Thinkpad T400 GPU upgrade

[dustinechoes849]

Hi fellow TP users! I'm new to this forum so please forgive (and make me aware) of any goofs!
I scored a ThinkPad T400 for 15 bucks a few weeks ago. Great machine. The P8400 CPU is MUCH faster than my old T43. The 1280x800 resolution took some time to get used to, but at 14.1 inches, it's not bad.
My type 6474 T400 only has the Intel GMA X4500MHD, no Radeon. The Intel GPU blows! My T43 ran all my games beautifully, and ran other 3D programs noticeably better, WITH A 64MB RADEON.
From what I've heard, I'll need a new mainboard. Are there any other parts that I need (heatsinks, etc.)?

I asked about this in the /r/thinkpads, but people kept [censored] on the old Radeon, saying it's not worth it...even though its specs are even better than my old (died a while ago) T61's nVidia! Which could run Garry's Mod at like 200-300 FPS with the graphics maxed at 1280x720, or at 100-200 FPS at 1680x1050. It also let me play Unreal Tournament 3 on the go, which was nice.

[TPFanatic]

I was one of the people ripping on the Radeon 3470.

I was also the person who said I'd try to compare it with the NVS 140m on my end.

You are correct you'd need to get a dedicated graphics heatsink if doing the swap.

edit: Alright, so I did end up running Furmark (400x300, 0X MSAA) on both my T400 w/ Radeon 3470 and T61 w/ NVS 140m. Furmark being as heavy as it is, the fact that they both averaged 4 FPS doesn't really show the performance difference between them. However the T400 did lead the T61 in the total number of frames rendered by about 10%. Also during the test the T400's 2.8 ghz T9600 only used between 50 and 60% CPU utilization, while the T61's 2.2 ghz T7500 was pegged at 100%. I'm not sure how much impact the CPU has on Furmark.

In HWMonitor the T400's Radeon 3470 max clocked its Graphics at 680 Mhz, Memory at 800 Mhz. The T61's NVS 140m's max clocked its are Graphics 432 Mhz, Memory 602 Mhz, Processor 864 Mhz; although its specs are Graphics 400 Mhz, Memory 700 Mhz, so I'm not sure what the discrepancy means.


Just to see if it got better FPS, I ran my T500 (2.8 ghz P9700, Radeon 3650) through Furmark at the same settings as well, 400x300, 0X MSAA, and it averaged 11 FPS. It is that much more powerful than the 3470. The T400 is pretty gimped.

Concludingly I think the NVS 140m and Radeon 3470 are equivalently bad, but people have successfully overclocked the NVS 140m to make it better. The Radeon 3650 is much stronger, and the FX 570m from the T61p is apparently even stronger than the Radeon 3650.

Part of the performance gap is because the NVS 140m and Radeon 3470 are 64-bit bus GPUs while the Radeon 3650 and FX 570m (15.4" only) are 128-bit bus GPUs. This makes a lot of difference.


I do get you on the reference to the T43's GPU performance. I used a T42p for a time with the FireGL T2, equivalent to the Radeon 9600, and it was more power than you'd expect from a 2002 era graphics chip. I played Need for Speed World competitively on the T42p.

[dustinechoes849]

Thanks for doing all those tests! I never knew about the whole 64 bit vs 128 bit bus thing.

You've successfully convinced me that the Radeon 3470 is crap, and is definitely not worth the 40+ dollars in parts.
The T61's GPU was honestly pretty bad without a ton of OCing, so having a GPU that's equivalent to a non-OC'd NVS140M is not that great.
I'm gonna stick with the T400 (as well as my T43) as is, and eventually save up for a W530 or something. I really want a W500, but holy hell those are impossible to find for even remotely reasonable prices on eBay. 300 dollars? dafaq

[axur-delmeria]

From what I've read, the Intel HD 4000 graphics in Ivy Bridge processors (like the ones in the X230, T430, T530 and W530) is roughly equivalent to the Radeon HD 3650. I don't have benchmarks to back it up though.

[Screamer]

NVS 140m's max clocked its are Graphics 432 Mhz, Memory 602 Mhz, Processor 864 Mhz; although its specs are Graphics 400 Mhz, Memory 700 Mhz, so I'm not sure what the discrepancy means.

I believe that the program which you are using to read the Quadro NVS 140M's clock speeds, is directly reading the clock generator's reference frequency multiplied by the Quadro NVS 140M's internal clock multiplier. That is why you are seeing a difference between its 'on-paper' specifications and its actual operating specifications.

I really want a W500, but holy hell those are impossible to find for even remotely reasonable prices on eBay. 300 dollars? dafaq

There is a working W500 on eBay that is going for $150 (but has 2 non-functional USB ports), and I do agree that they are overpriced.

I would suggest that you get that as fast as possible, before it gets sold out.

[TPFanatic]

With knowledge of the MTM at the top of the forum page you can try and find a T500 with the Radeon 3650, it is the same performance wise as the W500's FireGL V5700. I had a W500 and the double VRAM didn't make a difference in my experience.

[wujstefan]

With knowledge of the MTM at the top of the forum page you can try and find a T500 with the Radeon 3650, it is the same performance wise as the W500's FireGL V5700. I had a W500 and the double VRAM didn't make a difference in my experience.

...unless you overclock this particular GPU.

For whatever reason, v5700 overclocks higher than 3650, and it does make a signifficant difference.

3470m is a very low-end that performs worse than fx570m from 15,4" T61p, and I did not find any working OC software properly reckoning the GPU. Not to mention that, again - fx570 overclocks _HUGELY_ on stock voltage.

R500's nerfed 128Mb 3470m is even worse...

[RealBlackStuff]

The only difference between T500 and W500 is the number of RAM slots.
All T500 and most W500 have only 2 RAM slots for max. 2x4=8GB RAM.
W500 with quadcore CPU ex-factory comes with 4 RAM-slots for max 4x4=16GB RAM.
If 8GB RAM is sufficient for your purposes, then get a T500!

The next one up, W510 with quad-core CPU can have up to 4x8=32GB RAM (T510 with 2x8=16GB).
BUT: the screen is 16:9.

In either case, do NOT buy any so-called "Value Ram" for them.

[Screamer]

Wait, you got that mixed up. It is only the graphics chip that sets it apart from the T500, not the RAM slots (only in the W510 and after).

The W500 never came with 4 RAM slots, and had never natively supported a Core 2 Quad.

While you are right that the W510 with a quad-core Core i7 will work with the 4x8GB combination, the T510 does not work with the 2x8GB combination. This is due to some strange limitation in the dual-core Celeron/Pentium/i3/i5/i7 Arrandale-based processors, since they could only address 4GB RAM modules. It would result in the T510 maxing out at 8GB (2x4GB) instead, because of that weird limitation.

I second RealBlackStuff's advice for not buying any sort of 'Value RAM', though.

[TPFanatic]

...unless you overclock this particular GPU.

For whatever reason, v5700 overclocks higher than 3650, and it does make a signifficant difference.

3470m is a very low-end that performs worse than fx570m from 15,4" T61p, and I did not find any working OC software properly reckoning the GPU. Not to mention that, again - fx570 overclocks _HUGELY_ on stock voltage.

R500's nerfed 128Mb 3470m is even worse...

I am unfamiliar with overclocking in general so this is very interesting to know.

If my W500 didn't die this would be something to try out. But my expresscard eGPU provides more than enough graphics when I want it.

[dustinechoes849]

Concludingly I think the NVS 140m and Radeon 3470 are equivalently bad, but people have successfully overclocked the NVS 140m to make it better. The Radeon 3650 is much stronger, and the FX 570m from the T61p is apparently even stronger than the Radeon 3650.

How does the 3650 compare to a massively overclocked NVS 140M?

[wujstefan]

If my W500 didn't die this would be something to try out. But my expresscard eGPU provides more than enough graphics when I want it.

Well, W500 are not that costy nowadays, so having a spare board is not that hard
eGPU is another thing I'd definitely like to try out someday - but it costs quite a bit, and is not much handy

How does the 3650 compare to a massively overclocked NVS 140M?

128Mb of RAM on nvs140m and a 64-bit bus hinders performance greatly. Especially given that ATI 3650 unit is overclockable as well 3650m is simply way better if you plan to make some light gaming, and still very usable otherwise. Take note that stock core clock on 3650 is already 50% higher than on nvs140m, and 3650 runs DDR-3 on 128mb bus.

However, fx570m is better than both. Don't ask me why. It simply... is

[dustinechoes849]

Kinda unrelated, but anyone know if there's a way to get a 1280x800 IPS display in this machine? Like the really pretty 1920x1200 in the W701ds, with the nice colours, but not as high res.

[dr_st]

The stock W701ds screen is not IPS, although I think it can be retrofitted by taking a screen from a comparable HP/DELL workstation.

There are no 14" 8:5 IPS screens, AFAIK.

[dustinechoes849]

The stock W701ds screen is not IPS, although I think it can be retrofitted by taking a screen from a comparable HP/DELL workstation.

There's no way mine atleast isn't IPS. Viewing angles are amazing, colours are super vibrant, the colour black is actually black, not washed out grey. If it's not, it's the best TN panel I've even seen in my life. 1920x1200 btw

There are no 14" 8:5 IPS screens, AFAIK.

Are there at least 1280x800 displays with nicer colours, better viewing angles and/or less terrible contrast?
Been watching some Blu-Rays on here, mostly the old Batman flicks, and like 80% of the screen is this awful light grey due to the awful contrast ratio (I think that's what it's called.)

I watch a lotta movies lol