Thinkpads Forum

Picked this little tidbit up from over at the notebookreview.com forum ( http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo-ibm/ )today.

When I looked at the configurator, I had to choose the priciest of the three starting configs to get a shot at this chip.

Not cheap, but there if you need/want the extra horsepower...

A 2960XM chip with 32G of memory and you have one screamin' laptop on your hands...

Great! Finally it's arrived!

Alright. I might wait for another sale to see if I can get one of these babies after all. I'll know in advance not to expect a modem and put it in myself this time. I'll also avoid talking to anyone at Lenovo on the phone.

Growly wrote:Alright. I might wait for another sale to see if I can get one of these babies after all. I'll know in advance not to expect a modem and put it in myself this time. I'll also avoid talking to anyone at Lenovo on the phone.

I dunno 'bout this. You might want to recheck, as I thought I saw sumpin' in the fine print about a 2960XM + modem 'special package deal'. Limited time only

Hi all,

I've read that at least one individual has successfully upgraded their i7-2820QM W520 to an i7-2960XM cpu. I originally wanted to upgrade my i7-2820QM W520 to an i7-2860QM but I've also read that the performance gain is negligible. Any opinions re. the I7-2860QM upgrade? Thanks in advance.

Bert

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

WA2SI wrote:...but I've also read that the performance gain is negligible.

for most people it probably is.

what do you do with your W520?   what software do you run?   do you know with certainty that you're currently limited by your CPU?

generally speaking, the 400MHz difference between these two processors won't amount to a tangible difference in performance unless you can leverage all CPU cores simultaneously.   for multithreaded tasks like rendering or ray-tracing you'll save some time with the 2960XM.   in single-threaded apps i highly doubt you'd know which processor is installed.

if you don't already have an SSD, get one before you focus on the CPU.

Hi Erik,

Thanks for the reply. I already have an SSD. I wouldn't upgrade to the 2960XM, but rather the 2860QM. Do I need the processing power? Absolutely not! I just wanted the top dog ThinkPad. (Within reason) The extra $ for the 2960XM wasn't within the $2500 +/- budget. Sounds like I'm just fine with the 2820QM. Thanks again.

Bert

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

yeah, going from a 2820QM to 2860QM would be a waste.   the only tangible difference would be a lighter wallet.

erik wrote:yeah, going from a 2820QM to 2860QM would be a waste.   the only tangible difference would be a lighter wallet.

The funny thing is that it runs so much cooler compared to my older R51. I'm only running some amateur radio transceiver control applications and antenna modeling software along with the standard hum-drum office apps. I am lovin' it though. I'm about to replace the Stock 8GB of 1333 DDR3 RAM with 16GB of 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

A foolish question: What's so wonderful about the 2960XM chip? A cpu benchmark site I visited slaims that it's only about 10% faster than the 2860QM, and it's a lot more expensive.

Also... As far as I can tell, the W520 is available only with 1333MHz memory, even though the motherboard supports 1600MHz. I would have thought that faster memory would increase performance more than a faster processor.

ark wrote:A foolish question: What's so wonderful about the 2960XM chip? A cpu benchmark site I visited slaims that it's only about 10% faster than the 2860QM, and it's a lot more expensive.

Also... As far as I can tell, the W520 is available only with 1333MHz memory, even though the motherboard supports 1600MHz. I would have thought that faster memory would increase performance more than a faster processor.

Memory speed is usually not a bottleneck, while cpu can be, especially for uni-processor apps. While the total amount of horsepower on a W520 quad core is great, some apps can use only one of the four cores. If that app is a real number cruncher, then you have a bottleneck, even though there's plenty of mips left over from the other three under-utilized cores.

I'm in this exact situation, with multiple apps that use only one core, but need lots of mips. That's why, when I get some $thinkpad$, I'll be buying the 2960 chip. I also need lots of memory(ramdrive), but the speed doesn't matter. So, 32G for me

For most people, running most apps, a 2960 doesn't matter much, if at all.

AMATX wrote:Memory speed is usually not a bottleneck, while cpu can be, especially for uni-processor apps. While the total amount of horsepower on a W520 quad core is great, some apps can use only one of the four cores. If that app is a real number cruncher, then you have a bottleneck, even though there's plenty of mips left over from the other three under-utilized cores.

I'm largely interested in music production, which can use multiple cores just fine (one core per instrument). I'm concerned about memory speed partly because I expect the OS to use memory as a disk cache, and I would think that faster memory would result in decreased rendering time for audio samples.

It's usually recommended to buy memory separately from the laptop anyway so to some extent it doesn't matter what speed the laptop comes with as long as it can use DDR3-1600 at full speed (which it can with a quad-core CPU but not on the dual-core models IIRC). If memory speed is important you would certainly want to get aftermarket memory like Kingston's HyperX.

AMATX wrote:Memory speed is usually not a bottleneck, while cpu can be, especially for uni-processor apps. While the total amount of horsepower on a W520 quad core is great, some apps can use only one of the four cores. If that app is a real number cruncher, then you have a bottleneck, even though there's plenty of mips left over from the other three under-utilized cores.

ark wrote: I'm largely interested in music production, which can use multiple cores just fine (one core per instrument). I'm concerned about memory speed partly because I expect the OS to use memory as a disk cache, and I would think that faster memory would result in decreased rendering time for audio samples.

I've run ramdisks off & on since the early 1980s/DOS years, and on my current W700/Win7 setup for almost two years now. It's so fast, I doubt that the various speed increments of ram you can buy will make much, if any, noticeable difference. I'd guess you're still likely to run up against cpu issues way before ram speed differences.

But, try it and see...

jdrou wrote:It's usually recommended to buy memory separately from the laptop anyway so to some extent it doesn't matter what speed the laptop comes with as long as it can use DDR3-1600 at full speed (which it can with a quad-core CPU but not on the dual-core models IIRC). If memory speed is important you would certainly want to get aftermarket memory like Kingston's HyperX.

Interesting -- I hadn't realized what a price difference there was.

Looking at Lenovo's page for the W520, I see that you can get it with as little as 4GB of memory, and that they charge $480 additional for 16GB.

On the other hand, I can buy four Kingston memory modules for $30 each, thereby saving $360. Or, if I believe that the Kingston and OEM modules are close enough to other in specifications, I could buy only three Kingston modules and save $390.

Even weirder: I can buy 4GB memory modules *from Lenovo* at $35 each, which still saves a bundle!

What on earth is going on here?

ark wrote: Interesting -- I hadn't realized what a price difference there was.

Looking at Lenovo's page for the W520, I see that you can get it with as little as 4GB of memory, and that they charge $480 additional for 16GB.

On the other hand, I can buy four Kingston memory modules for $30 each, thereby saving $360. Or, if I believe that the Kingston and OEM modules are close enough to other in specifications, I could buy only three Kingston modules and save $390.

Even weirder: I can buy 4GB memory modules *from Lenovo* at $35 each, which still saves a bundle!

What on earth is going on here?

It's easy money for Lenovo(other pc makers do the same) to load up/bloat up the bare bones order with overprices goodies. Taken right out of the new car dealer's handbook. Charge 'em three times what the 'optional item' is worth, then knock off 10% to make 'em feel good.

For the W520, the best value play(since you have to order it with -some- memory) is to order one 4G stick, then fill in some/all of the remaining three memory slots with 4G or 8G sticks.

Last I checked, 8G sticks were $150+-, depending upon sales, etc.

AMATX wrote:For the W520, the best value play(since you have to order it with -some- memory) is to order one 4G stick, then fill in some/all of the remaining three memory slots with 4G or 8G sticks.

Can you mix capacities? Many machines require them to be in matched pairs.

^ Offhand, I don't know. As I don't yet have a W520, I can't personally verify. Others have written about this, so do a search.

Best guess is that you can. I've never had a problem mixing different capacity ram sticks in any of my many previous Thinkpads.

I currently have three 8G sticks I've picked up el cheapo. I'll order a W520 with one 4G stick and add these three sticks in, for a total of 4 + 24 = 28G.

In the meantime, if I come across a fourth 8G stick that's cheap enough, I may just buy that, so that I can max out the W520 at 32G

the W520 will accept mismatched module pairs but will drop into asynchronous dual-channel mode as a result.   it's not something you'll notice in real life but it shows up in benchmarks.

you can install 8GB + 8GB + 8GB + 4GB but you'd get slightly better performance from 8 + 8 + 4 + 4 instead.   at that point you have to determine what's more important; performance or capacity.

^^ Capacity for me. As noted, memory is so fast compared to other components that I'm willing to take an unnoticeable decrease so that I can get more ram...I'll eventually go to 4x8G, but depending upon the cost of a W520, I may start out with the 8+8+8+4 = 28G I mentioned above.