Page 5 of 5
Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:31 pm
by StevenD
Hi, Richard,
Can you post some photos comparing the T60p screens with the W500 screens?
Dumb Question, but I'll ask it Anyway
Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:40 pm
by eecon
Regarding the W500 (and the T500 for that matter) ..... Is there any chance Lenovo will offer a faster video card option like the ATI Radeon Mobility HD 3850 or 3870 (instead of the ATI HD 3650 based V5700) before the next model year rolls out in August 2009?
After reviewing the performance specs of HD 3650 based cards, it seems the faster HD 3850 or 3870 series coupled with the new 25W P series processors would work nicely together (with regards to preserving reasonable battery life).
I prefer avoiding the overclocking route as a means to achieving faster 3D gaming performance.
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:13 am
by freakwave
Hi Richard,
you are saying the display is much brighter, which one do you have the WUXGA or the WSXGA+ ,
Regards,
Wolfgang
Re: Dumb Question, but I'll ask it Anyway
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 1:41 pm
by awolfe63
eecon wrote:Regarding the W500 (and the T500 for that matter) ..... Is there any chance Lenovo will offer a faster video card option like the ATI Radeon Mobility HD 3850 or 3870 (instead of the ATI HD 3650 based V5700) before the next model year rolls out in August 2009?
Based on my experience - I would guess it is unlikely. The 3650/5700 pushes the thermal capabilities of this chassis pretty hard. ATI could come up with a lower power follow-on to the 3850 - but my guess is that they would just come out with a faster mid-range chip at the same time with the same power envelope and keep pushing performance at the high end.
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 11:48 am
by Kel Ghu
Can anyone do any benchmark please?
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:07 pm
by Pascal_TTH
Kel Ghu wrote:Can anyone do any benchmark please?
Agree ! Can someone run 3D Mark 2006 and post the score with details. Thanks !
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:10 pm
by awolfe63
I ran it several times (under XP)
2.8GHz CPU
3GB RAM
7200 rpm drive
I got around 3900 each time.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:05 pm
by eecon
awolfe63 wrote:I ran it several times (under XP)
2.8GHz CPU
3GB RAM
7200 rpm drive
I got around 3900 each time.
You're a good man .... thanks.
Looks like I'll wait another 10 months to see what Lenovo comes out with regarding GPUs for the next model year. You saved me a couple grand .... and with the stock market tanking like today, I need every bit of that 2 grand these days
Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:54 pm
by Pocket Aces
awolfe63 wrote:I ran it several times (under XP)
2.8GHz CPU
3GB RAM
7200 rpm drive
I got around 3900 each time.
This is really quite surprising. My T61p has the same amount of RAM and HDD speed, but I have an older, much slower processor and a FX570M, and I get the same score. I'm sure the score will improve with more mature drivers, but this is disappointing.
EDIT: And yes, I'm running Vista (x64).
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:54 am
by eecon
Pocket Aces wrote:
This is really quite surprising. My T61p has the same amount of RAM and HDD speed, but I have an older, much slower processor and a FX570M, and I get the same score. I'm sure the score will improve with more mature drivers, but this is disappointing.
Are you running Vista?
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:11 pm
by {ISV-K}SVX
This has been a very helpful thread. I was considering the T500 or W500, but can hardly justify the 2K cost for little to no increase in graphics performance. About the only benefits I see are the integrated camera, Blu-Ray drive support (which does not appear to fit in a T61p), 1066 FSB, and the wider touch pad. That being said, I suppose I will wait 10 more months as well (unless they release a Tablet with decent graphics).
In the meantime I will upgrade my CPU to a T9500 and the screen to WUXGA on my T61p.
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:53 am
by Pocket Aces
Also, comparing the GPU-Z of the V5700 (which thinks it's an HD3650) and the 570M, it seems that the fill rates and bandwidth of the V5700 are actually less than those of the 570M (bandwidth is actually half).
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:46 pm
by eecon
Pocket Aces wrote:Also, comparing the GPU-Z of the V5700 (which thinks it's an HD3650) and the 570M, it seems that the fill rates and bandwidth of the V5700 are actually less than those of the 570M (bandwidth is actually half).
Yeah, something does not seem "comfortable" about the new W500's price to performance ratio right now. Hopefully it's just driver related which can be fixed with time.
Anyway, I'm going to wait another year now.
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:34 pm
by Pascal_TTH
awolfe63 wrote:I ran it several times (under XP)
2.8GHz CPU
3GB RAM
7200 rpm drive
I got around 3900 each time.
Thank you awolfe63 !
http://forum.tt-hardware.com/fichiers/u ... 815827.png
I'am collecting score for a database. Can you please give me CPU, SM2 and SM3 score ?
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:59 pm
by eecon
Here is are 3DMark06 results for my T61 (outfitted per my signature line below):
CPU: T7500 2.2
3DMark06: 1669
SM2: 597
SM3: 599
CPU: 1960
WinXP Pro
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 140M Driver Version 6.14.11.7471
Core Clock: 400
Mem Clock: 600
1280x1024
Thanks
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:58 am
by awolfe63
For some reason - it keeps getting slower.
3DMark Score
3811 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score
1290
SM 3.0 Score
1605
CPU Score
2185
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 4:50 pm
by Pascal_TTH
Thank you awolfe63 and eecon. I will update this chart within a few days.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:42 am
by NaT
I'm wondering, how come the ATI 3650 in T500 in another thread
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=67774 (which were originally from NotebookReview:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4565) has much higher value? T500's 3dMark 2006: 4,371 vs. W500's: around 3,800-3,900 value?
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:18 am
by comptiger5000
My W500 gets 3969 @ 1280x1024 (3dmark06). The score was taken running Windows 2003 Enterprise.
