Thinkpad E14 Gen 2 Resurrection

[RealBlackStuff]

Correct, get an AMD EDP-RGB cable (5C10Z23846) {DC02C00LG20 REV.:0A} as mentioned on Reddit.
Here's one on eBay USA: https://www.ebay.com/itm/387695184778

With a new fuse you should then be good.

[Scorpion8]

Thanks. Dropped the laptop off yesterday for a new fuse, and ordered the cable direct from Lenovo (already been shipped). Now the waiting.

BTW, really bugs me when eBay shippers ^ don't know how shipping works. Shipper IN the US, I'm IN the US..... "will not ship to your location". Odd, the last 1,000 eBay shippers did. Sheesh. They just lost a sale.

[Scorpion8]

UPDATE: Laptop is back from getting backlight fuse replaced. New AMD-specific cable enroute. Old screen that I replaced when I thought it was the backlight itself KIA has been disassembled to test with new cable before I go thru the whole install.

Question: the old cable coming out of the original Intel mobo device says "GE480_EDP_CABLE_RGB_TOUCH" does that indicate that the old screen was a touch screen, and will there be any issues using that screen with the AMD cable? The old screen is a FRU 5D11B64637, N140HCN-EA1.

[RealBlackStuff]

Houston Juneau, we/you have a problem.
Earlier on (Sept. 26) you showed a picture of an LCD-cable, was that not your cable?
It didn't say anything about Touch.

But if you yourself had done ANY research about your LCD, you would have found out that it is indeed a touch-screen!

So that being the case, according to Lenovo the AMD E14 is NOT available with a touchscreen and there is also no AMD touch-cable.
You already found out that the Intel-touch cable does not work on the AMD motherboard.

Your alternatives are:
1) get another Intel motherboard if you want to use that LCD
2) get another NON-touch screen (e.g. N140HCG-GN1)to use with the AMD motherboard and the AMD LCD-cable

[Scorpion8]

Actually I think there are some crossed wires here, or overly-quick reactions.

Recall that I have two screens. Before you helped me pinpoint the F1 LCD backlight fuse as the issue, I was assuming that the original screen backlight was out, so I procured a (used) replacement screen assembly. The original screen went with the Intel cable and Intel motherboard, but I had replaced the motherboard with an AMD version. That is when we/you/my tech friend helped figured out the Intel-cable on AMD motherboard was not compatible. Until I disassembled the original screen assembly I didn't see the TOUCH designator on the (original Intel) cable.

Also, I do not have extensive references for these machines. The PSREF shows that touch screens are available, but not if yours/me/mine has one....there's no label on the outside to designate and since the screen never worked from the get-go to try....

So now I have installed an AMD motherboard. An AMD-compatible cable is enroute (supposed to be delivered to home today).

That leaves me with two screen options, the original 5D11B64637 (N140HCN-EA1) and the replacement SD10M34154 (B140HAN04). Depending where I look online (yes, I actually DO do some research, but...) at the original screen, some references or ads say "touch screen" and some say "non-touch" so it is easily confusing. No where does the new screen say TOUCH anywhere on it.

The only remaining question is "Is the new AMD-compatible LCD cable compatible with one or either of the two available screen LCDs before I plug one of them in to test?" Will the (for example) touch screen work as a non-touch screen? Should I go strictly with the new (verified as...) non-touch screen?

[RealBlackStuff]

You're right, it was all a bit convoluted, because I managed to overlook your replacement LCD.
I also did not realise that your first LCD-cable pic was from that B140HAN04 LCD.

The good news is, that B140HAN04 is NON-touch and should work with the new AMD LCD-cable (and a working fuse).

FYI: the touch screen has 40 pins for the LCD-cable, the NON-touch has 30 pins there.
See also this comparison between a B140HAN04, touch N140HCN-EA1 and my recommended N140HCG-GN1.
(Note: there are at least 10 versions of the B140HAN04, incl. glossy, so could be the wrong comparison).

There remain the dock problems, about which I'm blissfully unaware...

Anyway,best of Irish.

[Scorpion8]

S-U-C-C-E-S-S !!!!

New cable installed, new(er) B140HAN04 LCD panel installed (chose this one because it had less keyboard markings/wear on the panel) and she boots right up into COLOR on the screen!!! Running Windows updates for all the changes and replaced devices as we speakish.

Curious though, both of the monitor LCD panels available in this project have 30-pin "copper" colored same-size LCD panel cable connectors (read online that the 40-pin tough connector was silver and different sized of course), yet one panel (the original N140HCN-EA1) is supposed to be touch (the cable coming out of the original setup was labeled TOUCH), meaning it should have the 40-pin connector (or am I getting that confused yet again)? Looking at them, I could have installed either with the new cable because they both have the same connector on the LCD panel, even though the cable from the original panel was labeled "TOUCH".

But a happy guy at the moment.....

One further question, considering the above, which LCD panel is considered "better" and should I have used the other panel?

[RealBlackStuff]

The touch is marginally better than the non-touch.
But the touch will NOT work on AMD.
Also look at the comparison data and judge for yourself.

[Scorpion8]

Thanks for the info. All seems well except the "brightness" doesn't seem to change using the Fn keys at all. All of the other functions (sound mute, wifi on/off, etc) do work.

ETA: The "monitor" driver was outdated and not the correct one. The Vantage install of the "Monitor file" kept failing which lead me to the problem. Proper driver installed and the brightness works fine and is BRIGHT! One issue at a time....

[RealBlackStuff]

The 40-pin connector is on the (touch) LCD itself, the non-touch LCD has a 30-pin.
The cable-end that goes in the motherboard LCD-connector is the same for both (Intel E14).
In your convoluted E14 case, even the motherboard LCD-connectors between Intel and AMD are different.

But great to hear you got it all going.

[Scorpion8]

Right, gotcha on that front. But .... Lenovo lists the original screen 5D11B64637 (N140HCN-EA1) by the same p/n as "touch" but this is a 30-pin connector? How can a 40-pin cable needed for a touch screen use the 30-pin connector?



Trying to figure out why what I see and what is reported doesn't match actuality?

[axur-delmeria]

I count the solder joints on the connector in your photo and got 40.

[Scorpion8]

I count the solder joints on the connector in your photo and got 40.

Odd, because the connector is the same size on each panel. I read somewhere that the 40-pin connector was silver and the 30-pin connectors were this copper-colored.

[RealBlackStuff]

If you look at that LCD-comparison, you'll see that the signal interface pin pitch = 0.4mm for 40-pin and 0.5mm for 30-pin.
That's 1 mm difference between them, which is barely (if at all) visible to the naked eye when looking at the LCD-connectors.
But hold the LCD-ends from the Intel-touch and the Intel-non-touch cables (parallel) together, and you should then see the pin-density difference.

[Scorpion8]

Well in the end it's all wrapped up. I dare say it is not Lenovo's best of form to use virtually identical connectors with "essentially" (to the naked eye) the same pin-out connector for a system that will short a component immediately. But "thanks all" for all the help here.

Onto the next project.....

[axur-delmeria]

Can't blame Lenovo for the LCD connectors, as those are industry standard.

[RealBlackStuff]

Knowing Lenono, the AMD connector was probably $0.001 cheaper than the Intel one.