Thinkpads Forum

I called customer service 2 days before it shipped (today) and the guy said he'd stop it and get it changed. I called again today when he never followed up with me like he said he would, and the lady told me that it was too late to stop it and if I want it changed I have to refuse the package on delivery and make it go back.

This will probably take 3 weeks at the very least to get it back with the right processor. I'm really excited to get it, but at the same time I don't want to lose a possibly large increase in performance for only $50.

What do you guys think? Is the upgrade to Core 2 Duo really worth the extra long wait? I saw some benchmarks that showed up to 20% increases in performance, but also very little in other areas depending on the application. I was hoping to do CAD on it, so I'm thinking I'll probably need every increase I can get.

Three weeks are going to pass pretty fast.

Ask yourself whether every time you look at your X60 for the next 2-4 years, will you be bothered by the oversight? If yes, return it.

If you're going to be doing CAD, I would ask myself if the GMA 950 graphics chip is going to be fast enough. A lot of CAD software relies on reasonable 3d graphics performance. If you get the X61 or the X61s which will be released on May 31st, you will get a faster Core 2 Duo chip as well as the X3100 graphics chip.

Getting a brand new X61 is a little out of my price range since there won't be any discounts on them when they come out.

Any idea if I can try out the Core Duo model and send it back after having it unpacked?

Unpacking it may require them to tag it as a refurbished system. I would guess that would be a bad idea. Don't do it.

Suggestion: Call Lenovo, now, whether or not you opened the package. Assert that you asked them to fix the order on the phone on <state date> and apparently Lenovo fulfillment has sent you two systems and you have received the canceled system first. (This may actually be true, btw.) Ask for a return label and ask for the status of the corrected system. Act bewildered. Bet that gets you an express shipment. Remember, you did ask for a cancel, so you can do this. Good luck.

BTW, always get the tech name or badge number and write it down with the time you talked.

For clarity sake I made it sound like I bought it in the original post, but this was actually a gift. My parents let me configure it however I wanted and they accidentally ordered the wrong processor.

It's really not a big deal, I suppose, and I don't want to sound unappreciative by saying they got the wrong thing. They're also trying to "surprise" me with it, but they aren't very good at it, and I don't want them to feel as though I'm let down. I'm sure it'll work well.

Thanks for the help guys.

I think that idea of a 20% increase is generous to begin with, and this is for the same clock speed. So a 1.5 would be a equivalent to a 1.8 if it was twenty percent faster at everything, which from what I have read, it is not. From what I have read, 10% is a more reasonable number which puts it at 1.65 or almost exactly the same as what you ordered. I think that people are insistent upon core 2 duos in laptops because of what a revolution they were in the desktop market. Of course, it is your call, but my 2 cents are that you will probably not see a difference in the two.

The real difference is supposed to be with Santa Rosa with a faster FSB. I am sure that you know all of this, though. You sound like you know what you are talking about.

I have a 1.83 x60t with 2GB RAM and it runs Vista very well. I do not use it for CAD, however.

You don't really want the Core Duo. I have one of those when I first bought it when it came out. 6 months later the Core 2 Duo was released for X60, for the same price I paid for the Core Duo X60 in Mar '06.

I been blaming myself ever since.

I am very pleased with my X60T. I am not very happy with the software preload and Vista. I have eliminated what I could and love it. I am still a bit limited on what I can run on it. The boot time is slower than my 5 year old A31, but I am dealing with that with Hibernation. If XP Tablet can do this handwriting recognition, then I would see no reason to go with Vista at all.

The hardware is good though.

Well I've been using the Core Duo for a couple days now. It's prone to making Firefox freeze up if I have too much stuff open at once. Running antivirus and searching is a bit slow, and shutting down/locking the computer both take unusually long times.

Overall, though, it serves its purpose well. I'm ordering another gig of ram and hopefully that'll help.

For C2D, how much worth it is having the 64-bit capability and the extra 2mb of L2 cache?

SkiBunny wrote:For C2D, how much worth it is having the 64-bit capability and the extra 2mb of L2 cache?

4MB L2 should improve overall efficiency of the CPU.

With a 64-bit capability, you could eventually update to 64-bit OS, allowing you to expand to 4GB, instead of 3GB. Since there are no 1.5GB sticks, to get 3GB, you need to put in a 1GB + 2GB. The size causes a mismatch that defeats the dual-part of the DDR2 spec, causing you to have slower memory (vs 2GB).

Though not your question, the Santa Rosa Centrino adds a bit more speed at lower clock speed, better sleep states, and the 965 express chip set which supports X3100 graphic chip. Overall, you should get more throughput for less watts.

SFWrtr wrote:

SkiBunny wrote:For C2D, how much worth it is having the 64-bit capability and the extra 2mb of L2 cache?

4MB L2 should improve overall efficiency of the CPU.

With a 64-bit capability, you could eventually update to 64-bit OS, allowing you to expand to 4GB, instead of 3GB. Since there are no 1.5GB sticks, to get 3GB, you need to put in a 1GB + 2GB. The size causes a mismatch that defeats the dual-part of the DDR2 spec, causing you to have slower memory (vs 2GB).

Though not your question, the Santa Rosa Centrino adds a bit more speed at lower clock speed, better sleep states, and the 965 express chip set which supports X3100 graphic chip. Overall, you should get more throughput for less watts.

These computers are not capable of doing "the dual-part of the DDR2 spec" regardless of whether they are matched or not.
Look it up on Crucial.

proaudioguy wrote: These computers are not capable of doing "the dual-part of the DDR2 spec" ... Look it up on Crucial.

Hmm... It would be odd if the paired slots wouldn't provide this capability. I did not find the info on the Crucial, but would much appreciate the link.

I have two 1GB sticks in my X60s, and CPU-Z shows the memory running in dual channel mode (when I had only one stick it was single). I haven't done any benchmarks to know that there is a difference between two 512MB and one 1GB, but I would imagine there is. Maybe someone with the appropriate memory combinations could disprove Crucial on this one.

It looks like Kingston disagrees with Crucial...I'd go with Kingston's opinion over Crucial's any day:
http://www.ec.kingston.com/ecom/configu ... ysID=34185

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts. ... l+Types%29


Q: Does my computer support dual-channel memory?

A: No.

Your system does not support dual channel.

So it would seem Kingston and Crucial disagree. Maybe Lenovo can shed some light.

ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/pc/pcinstitu ... tabook.pdf

tabook.pdf says it's "dual-channel capable"

Score one for Kingston.

SFWrtr wrote:With a 64-bit capability, you could eventually update to 64-bit OS, allowing you to expand to 4GB, instead of 3GB. Since there are no 1.5GB sticks, to get 3GB, you need to put in a 1GB + 2GB. The size causes a mismatch that defeats the dual-part of the DDR2 spec, causing you to have slower memory (vs 2GB).

1. You can put two 2GB sticks in a 32-bit machine (assuming the chipset is capable of supporting it - but I believe they have been able to do so for a long time). Due to fine print in 32-bit specifications, the operating system will only see anywhere from 3 to 3.5 GB. The official statement from Microsoft says that "to avoid potential driver compatibility issues, the 32-bit versions of Windows Vista limit the total available memory to 3.12 GB." I imagine the situation would be similar with Windows XP.

2. Size-mismatched RAM sticks will not be able to run dual-channel - however, the performance benefit from dual-channel is small in synthetic benchmarks and virtually unnoticeable in real-life use.