain about "shared" it's because that's the amount it CAN borrow, NOT the amount it's using. If you're just using Word then the card will just use it's normal VRAM to run a 2D desktop/applications. Once you fireup some sorta of 3D Application or CAD or something then the card will "borrow" up to that amount from memory. It does NOT grab that amount all at once, only UP to that amount.

As for Vista still still showing 30-40% of RAM usage is because it saw you had more to use. When you have 512MB of RAM Vista turns off a lot of stuff (including AERO) by default in an attempt to use less RAM. When you have more it turns them back on and uses the RAM instead of the pagefile which is what makes the system so slow with low RAM. So when Vista saw you had 4GB to use then it goes hey, well now i can turn on this and stop using the pagefile for that service/program. I can load it directly into the memory. What's the point of having 4GB of RAM and let the OS force itself only 256MB of it only while leaving the rest free to sit idle? Unused RAM is money WASTED!

Now for the WEI stuff, because you put in 4GB of RAM doesn't mean your computer can do stuff faster. RAM Speed determines the WEI scores, not the amount of RAM you have. Surely goin from 512MB to 2GB will show a difference in speed (probably cuz of the density of the RAM therefore faster somewhat) but putting in 8GB of RAM still wouldn't give you 5.9 if your RAM isn't that fast. 5.9 is the highest but only certain RAM get that i guess.

Crunch wrote:I did check the BIOS, and it displays 4,096MB, and Vista 32 shows 3GB, and 3070MB somewhere else. Is 3GB a Vista 32 limitation? I know Vista 64, which I hopefully will have installed by this weekend, "WANTS" 4GB, and the dual channel part will make use about 8-10% of the last GB. I read that from another thread a while ago...

it's in a sticky at the top of the T6x forum; T60/T61/p memory limitations -- the definitive answer

vista 64 might want more memory but only if what you're doing needs more memory.   surfing the web under x64 with 2GB and 4GB will seem absolutely identical.   and, you'll never humanly notice the difference between single-channel, asynchronous dual-channel, and dedicated dual-channel modes, period.   if you can then it's a placebo effect and you're literally fooling yourself.

having tested a single 2GB module (single channel) against two 1GB modules (dual channel) on my T61p under vista x64 using autocad 2008 64-bit to perform a complex 3D machine part rendering, i couldn't tell a single bit of difference whatsoever.   the hype surrounding dual-channel mode in modern computers is just that; hype.

To efrant...yes, I know about the v5250...It's more of a pain from what I've heard, and even ATI's site says to look at the specs of the V5200 for more information...lol. What IS the difference between the two anyway? I googled it one time and came up with virtually nothing. There must be a small difference??? Apparently it's tiny and getting drivers for it is a struggle from what I hear!???

By the way, under Properties, and since I installed 4GB's, it now says 256MB dedicated, and 1.575GB available for sharing. ??? The actual shared RAM was 0. How much can this baby share?

erik: Yea, I just read the quote from Lenovo and it lists Vista x64 as well as XP x64 as the only two OS's that are supposedly not affected by the 3GB limitation. The dual-channel "benefit" is tiny at best (8-10%). I currently have 4GB installed, but only because I got the chips for nothing. Let's see what happens when I install the T7600. Does Vista x64 "look for" systems with 4GB's? I have inferred that from reading several posts. I probably don't need any more than 2GB, so I may give one of the chips to my dad, and replace it with a 1GB chip to make it 3GB, which is likely overkill as well.

My WEI subscore for hard drive jumped from 4.5 to 5.4 lol...Makes sense...200 5400 ---> 200GB 7200.

Does a Core 2 Duo (over a Core Duo) have ANY impact on the other components, such as the graphics card, RAM, etc. I know the 64-bit, double the L2 cache, etc., but I was wondering if it has an impact of other components not listed performing better based on a not only faster, but different, and newer processor?

This stuff is so much fun. Thanks everyone.

Crunch wrote:[snip] I know about the v5250...It's more of a pain from what I've heard [snip]

Really? How is a faster card a pain in the [censored]??

Crunch wrote:[snip] What IS the difference between the two anyway? I googled it one time and came up with virtually nothing. There must be a small difference??? Apparently it's tiny [snip]

From my understanding, the v5200 (same hardware as the x1600) is based on the M56 chip, while the v5250 (same hardware as the x1700) is based on the M66 chip. As far as I know, the M66 has no extra pixel shaders or vertex shaders vs. the M56, but it does clock faster. I'll have to check to see how much faster the core is clocked on the v5250 vs. the v5200.

Here is one site that shows some benchmarks of different mobile graphics cards:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Gra ... 844.0.html

By the way, if you game (from what I understand), you would see better performance (at least in some games) from using the Catalyst drivers (i.e., for the x1600 since it's the same chip) instead of the FireGL drivers...

Crunch wrote:[snip] and getting drivers for it is a struggle from what I hear!???

What do you mean it's a struggle?? They are on Lenovo's website! LOL!!!!

Okokokok....sorry I said anything. I had just remembered asking someone who actually HAS the V5250, so I asked him what was different, as I was unable to find any info on it anywhere. I posted something like "it's a different card, so there has to be SOME kind of difference", to which he/she replied something about drivers being more plentiful for the V5200, and complained about one other thing, which I cannot recall right now. It's on this site. He actually sounded like he would prefer to have the V5200 vs. his V5250, so I left it alone.

Anyway, I stand corrected. Thanks for the info. So it's based on the x1700. Yea, that's cool. You researched it pretty well, so I would love to have the V5250 now. Are there 64-bit drivers available?

And I don't really game a lot at all, but yea, when I found out that it also runs as the Radeon x1600, I thought, awesome! Now that I know the V5250 is based on the x1700, I want it.

So.....would I be able to get that thing installed???

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings or anything, by the way...I do appreciate all the research you did. I now MUST have it. haha...Please tell me that I can at least install that thing, even though it's, ok, would "incremental upgrade" be alright to say? Just kidding ya...

Seriously though, I would totally get it, if someone told me it was possible, as I had always been under the erroneous impression that it was "the same thing", and for me "not to bother".

Thx again!

Crunch wrote:Are there 64-bit drivers available?

Yes, of course they are available.

Crunch wrote:So.....would I be able to get that thing installed???

Only if you want to change your motherboard, as it is soldered on...

Crunch wrote:I didn't mean to hurt your feelings or anything

Not at all, don't be silly!

Crunch wrote:I had always been under the erroneous impression that it was "the same thing", and for me "not to bother".

I can't imagine that you would notice any difference if you had the v5200 or the v5250, despite it being a bit faster. (It's the same argument for using dual-channel memory vs. a single stick - yes, it would be a bit faster, but you would not be able to tell the difference anyway...)

Crunch, if you really wanted to swap your 5200 for a 5250, look at this posting in the marketplace http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=53754. Its it a bit old, but the offer may still stand.

Crunch wrote:erik: Yea, I just read the quote from Lenovo and it lists Vista x64 as well as XP x64 as the only two OS's that are supposedly not affected by the 3GB limitation. The dual-channel "benefit" is tiny at best (8-10%). I currently have 4GB installed, but only because I got the chips for nothing. Let's see what happens when I install the T7600. Does Vista x64 "look for" systems with 4GB's? I have inferred that from reading several posts. I probably don't need any more than 2GB, so I may give one of the chips to my dad, and replace it with a 1GB chip to make it 3GB, which is likely overkill as well.

as i said in my memory limitation write-up, even with vista 64, XP 64, or server 2003 32/64 installed, your T60p can only address 3GB.   the T60's limitation is due to the chipset, not the OS.

vista x64 doesn't "look for" 4GB.   in my experience it runs about the same under 2GB as it does 4GB during normal tasks.   unless you are running memory-hungry applications like photoshop, illustrator, autocad, solidworks, maya, 3dsmax, etc., you'll likely never be able to discern the difference between 2GB, 3GB, and 4GB.   in fact, most computer users don't need more than 1GB under XP and 2GB under vista.

Crunch wrote:And I don't really game a lot at all, but yea, when I found out that it also runs as the Radeon x1600, I thought, awesome! Now that I know the V5250 is based on the x1700, I want it.

if you don't game much or run other 3D apps, what benefit are you looking to gain from the V5250?   i'd like to meet the guy who could take a blind test with two equally-equipped T60s and tell us which one has a V5200 and which one has a V5250.

efrant, see, this is what I was talking about: http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=53754

erilk, thanks, that's what I thought. Hmm...Alright...never mind..thanks everyone. Is the V5200, or V5250 the best I can get for a T60p?? It certainly looks that way...??

Thx again...

Crunch wrote:efrant, see, this is what I was talking about: http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=53754

He is not talking about drivers for Windows....

efrant wrote:He is not talking about drivers for Windows....

Yea I know. I'm just saying. Something like a driver issue, but I obviously misunderstood. erik's the graphic expert here, ...so if I have to replace the whole motherboard for what would be a fairly useless operation, as I would see only a measurable, but not noticeable difference, it's not worth it. It plays BluRay's well, but the card does get hot, and multi-tasking is not possible with certain operations, such as a virus scan at the same time as watching a DVD...on Vista at least.

However, I have yet to install my T7600, which will speed up things on several fronts from what I read, so once that's done, the video card should be just fine for what I use it. It's weird. I've had the [censored] thing for 3 weeks...I did order the thermal grease/paste over ebay AND Lenovo and I called Lenovo yesterday, only to find out that as of a few months ago, Lenovo doesn't send out any more of it l...RadioShack was out, so wtf...I guess it'll be interesting as to what differences I'll see when I do get it...

ANyway...with my T2600, I don't think I could get away with anything less than the V5200!! Hmmm...

The v5200 = v5250 in performance. The notebookcheck site seems wrong for 3dmark06. You can test it for yourself. 1650 shouldn't be hard to get with newer drivers.
So, if you need to upgrade the GFX, a 14.1" T61p motherboard does fit the T60p case, but the 570M in that edition may show limitations were the v5200 didn't - due to half the memory, completely different drivers, and less sophisticated memory bus bandwidth.

Retrofitting a 15.4" WS motheboard may indeed be possible. I have compared screw positions on pics, and from what i see, they match up very well with the T60p. BUT - the ultrabay slim drive connector is too far to the right, so the drive will likely stick out with the T60p
There may be ways to modify the location of the connector, but i don't think i have the guts or money to ruin a $900 replacement part... let alone money for buying it.

Troels wrote:So, if you need to upgrade the GFX, a 14.1" T61p motherboard does fit the T60p case, but the 570M in that edition may show limitations were the v5200 didn't - due to half the memory, completely different drivers, and less sophisticated memory bus bandwidth.

Retrofitting a 15.4" WS motheboard may indeed be possible. I have compared screw positions on pics, ....but i don't think i have the guts or money to ruin a $900 replacement part... let alone money for buying it.

Oh man, we gotta talk...so one of the differences with the highest-end T61p 14.1" and T61p 15.4" is the graphics card??? $900? USD? Let's play. Our dollar is worth crap anymore anyway. 7-digit type and model # is what we need...I'm going on the hunt.

Crunch wrote:Oh man, we gotta talk...so one of the differences with the highest-end T61p 14.1" and T61p 15.4" is the graphics card???

the 14.1" T61p has a 128MB Nvidia Quadro FX 570M where the 15.4" T61p has a 256MB Nvidia Quadro FX 570M.   if you go this route then you'll have to make a sacrifice.

erik wrote:the 14.1" T61p has a 128MB Nvidia Quadro FX 570M where the 15.4" T61p has a 256MB Nvidia Quadro FX 570M. if you go this route then you'll have to make a sacrifice.

Yea, that's what I thought. In the T60p series, doesn't the highest-end T60p 14.1" have the option for the same amount of VRAM than its 15" counterpart?

Crunch wrote:Yea, that's what I thought. In the T60p series, doesn't the highest-end T60p 14.1" have the option for the same amount of VRAM than its 15" counterpart?

yes, T60p models were available with 256MB GPUs in both 14.1" and 15.0" flavors.   this is not the case with the current T61p lineup.

Crunch wrote: Oh man, we gotta talk...so one of the differences with the highest-end T61p 14.1" and T61p 15.4" is the graphics card??? $900? USD? Let's play. Our dollar is worth crap anymore anyway. 7-digit type and model # is what we need...I'm going on the hunt.

Here's a comparison:
T61 15.4 WS motherboard with 140M: http://images.channeladvisor.com/Sell/S ... s/T61A.jpg
T60p, likely 14.1" motherboard: http://i22.ebayimg.com/04/i/000/a0/d6/46d9_1.JPG

Notice the screw positions. What exactly the T61 motheboard has around the HDD department i don't understand - looks weird. If the ultrbay connector only has a single sided connection onto the motheboard, one can be lucky to modify the board with a new connector.
Another problem may be that 15" UXGA resolutions are banned - this is very easy to do, since - unlike the T4x - the T6x series has one common LCD cable whereby the screen manufacturer and resolution by the EDID stored on the LCD.

ryengineer wrote:...
2. You would need to swap out the whole motherboard. The graphics card is soldered onto the system board.

Hi Ryengineer,
Can I "do it by force" to swap? I mean if I break it and solder on another, will the number of pin and the shape fit? or If there can be a way to "do it by force"?

milstein wrote:

ryengineer wrote:...
2. You would need to swap out the whole motherboard. The graphics card is soldered onto the system board.

Hi Ryengineer,
Can I "do it by force" to swap? I mean if I break it and solder on another, will the number of pin and the shape fit? or If there can be a way to "do it by force"?

Thinkpad is not handmade. You won't be able to finish the job without special soldering machine, even you are a genius in playing with soldering iron and know exactly what you are doing. If you insist, you will end up with a toasted motherboard and two burnt graphics chips.