Speccing a T410s...advice appreciated

[niccolo]

With the old T42 on the fritz again, I'm thinking it's probably time to invest in a new machine. I thought hard about making the switch to MacBook Pro, but am not a fan of the keyboard or the price premium. So I'm inclined to go for a T410s, disappointing display notwithstanding. A few quick questions re the specs:

- Windows 7 Pro 64 over 32, right? I'm not running any legacy hardware or software. I notice the Lenovo site defaults to 32, but recommends 64.

- 4 GB RAM in 2 DIMMs seems the right budget-conscious but worthwhile upgrade over the base 2 GB.

- System Expansion slot, am leaning 5-in-1 media card reader over ExpressCard34, but don't really use either at this point, so not sure how to make that decision, advice?

- Wireless card, the Thinkpad bgn card gets bad reviews, am thinking the Intel 6200 makes sense, upgrading to 6300 is not expensive if someone thinks there's a reason to do so.

- Thinkpad Protection seems very reasonably priced covering accidental damage, I travel a lot and my computers occasionally need TLC.

Appreciate any feedback, especially sometime soon because I'm thinking of biting the bullet on this shortly. Thanks!

[w0qj]

I've just migrated from T42 (2373-K5H) to T410 (2522-RE3), since the T410 and T410s is quite similar, my comments as below:

1) If you don't have to worry about legacy software or hardware, you should go for 64-bit Windows... many 32-bit programs should run under 64-bit... and 64-bit Win7 lets you use more RAM.

My T410 with 32-bit Windows can only "see" 3 GB of RAM, despite the fact that I have 4 GB worth of RAM physically installed

2) The sweat spot for cost-conscious is 4 GB RAM (2+2).
If you're using 64-bit Windows, you can always upgrade when RAM prices drop further...

3) 5-in-1 media card reader is useful especially if you're using SD cards for your digital photography. It will not accept the larger CF cards due to physical size limitations.

That said, the ExpressCard slot may become important in the next 2-3 years when USB-3 external hard drives (read: data backup) become more prevalent and cheaper, and you can at least buy a ExpressCard-to-USB3 adapter for high speed data backup.

However, I've read that there are actually 2 types of ExpressCard speeds:
~The newest ExpressCard speed theoretically lets you take advantage of full USB3 throughput speeds.
~With the older ExpressCard speed you *cannot* take full advantage of the USB3 throughput speeds, but still noticably faster than USB2 that your T410s is using.

4) Intel 6200 makes sense, upgrading to 6300, either would be fine. If you use WiFi a lot, 6300 would give you better reception especially far away from base station.

5) Get as much ThinkPad protection as you can, it's worth it, especially if you travel around with your ThinkPad a lot.
I extended my T42 warranty to full 5-year, and it was worth it

BTW, my other comments regarding T42 vs T410 here:
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=86781

[niccolo]

Appreciate the responses! Upgrading from Intel 6200 to 6300 wireless card is an extra $20, is there any reason to think this makes an appreciable difference in wireless connectivity? It's not a lot of money, so if there is I'm happy to go with the higher-end card.

[w0qj]

The Intel 6200 has 2 antennas, whereas the 6300 has 3 antennas, therefore 6300 has better WiFi reception, at a minimal cost upcharge...

[Navck]

For reference: eSATA still will be more useful than USB 3.0 for external harddrive enclosures (You get SMART readings including temperature.)

[niccolo]

On reflection, I decided to cancel my order. I was really unhappy with the T400s display I briefly had and returned last fall, and the T410s is no better (notebookcheck actually measures an even worse contrast ratio for it, if that's possible!). It's a shame, the T410s is a great machine otherwise. This is beating a dead horse on these forums, but I posted on the Lenovo blogs in the faint hope that future iterations might include at least semi-decent displays...

I’m a long-time Thinkpad user, and overall I’m a fan of the new T410s and last year’s T400s. I can live with 16:10 displays and various inevitable changes that generate so much controversy with Thinkpad diehards, and I think you’ve done a great job overall updating the T4XX line. But you’ve shot yourself in the foot with the displays you’ve been sourcing for these models. Even if you can’t source IPS, there’s a spectrum of TN displays out there, and you’ve somehow managed to source the very worst. I mean, 95:1 contrast ratios, as compared to 456:1 for a matte-screen MacBook Pro? Heck, even a generic Dell laptop has a better screen than that. (http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Len ... 386.0.html) Here’s hoping you manage to address this issue in the next generation.

[Navck]

I somehow got a great display panel on my T410 but it might of been luck and getting what might be the LG Phillips panel instead of the others.

[niccolo]

When you say great display panel, does it have real blacks and good contrast? This affects even basic things like text display, but it's easiest to judge when looking at a photo or movie. The website notebookcheck measured what I think was the worst contrast ratio for any laptop on the market for the T410s, at 95:1. They measured the T400s at 98:1 (effectively the same), typical Dell or other laptops come in around 150:1, and at the higher-end a matte-screen MacBook Pro at 456:1 (glossy screens are not a fair comparison, since by definition contrast is higher). This is very much consistent with my experience, and I went through a big hassle to return a T400s I bought last fall because of it.

[Volker]

This affects even basic things like text display

Oh puhleeze. A hardcover book has typically a contrast ratio of 50:1, the amazon kindle has 7:1.

[niccolo]

Volker, is the argument that while the contrast ratio for the panels Lenovo is speccing for the TXX is the worst in the industry, the reference set shouldn't be other laptop screens, it should be paper books and e-ink readers, and relative to those Lenovo screens are excellent? Sort of like the argument that my Yugo car may have crappy acceleration, but compared to a bicycle it's great, no?

To be fair, perhaps you're just arguing that reading text requires very little contrast, and therefore Lenovo screens may have miserable contrast but it doesn't matter, because people can read low-contrast screens perfectly well. It's true that Lenovo screens are perfectly readable, if that's the argument, but I don't think anyone's arguing that they're illegible. I do think there are gradations in quality between a legible screen with poor contrast and color and a screen with excellent contrast and color.

I'm glad, if a bit puzzled, that some folks are very happy with the current crop of screens. I, for one, am very much hoping the next generation can do a better. Never mind best-in-the-industry; I'll settle for somewhere in the middle of the industry if necessary.

[Volker]

This affects even basic things like text display.

It's true that Lenovo screens are perfectly readable, if that's the argument, but I don't think anyone's arguing that they're illegible.

I'm confused

I totally agree that colors and black levels are nothing to write home about. Like most laptop panels it does suck for photo work and/or movies. But for text display its more than adequate.

[niccolo]

I guess text display on a laptop screen isn't a binary variable for me, i.e. either I can read it or I can't. Isn't that setting the bar a little low? New corporate motto: "Lenovo, we source screens so adequate that you will be able to read your work!" At least to my eye, screens with blacker blacks and higher contrast are both easier to read and more aesthetically pleasing. Hence I am unhappy that Lenovo screens have the worst black levels and worst contrast levels in the industry. So I don't think the T4XX screens are illegible, but I also think their quality is very poor. Sorry if that was confusing!

[Navck]

I don't get those night blacks like my T43's IPS panel but the LCD is pretty awesome compared to some of the 15.4" consumer laptops (Mainly HPs) I've had it next to in terms of black and contrast. I would say it is a step or two down from the T410 in terms of black levels but the T43 can't be used outside or in one of the rooms with the sun rising (The T410 works fine outside, however.)

[Volker]

At least to my eye, screens with blacker blacks and higher contrast are both easier to read and more aesthetically pleasing.

Do you also complain in the same way about hardcover (paper) books that are so hard to read because they only have a 50:1 contrast ratio?

[raydabruce]

I'm very happy with the display on my T410 (not an "s"). It's the WXGA+ (1440x900) and after tweaking the color settings in the Intel Graphics control panel, the colors and contrast look just fine to me. I prefer the 16:10 aspect ration since it gives you more vertical space for web browsing/reading. I don't do a lot of visually oriented tasks like photo editing, etc. ThinkPads aren't designed for that. They're business notebooks.

If I were going to do more than occasional photo/video work (or play), I suppose I'd get a MacBook Pro. They ARE designed for that. Then again, perhaps a good external monitor is all one would need with a ThinkPad.

[pianowizard]

lsut the T43 can't be used outside or in one of the rooms with the sun rising (The T410 works fine outside, however.)

But that's probably mainly because IPS screens dim down rapidly over time. I bet your T43 was quite a bit brighter 4 years ago.

Do you also complain in the same way about hardcover (paper) books that are so hard to read because they only have a 50:1 contrast ratio?

Comfortable reading depends on not just contrast ratio, but also pixel density (which affects the smoothness of the text), viewing angle, color uniformity, etc. Books are far superior to any LCD screen in these aspects.

[niccolo]

Volker is quite insistent that although Lenovo may source screens that are some of the worst in the industry, this doesn't matter because paper books have lower contrast ratios. For me, the relevant comparison set is other laptop screens. I wish Lenovo would source better screens, and I post comments like this in the (faint) hope that the next generation might improve, because I am otherwise a big Thinkpad fan. As for the book comparison, at least to me it's apples-to-orangutans for a whole host of reasons, some of which others have mentioned above. But I guess we can agree to amicably disagree.

[underclocker]

I mentioned this in another thread, but IMHO, the two T410s machines that I had the pleasure to work on for several hours had very, very nice displays. The production dates were April 2010 and May 2010.

They were very bright, with very nice colors and had good viewing angles. I have used hundreds of Thinkpads, so I've seen low quality and high quality LCDs. One of my current machines is a T60p with a FlexView UXGA screen. I've also seen low quality in some earlier R60 and T60 machines. The T410s LCDs that I saw were certainly above average. They seemed appropriate for a higher end ThinkPad.

Perhaps the mixed comments are due to early models or multiple sources for LCDs. This situation reminds of the early T60 and R60's, some were just awful, but many were quite nice. Every later model T60 I owned had a nice LCD.

[niccolo]

Fascinating. I'm only working off a few datapoints, basically the T400s I ordered and returned last fall and the notebookcheck.net reviews of the T400s and T410s.

The T400s I had last fall had very high (i.e. gray, non-black) black levels, giving even text a relatively washed out appearance. The T400s LCD was bad enough that, together with the CPU whine and the fact that the case was warped so that only three of four corners touched the table top, I convinced Lenovo to let me return it.

The notebookcheck.net data buttresses this assessment, reporting terrible black levels and industry-worst contrast of 98:1 for the T400s and 95:1 for the T410s.

It sounds as though some folks have genuinely solid screens on their T410/s computers. If I was confident I could obtain one of these myself, or somehow avoid the restocking fee, I'd order one.

[Volker]

Its true, the black levels are high. Its annoying when, for example, watching dark scenes in a movie. But for anything that does not involve photo retouching/movies, its a complete non-issue. Text is crisp and easy to read. The truth is, I cannot tell the difference between a 1000:1 (my Dell U2711 IPS screen) and a 100:1 contrast ratio when looking at black text on a white background.

[niccolo]

A while back I posted some very negative reviews of the display in a T400s. I recently ordered a T410s, and then canceled the order the next day, but Lenovo accidentally shipped it anyway. One of the trackpad buttons shipped broken, but other than that the machine seems to be in good shape, and this gave me a chance to check out the screen again before I send it back to Lenovo. Some reactions:

Black text on a white background actually looks pretty decent, somewhat to my surprise based on my recollection of the T400s, and the contrast appears high with the backlight maxed out. It's better than I remember it with the T400s, although I suspect the differences, if any, aren't big. Viewing angle is sensitive, i.e. the appearance of the text changes quite a bit with different angles, although nowhere near as bad as with photos or movies. The backlight seems very bright, which gives the plus of high apparent contrast but I wonder whether it creates eye strain during longer term use. Turning the backlight down results in a grayer rather than white screen.

For movies and photographs, because the viewing angle is zero, i.e. there is no screen position in which the screen can represent anything close to black at both the top and the bottom at the same time, quality is pretty poor. There's one precise screen/head position where movies look decent, but even slight head movements must be avoided, and even in this optimal position, it's not possible to have dark blacks at both the top and bottom of the screen at the same time. Horizontal viewing angle seems to be even more poor than I remember it on the T400s, as bad as the vertical viewing angle. One certainly could watch movies on this screen, and with very careful screen/head positioning they'd look decent, but it's not an enticing movie-watching experience.

Bottom line: The screen won't impede work productivity, although I still think a laptop screen--any laptop screen--should be able to passably display photos and movies, and this one fails in that regard. The extraordinarily small viewing angle--effectively zero in the sense that some inversion or dramatic graying of blacks happens somewhere on the screen regardless of screen/head angle--is really odd. Hope Lenovo fixes this in the next generation--otherwise this seems to be a great computer.