- Junior Member
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:40 am
- Location: Copenhagen Denmark
I just saw this topic, after investigating due to a Marketplace post; https://notabug.org/libreboot/libreboot/issues/340
It is now possible to install QuadCores into T400/T500TW500 following something akin to the procedure of installing it to a T61/p.
These Thinkpads are dated, but this can possible breath some new life into them. A QX9300 is noticeably faster than anything they are offered with!
Just a heads up, if anyone is interested.
Custom build ITX desktop (i5 4590, 8GB RAM, GTX 1050Ti, custom watercooling)
Thinkpad 8, Thinkpad W500, Thinkpad T61F 14" (2.53 GHz QX9300, 6 GB RAM, Quadro FX570m 256 MB), GPD win
- Senior ThinkPadder
- Posts: 2659
- Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:25 am
- Location: N. Bellmore, ny
W700 did, W500 didn't come with them from the factory but I don't know if the W500 is plug n play with the quad-core CPUs.
The efficiency of two screens equally sized with equal numbers if pixels are equal. The time spent by a 4:3 user complaining about 16:9 is proportional to the inefficiency working with a 16:9 display, therefore the amount of useful work extracted is equal.
Huh, apparently not
128GB SSD + 1TB HDD + ODD
1920x1200 @ 17" + 768x1280 @ 10"
Dock + Wacom + Calibrator
- Freshman Member
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:08 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
FrankenPad T601 UXGA LED AFFS X9000 8 GB RAM 240GB SSD
Dell Vostro 470 GTX 1080 i7 3770 16 GB RAM 2x250GB SSD+2x2TB HDD
MacBook A1181 T8300 4 GB RAM 160GB HDD
To be honest, it would likely hit the thermal limits of the W500/T500's discrete heatsink. I believe that it was already demonstrated with the T61's discrete heatsink, and it was barely capable of expelling the heat generated from the Core 2 Extreme QX9300.
Rather than an overall upgrade, I see it as a downgrade as the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 has next to no thermal headroom for overclocking. Unless the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 is placed in an ideal environment that always utilizes all of its cores, it has very little improvements to offer over the Core 2 Extreme X9100 that still has some thermal headroom for overclocking and improvement.
100% correct. Even with decent fan update over T6x series, the heatsink itself was poorly designed. These systems have problems with cooling dual-cores in some cases. Unless heavy updates are done, they are not able to cool QX9300 and require serious undervolting. And this kills the idea of using core 2 quads extreme in those systems.
Tested with T61p heatsink + T61p fan; QX9300 was able to work stably, but resulted in 90+C temps. HOT! Absolutely no overclocking was possible on those. With D-IDA however, it still hits 4 cores at 2.8GHz
I'll add in that X9100 does work out-of-the-box and offers higher frequency, especially when overclocked. Not to mention that these CPUs can accept some serious undervolting at stock frequencies (very useful on the road). QX9300 will make a huge difference only at gaming or CADs utilizing all the cores. And HD3650 / firegl v5700 is actually worse than fx570m from T61p considering gamingScreamer wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 4:18 amRather than an overall upgrade, I see it as a downgrade as the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 has next to no thermal headroom for overclocking. Unless the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 is placed in an ideal environment that always utilizes all of its cores, it has very little improvements to offer over the Core 2 Extreme X9100 that still has some thermal headroom for overclocking and improvement.
Try out X9100. Way cheaper. Way cooler. Overclockable. Undervoltable. Your GPU would be your bottleneck anyway, and if not that - your RAM size
(stable under reduction)
lenovo T430s i5 3230m 16GB QHD w/ optimus(RIP), lenovo T430 i5 3320m 8GB FHD, lenovo T500 P9700 8GB WUXGA(LED) w/ switchable graphics
Enable 2 finger scroll on old Synaptics touchpads with registry.
Planning to test that in similar specced M6400 and 8740w.
Both 8Gb of DDR-3 1066, both with m7820, both 16:10 1920x1200 pix LCDs. 8740w equipped with i5-560m, and M6400 with QX9300. I'm just awaiting QX9300 to arrive, but I expect it to swallow i5. Q9100 already proved better, and take note that QX9300 works on 2.8GHz stock (with D-IDA) and easily ups to 3,5GHz (OCed). Huge upside is the possibility to control voltages, which is not enabled in i-core CPUs up to 4th (clunkpad!) generation.
(stable under reduction)
- Similar Topics
- Last post
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests