Thinkpads Forum

so im lookig forward to upgrading to the latest in T series and im wondering if they run cool and if they have any flex issues?

The T410 with the NVS3100m doesn't seem to have an issue with heat, it also seems fairly rigid enough to ensure that the motherboard doesn't suffer from flex.

Well, we have a rollcage around the motherboard for a reason

Navck wrote:The T410 with the NVS3100m doesn't seem to have an issue with heat, it also seems fairly rigid enough to ensure that the motherboard doesn't suffer from flex.

thanks for the quick response! could you fill me in with the average operating temperature on that machine? i've read the threads here and i get the impression its not unsual to see 60-65 C which would be at par with earlier T series models?

Colonel O'Neill wrote:Well, we have a rollcage around the motherboard for a reason

thats great i dont know how that works. is there a quick video for newbies to the rollcage? thanks

I've replaced the thermal paste, add +3-5C to get what you'll probably get (Oh by the way, using the i7-620m)
My average idle temperatures: 34-37C
Average practical (Small, sub 25mb 7zip/RAR operations, heavy internet browsing) temperatures: 40-47C
As hot as I can get the T410 (2 instances of 7zip on ultra compressing very large files plus audio encoding and light internet browsing, pushing the machine): 70-75C

Navck wrote:I've replaced the thermal paste, add +3-5C to get what you'll probably get (Oh by the way, using the i7-620m)
My average idle temperatures: 34-37C
Average practical (Small, sub 25mb 7zip/RAR operations, heavy internet browsing) temperatures: 40-47C
As hot as I can get the T410 (2 instances of 7zip on ultra compressing very large files plus audio encoding and light internet browsing, pushing the machine): 70-75C

Great thanks so much for the detailed information ! very helpful

Colonel O'Neill wrote:Well, we have a rollcage around the motherboard for a reason

ok i dsaw a few videos on youtube it seems like the rollcage is a frame for the parts and where the flex issue starts is if you hold the laptop from one hand... that would mean an impact on the underside/plastic body.

its good to see they have switched over to carbon fiber reinforced plastic instead of ABS!

now my question is does that CFRP prevent flex of the underbody of the laptop when picked with one hand.?

the problem with earlier T42's was that the GPU got so hot that if you moved the lapto around with a single hand after the use then you've most likely end up displacing the GPU or atleast weaken a couple of joints in the BGA array under the GPU.

this i think was an underbody issue coupled with hot running chips. so we have the intel HD graphics solve the heat issue now does the CFRP solve the underbody flex and keep the motherboard stiff while handling the laptop with a single hand?

Thanks!

The "roll cage" found in Thinkpads is a metallic (Magnesium alloy) chassis that is encapsulated (Lid or outer chassis assembly) by a composite* shell, such as with carbon fiber or fiberglass. This construction is fairly high in rigidity and is more resistant to deformation that can stress the system planar or LCD.

*The T410's LCD uses ABS/Polycarb or some kind of plastic with high elasticity, instead if functions as a "standoff", where it takes the stresses** and does not transmit them to the LCD panel.

**Under conditions where the lid does not physically distort enough to interact with the LCD.

Navck wrote:My average idle temperatures: 34-37C

Quite impressive considering my friend's Acer i5-420M idles at 45 degrees Celsius.

The T410 uses ABS according to tabook.pdf; the T400 uses Super-Elastic Polycarbonate. I will say, the concept of using the outer plastic shell as a sacrificial element in protecting the LCD contrasts with the Apple (and others) concept of using an aluminum alloy to protect the LCD. Both have their merits, although the plastic way is definitely thicker as it must have sufficient space to deform. Nevertheless, I really don't trust those "razor-thin" displays; the aluminum plate is likely in contact with the display panel normally, and any pressure (I doubt an ideal material with a Young's modulus of 8423OMG2712 exists that would have zero deformation with stress) would push on the LCD.

Actually by "standoff", I want you to imagine Schurzen used by Panzer 4s late in World War 2.

What happens with the T410 is that the outer casing of the lid will flex instead of the LCD, the space between the LCD and the lid allows for the user to do all sorts of things you would not and the LCD will remain untouched as long as it does not get pushed far enough. It is not a sacrificial element but integral in design. The T410's LCD happens to be mounted on rails inside the lid, not contacting completely (There is a small, rubber pad on the LCD for some reason). Additionally there is some type of foil in there as well, it may of been for electromagnetic shielding.

What happens for the rollcage designs is different. They use the very rigid metallic structure to prevent deformation to the LCD when the lid has pressure applied. Of course, with enough pressure, the metallic structure will deform and press into the LCD as well (!). Ideally, the structure has a little standoff (As in, it is not touching the lid) so that the lid can deform and absorb some of that stress as well.

With the older, magnesium fiber designs, the composite structure will be quite rigid compared to the standoff type design, relying fully on the lid structure to resist deformation to the point it will damage the LCD. Carbon fiber and fiber glass function similarly in role for the chassis, their mix into the chassis means that rigidity and strength is added in a specific manner. (Ask the engineers how they lay those fibers out, that will let you get an idea how they optimized it to be strong in SPECIFIC ways.)

Apple does not really do engineering, the Macbook (Old) unibodies and Macbook Pro unibodies are closer to a very flawed monocoque design. A true "metallic" frame and body design would be closer to the "roll cage" design used. Apple's design is both the outer body and support frame and the way Macbooks are built, stress is still imparted through the body.

Aluminum and especially aluminum have very specific properties, they can be superior or inferior to steel in various constructions. In a bicycle tube, you can use very narrow diameter, thick walled steel tubes or achieving similar strength, very wide diameter tubes with equal thickness aluminum walls. Both will be very strong, the aluminum bike may even be more rigid but definitely lighter. However it will not withstand fatigue as well and may suffer from microscopic level flexing (!) at some parts where the walls are too thin in the tubing. To offset potential problems if your design was defective, you could use very, very thick walled, wide diameter tubes. This would mean your bike weighs as much as the steel bike but it will be very, very rigid and very strong. Aluminum will still be softer here, however (Surface scratch will happen easier, deformation with same thickness, etc.)

Apple's engineering flaws are numerous in this case, to be specific:
If they actually cared about producing a very strong chassis, they would drop forge the general shape before doing minor machine work instead of only machining the chassis out, which is a very time consuming and expensive process when using entire slabs (Inefficient and weaker too.)
Actually, Apple would have been better off if they only drop forged a frame unit and attached the aluminum shell as a second piece to that, but this can take you into a whole other field (Think: Car unibody construction)
The aluminum is exposed (!), which, while looking great, does not help. Apple does not heatsink the insides of the machine to the chassis, trapping heat in there. Now at this point, I would of hard anodized the exterior (Comes in: Black or hard anodize natural, which is very hard to describe color.) for protection. If not, a clearcoat like alloy wheels on cars to provide some resistance to damage to the chassis. Of course, Apple is an entertainment company, not a “computer” company in that sense.
The worst flaw is the manner the system planar is mounted to the chassis; it directly transmits any structural loading to the planar due to the very rigid… And very flawed screw mounts (Straight cylinder down into the chassis, bad! No taper at all! Come on Apple, you send it to the machine shop to make slabs into the chassis!). This means the planar will suffer greatly from any small level deformation in the chassis (Fractions of a millimeter.)

Of course, to be “Fair & Balanced” as Fox News claims theirself to be (I’m sorry if I’m making fun of Fox, but the other news channels do not have funny slogans. Actually if you ask me, they’re all comical in their own ways, like CNN is very serious about theirselves and NBC has a hint of insanity.) I will say that, personally I have a few wishes (As in, unreasonable ones for production) for Thinkpads that would make them cost quite a bit more (A lot more. Unreasonably a lot more.)
Polished or micro texturized (Like a rubberized finish) surface for the chassis with protective powdercoat paint in black OR high contrast red with black chassis (Makes working on the system easier.) Premium components on the planar, everything, capacitors to ICs. Hybrid fluid bearing/ball bearings for the fans, for maximum lifespan at high RPMs and low bearing noise. Hard anodized or rust resistant coating on ALL exposed metallic surfaces with metals that are vulnerable to rust (Aluminum is excluded due to the sapphire (Aluminum oxide) coating forming on the surface). More LED indicators and a backlit high DPI black and white LCD display between power and Thinkvantage buttons to bring temperature, battery state, etc (If anyone remembers what Thinkpad had this, you get a cookie. Well minus the backlit.)

Red, yellow, green LED array for battery indicator (Mix colors by switching two LED groups on.)
Defaults as, but programmable by user in power manager
Green – 80-100%
Yellow-Green – 60-75%
Yellow – 40-60%
Orange – 25-40%
Red – 15-25%
Red blinking - <15%

Charging would be a slow fading strobe (See: Power button on T410, T400s, etc when in suspend) from the current charge state (See list above) to green. Shou
Obviously this would confuse most people but hey, I need to throw some items out so I don’t sound like I’m an Apple hating troll or something.

Navck wrote:... It is not a sacrificial element but integral in design. ...

I meant sacrificial in that sense in that it would flex and absorb the downward (in the direction of the LCD) push; most of the impulse would be absorbed before the plastic deformed enough to contact the LCD. Nevertheless, you explained it much better; I just had a handwaving sort of diagram in my mind before.

Navck wrote:... Additionally there is some type of foil in there as well, it may of been for electromagnetic shielding.

I'd venture a guess and say those are the UltraConnect antennae. Hopefully, they're of the fractal variant, because fractals are awesome.

Navck wrote:... The worst flaw is the manner the system planar is mounted to the chassis; it directly transmits any structural loading to the planar...

I may not be an engineer, but from what currently I know about electronics and physics...

This may sound advanced to some people, so read this over and over until it makes sense if you are one of those people:

I want you to take a Macbook chassis and RIGIDLY mount (See: ifixit's teardowns for what Apple does) the system planar to already stressed screw mounts (Straight tube, no tapered off connection to the chassis.) (Images below)
Now I want you to imagine what happens to the planar when the chassis flexs by 0.5mm
Guess what, the planar flexes too. Surprise, imagine everytime you lift a Macbook up with one hand on a corner, over and over.
Premature failure.
This is a terrible method to mount the planar, they should have an independent mounting frame inside the chassis that allows for some deformation (Ex. Chassis flexes, rubber spacer element compressed, frame stays rigid. Or inversely, chassis flexes, chassis-frame flexes, but motherboard-frame mount is not fully rigid.)

This is why one does not mount the planar to the EXTERIOR chassis directly! That has to bear the load of its own weight when someone grabs the corners! Some form of separation is required unless you can make a super rigid chassis (Not happening with Macbooks).

It would be more accurate to say that the lid absorbs energy (In scenarios where pressure is not sustained) or disperses*/reduces the force transfered to the LCD is a sustained pressure scenario. (Force is required to deform the lid, that is reduction. Dispersion is from the construction of the lid, where force is imparted on the outer edges as well, another design feature of your Thinkpads. Ever wonder why they contact the chassis when closed?)

*Don't quote me on that. My word usage might be off.

I doubt the foil is the antenna, it is a large sheet covering the entire interior of the lid. For all I know it could be to make the lid stronger (Doubt it.)

Bonus lesson: T42s with non 9600 GPU failed because they lacked the heatsink connection running to the GPU, yes? Heatsink provides structural support by extending there (Long fan units). Rigidity.

v.92 incompatible zone ahead!
http://s2.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/H ... KTl3.large
Mounting mesh/plate between motherboard and chassis on far, bottom left corner of image.
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/F ... oS2AO.huge
Bad! Bad! No tapering of mount to chassis! Stress imparted is excessive! (See how its a straight cylinder? No curved or conical transition to the chassis? Bad!)

Excessive stress to system planar! Every time the chassis flexes (Even on a microscopic scale), that is imparted to the planar! (And imagine all those hamfisted techs who do not understand what "torque specs" are!)

Don't believe me?
"Of course, building only one part creates its own set of challenges. When you have multiple parts that are fastened together, tolerances don’t need to be perfect. You have wiggle room, both literally and figuratively. But when one part is responsible for many functions, it’s critical to manufacture that part with absolute precision, down to the micron."
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/design.html
Now with extra tight tolerances to ensure you kill the planar faster. I love it when marketing propaganda can spin off something like a car that explodes into fireballs when rear ended! Perhaps this is a new "self enclosed funeral" feature, as caskets cost much money, so you might as well be cremated *and* buried within your car in accidents deemed unsurvivablee, yes?

i think ive got the right man on the case here! great info Navck!

now if you could tell me

Q1. planar on t42 with 9600 fail as well - is it because of the planar being in direct contact with the external chasis?

Q2. From what i understand the T410s has the planar mounted on an internal rollcage instead of being in touch with the external chasis. Hope i've got that right?

Q3. If the above is correct that is fantastic. Now considering the weight of the laptop, imagine it to be open and being lifted from either corner single handedly, will the underbody flex enough to impact the planar?

Q4 If the above is no then shall we treat the engineers at Thinkpad with some fine champagne?

Regarding Q1, I believe the general consensus reached on these forums has been that the T4x GPU failures are not directlycaused by flex, but rather by weak solder joints. The different components of the joints have varying thermal properties, which causes them to shift relative to each other during heating/cooling cycles, and eventually leads to breakage.

This theory was reinforced by numerous evidence of GPU failures even in machines that were completely or almost completely stationary during their lifetime.

At the same time, flex naturally increases the chances of failure, due to additional stress it inflicts on the joints.

The solder failure is one part of the problem, it can be exaggerated by excessive flex. The T4x series I will have to take my T43 apart and see HMM as well as other machines to determine the mounting solution used. The chassis of the T4x series is fairly rigid and possibly the method of mounting does not impart too much motion to the planar when the chassis deforms (However, the people who lift the 14.1" T4xes by the corner of the machine where the PCMCIA/Expresscard and HDD is... I cannot say what happens there.)

The modern century series of Thinkpads (And T60es/etc, legacy Thinkpads I refer to "classic" century series, for reference) construction seperates the "roll cage" from the external chassis, as well as making the exterior quite rigid. I think the planar will be a lot happier when you lift it by the corners than lets say, a T4x. Remember, when you lift a Thinkpad by the corner closest to you, that is the machine's weight, multiplied by the effect of a lever with the LCD open stressing that area. Check out how the chassis fairly well built in those areas (As well as the shaping).

Also, if you guys have noticed, open your LCD by pushing on a corner, do the same while closing it. Do you notice your LCD appears to bend (The lid is physically bending) but the LCD does not distort? My T43's LCD will show a little distortion but the T410 does not, even if it is a wider, 16:10 LCD. Again, the construction of the lid contributes to the enhanced durability.

thanks dr_st and Navck thats been very helpful in understanding the designing which goes into a thinkpad of today!

Superheated challenge!
91C for a brief moment, dropped back to 85C!
Reasons for this? 40GB of data moving back and forth, from a WD Raptor to the T410 over eSATA followed by a quick defrag, moved back to another harddrive (1TB RE3) after sorting all sorts of data out. Using a file mover that 1GB of RAM to buffer! T410 is still safe enough to hold unlike the Hotbook Pro (Congradulations Apple, 101C benchmark of i7 heat!). Doesn't seem like I'm sterilizing myself by having it in my lap, in bed (I'm insane enough to bring my external HDD enclosure into my bedroom!). All while streaming flash video with GPU acceleration. Fan is at max right now and the 320GB 7.2k Hitachi is at 45-46C. We're talking about 80mb/s spikes with sustained 30-50mb/s activity with over a hundred thousand files. (The joys of trying to pull files off.)

Left palmrest is beginning to feel a tad... Warm

91 degrees is still a bit high for me coming from a 2.53GHz P8700 that tops out around 66.
But hey, it's a i7-620M with 3.33GHz of raw fury, so it's to be expected.

Out of curiosity, how does that T410 handle IntelBurnTest?

(And offtopic a bit: what file mover can set custom buffer sizes? I've been using TeraCopy that sorts figures it out on its own.)

Fastcopy lets you set a 1024MB buffer, it writes slower than Teracopy in bursts but leaves less excessive fragmentation for specific file size ranges. (Experiment as you will to find which is better for specific usage.)

91C *with* Arctic Silver 5, I'm practically pushing the T410 here. Also FYI, you're going to reach the same temperatures with an i5-520 or 540 because the TDP is the same. Read: The i7-620m is more efficient at accomplishing work given the same amount of heat produced. At full load, the i7-620m gets more cycles out at 35W while the i5-520m or i5-540m is running at a lower clockspeed producing the same amout of heat (!).

IntelBurnTest is not a realistic test for the T410, it would be for something like my desktop when I overclock it for fun (i7-920) and then run four instances of 7zip at Ultra to compress 4GB+ directories. It'd probably run close to thermal junction max for the i7-620m (105C.)

But thats OK, the T410 physically didn't burn me like some of the Dells used to
http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/04/26/ ... .in.tests/
(Wait till someone hits thermal shutdown.)

Edit: Ran IBT, sat around 87-91C before rapidly cooling off after the end of five tests. T410 is physically safe to touch and does not burn hand or legs or sterilize one. I should also mention that the T410 only has one fan compared to the dual fan setup the MBP 17"s have with their i7s. (Looks like someone is giving Intel the middle finger on thermal engineering again.)

Why not just try an extended run of cpuburn? That'll stress the CPU far more effectively and evenly than just copying files, compressing things, etc...

I hope you realized that IBT reached the same temperatures as AGGRESSIVELY moving files while AGGRESSIVELY running file compression, right? Wait, you didn't read what I wrote again. IBT pushes the Core i* processors pretty hard because it will aggressively use processor specific instructions to load.

40mb/s (Sustained.) is not a light load for any of the system components, overhead combined with the processors within the harddrives (Yes those exist. You would think that harddrives had a simple IC but no, they're actually pretty complex and sometime in the future you'll start seeing HDDs that self defrag after writing files.) will be loaded pretty hard. Also most "benchmarks" for battery, heat, etc are bull and do not represent a true load on a system. (I can make a system do 10 hours or 2 hours depending on what I do, its very easy to manipulate your usage habits to adjust power usage. You can be just as productive either way, overhead goes to your mind in usage optimization.)

7zip on Ultra is not to be mocked when you toss around a few gigabytes of data casually. Also do yourself a favor while browsing the web, check how modern browsers will push your processor aggressively with all the obnoxious web 2.0 + imbedded flash advertisements everywhere (Nothing like the 90s is it?)

Also realize that at least 1GB (Or more) of system RAM is used during compression and copying files. Its not like this is magical free background work, especially with the overhead from compressed NTFS too.

I practically will expect my T410 not to go past 90C in practical, everyday usage assuming ambient is under 80F (~ 26.7C). Actually I would say it shouldn't go past 65-70C really. (Unless you actually have a reason to use the i7-620m like I do, as well as the NVS3100m)

I did miss the part about IntelBurnTest. Mea culpa. That's basically the same thing as cpuburn, so never mind what I wrote.

As far as the rest of the stuff goes... <shrug>

(BTW, 40 MB/s isn't really a heavy load for a modern CPU/chipset.)

Actually 40mb/s is pretty heavy if you count everything like CRC and overhead in (Surprise, another 40mb/s read back to check if written data is good.)

Navck wrote:Actually 40mb/s is pretty heavy if you count everything like CRC and overhead in (Surprise, another 40mb/s read back to check if written data is good.)

CRC32 is a relatively light algorithm. You can easily hit 100MB/s on an old Pentium III -- a modern CPU won't even break a sweat at 40MB/s.

Not that it matters, however, because that's not really how drives work. ECC, etc. isn't performed by the CPU in the first place. Sure, the driver's gonna take some CPU time to set up DMA, and yes, you're going to use memory bandwidth, but for the most part disk I/O just isn't that CPU intensive.

Bottom line: if you want to test out your CPU's thermal performance, copying files from your HD/SSD isn't a terribly useful benchmark.

Last time I checked, my T410 hit very high temperatures from sustained transfer, equal to benchmark level temps.
You also ignore NTFS compression which while a mild overhead, will still apply for a 40mb/s stream. (Performance monitor reports there is intensive read activity going on the destination drive as well) Ask yourself why harddrives and even SSDs have controllers that get hit by intense overhead? If you pretend this away, then you need to do some research before going off and telling me that the processor does not get hit at all. (Why would WD put dual processors on their harddrives, go on, find out why.)

Bottom line: For intensive level file copies using 1GB of RAM as a buffer combined with overhead, you'll be actually loading the processor fairly well.

And just FYI, 74GB 10k WD Raptor to 320GB 7.2k Hitachi over eSATA.

Anyways, if you're ignorant enough to ignote the temperatures posted by me and then go on and be that way in all the other responses to perfectly legitimate, valid pieces of data I report. Go and claim that the T410 has a weak lid or whatever.

Navck wrote:Last time I checked, my T410 hit very high temperatures from sustained transfer, equal to benchmark level temps.

Not having a T410, I can't provide data on operating temperatures under any given set of conditions.

Go and claim that the T410 has a weak lid or whatever.

I don't think that it has a weak lid. I haven't seen any data indicating that it is superior or inferior. Some people think it's a bit weaker than the T400, some people think it's fine. I'll reserve judgment until I get my hands on one -- and even then I won't be able to provide any objective measurements.

CPU usage by copy program with last buffer + System indicates that there is overhead, additionally 91C is much greater than the average operating range of 42-53C.

A simplistic way to measure the lid strength is to use a static eraser and apply the same amount of pressure to the lid and the lid of a "reference" laptop, in this case I used a 15" T43, which the last time I checked, did not have a "weak" lid.

I'm pretty sure any interaction with drives hooked up through USB 2.0 incurs CPU overhead. Which is sorta why eSATA or USB 3.0 is going to replace USB 2.0. Then again, I've never actually seen my CPU temp go up significantly during file copies, as the speeds are limited to my 5400RPM drive and slow (23MB/s) USB 2.0 connection. That and I don't sustain file copies long enough to drive it up.

However, using WinRAR to pack an archive is an entirely different story. It warms up, but because it appears to be a single-threaded (CPU doesn't exceed 50% for WinRAR.exe), it doesn't stress both cores, and again, temperatures don't really go up too much.


Aside from strictly gauging downward pressure on the lid, how does it stand up to rotational strain? I.e. pushing the left corner and pulling the right corner of an open screen. I hear issues regarding that kind of stress on the X2xx side of things.

I used a file copier (FastCopy) that utilizes a thread for each drive for copy/move operations + 1GB of RAM for the cache. Kept that up for a hour while defragging my harddrive every 6-18GB of data moved. Got the 320GB 7.2k Hitachi to 45C (Which is what the T43 hits from defragging, not intensive file moving sessions.) at the end after I moved everything onto my 1TB RE3 in the same enclosure (Swapped the Raptor in for a bit.)

WinRAR can be multithreaded, check if your version supports it and enable the support. (General tab, tick multithreaded in top left corner)

The T410's lid is superior over my T43's lid. No distortion shows from me pushing in opposing directions on each corner while the T43 would distort from one hand being used to push the corner for opening (Nothing bad happens to the T410.) The way the LCD is mounted in the T410 means it doesn't really incur any of the flex that happens to the lid physically (LCD not rigidly attached to the lid, instead its mounted on rails.)