T43 - Sucessful gaming?

Message

HamTard · #1 Post by **HamTard** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:28 pm

I know the T43 isn't a gaming rig, but what are the most graphically intense GPU stressing games out there you have been able to play at really low settings on a T43 with the X300 64mb? I don't expect to play a lot of first person shooters, but all games are becoming pretty 3D intense, and I'm interested in Elderscrolls 4: Oblivion (not out yet, supposed to look amazing though) but I'm afraid I won't even be able to play it at the absolute lowest of low settings. Are my fears unfounded?

Navck · #2 Post by **Navck** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:31 pm

I can play Half Life 2 on 800x600 on low-medium (Mixed) settings
Note = 2687DDU

HamTard · #3 Post by **HamTard** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:38 pm

Thanks for the quick reply Navck, I guess what I'm really hoping is Oblivion will have really low settings to switch to, haha.

nirvana0001 · #4 Post by **nirvana0001** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:25 pm

it got approximately 9550 score in 3dmark01. I think it has no problem with most decent games.

HamTard · #5 Post by **HamTard** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 12:09 am

is the X300 in the T43 the 64-bit memory version? apparently the Dell i6000 has a 128-bit version of the X300, and I am hoping the T43 does as well, because that would make it much faster.

STS06 · #6 Post by **STS06** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 12:27 am

Sorry Ham, the x300 is a 64 mb card. Another option is to scale back to a T42 which has a better graphics card of upgrade to the p-series (T42p or T43p).

danny_isr · #7 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:04 am

T42 doesn't have better graphic card .
it came out marginal better on some benchmarks and less on others .
Games are not only graphic card , they use your CPU and memory speed.
and the T43 is faster there for sure. So i woud not say T42 is faster on games.

HamTard · #8 Post by **HamTard** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 7:08 am

STS06 wrote:Sorry Ham, the x300 is a 64 mb card. Another option is to scale back to a T42 which has a better graphics card of upgrade to the p-series (T42p or T43p).

I know its a 64mb card, but does it use 64-bit memory? Because the X300 is apparently just a slower X600, but the X600 has 128-bit memory. I have read that an X300 with 128-bit memory (not MB) can be overclocked to achieve near X600 capabilities.

HamTard · #9 Post by **HamTard** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 7:12 am

danny_isr wrote:T42 doesn't have better graphic card .
it came out marginal better on some benchmarks and less on others .
Games are not only graphic card , they use your CPU and memory speed.
and the T43 is faster there for sure. So i woud not say T42 is faster on games.

You have a T43, how does it score on 3DMark 2003? If you play games, what are the most modern 3D games you can play without being really choppy (on low settings)?

nirvana0001 · #10 Post by **nirvana0001** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:19 am

T43 not for gaming. If you need X600 performance, upgrade to t43p by extra $.
----------------------------------------------------
And here's copy from www.ati.com:
Multiple Variants For Ultimate Design Flexibility
Support for multiple mobile form factors:
Discrete
On-chip 32MB DDR (64-bit)
On-chip 64MB DDR (64-bit)
----------------------------------------------------
It seens X300 doesn't support 128bit, where'd you see Dell 6000 has 128bit x300? I only finding they have 128MB X300.

HamTard · #11 Post by **HamTard** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:45 am

I actually just read about the X300 having 128-bit on the i6000, but I guess the guy who said that was wrong.

danny_isr · #12 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:26 pm

from reading here about other people experience with the T3p , doesn’t seems it's a gaming machine either . i would NOT buy a P model for the games .
if you looking for a pure gaming machine i guess any T machine will not do.

from my experience with Doom3 for example . works just fine on the low settings . actually any game that i tried so far worked good.
I didn’t see it yet slow on any game that i tried . but i guess i didn't try them all.
IMO it's just fine ,

and i didn't run those benchmarks on it. i'm not comparing it to another machine here side by side. so didn't find a reason to run them.
this is what i got and it works fine

thinkpadz · #13 Post by **thinkpadz** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:57 pm

I'm having great sucess with the t41p with firegl t2.
doom3,q3,HL2 without a hitch.

danny_isr wrote:from reading here about other people experience with the T3p , doesn’t seems it's a gaming machine either . i would NOT buy a P model for the games .
if you looking for a pure gaming machine i guess any T machine will not do.

from my experience with Doom3 for example . works just fine on the low settings . actually any game that i tried so far worked good.
I didn’t see it yet slow on any game that i tried . but i guess i didn't try them all.
IMO it's just fine ,

and i didn't run those benchmarks on it. i'm not comparing it to another machine here side by side. so didn't find a reason to run them.
this is what i got and it works fine

danny_isr · #14 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:01 pm

then read my post again , i didnt say they are not good

thinkpadz wrote:I'm having great sucess with the t41p with firegl t2.
doom3,q3,HL2 without a hitch.
danny_isr wrote:from reading here about other people experience with the T3p , doesn’t seems it's a gaming machine either . i would NOT buy a P model for the games .
if you looking for a pure gaming machine i guess any T machine will not do.

from my experience with Doom3 for example . works just fine on the low settings . actually any game that i tried so far worked good.
I didn’t see it yet slow on any game that i tried . but i guess i didn't try them all.
IMO it's just fine ,

and i didn't run those benchmarks on it. i'm not comparing it to another machine here side by side. so didn't find a reason to run them.
this is what i got and it works fine

STS06 · #15 Post by **STS06** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:06 pm

Read your post again for what? He has a p-model and its running well for Doom3 and etc. IBM machines aren't designed for games but it doesnt mean they cant handle some, if not most. From what i hear, the p-models are your best bet and the T43 and T42 are both good. Don't expect to play games like we do on desktops though or the Dell X2...but then again, IBM laptops are better quality.

danny_isr · #16 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:11 pm

you basically said the same thing as me , that’s why i said read it again
I didn't say the P model are not good for games .
but i would not add the difference in price between a non P model to a P if the reason is just games. Because it's not going to be gaming machine either.
the difference in games performance between those machine is insignificant. and not worth the price difference if all you have in mind is better game performance .

STS06 wrote:Read your post again for what? He has a p-model and its running well for Doom3 and etc. IBM machines aren't designed for games but it doesnt mean they cant handle some, if not most. From what i hear, the p-models are your best bet and the T43 and T42 are both good. Don't expect to play games like we do on desktops though or the Dell X2...but then again, IBM laptops are better quality.

STS06 · #17 Post by **STS06** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:25 pm

Yeah I can agree to that. The T42p I configured is 2400 AFTER EPP. The T42 I configured was roughly 1900 dollars. I don't know what to choose. The T42p price is what I orginally capped my spending at BEFORE I found out that I could get EPP (realized that cousin worked at IBM).

One hour, I'll think, T42p is great...I'm already getting an awesome discount (orginal price is 3700) but the next I'm thinking the T42 is much better for its price.

nirvana0001 · #18 Post by **nirvana0001** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:29 pm

un-true! the P model not only has better game performance. You will also have UXGA, higer clocking CPU and etc.
"the difference in games performance between those machine is insignificant."?! are you kidding me? such as the different between Porsche boxster and Porsche 911?

danny_isr · #19 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:47 pm

This is starting to be a meaningless argument (all about pride and ego)

Well let me say it again

if all what you looking for is getting better GAMES performance i don't think
paying $929 more (that’s how much you paid more then me) is worth it.
the guy was talking about GAMES , not CPU and not screen.

i don't get it , your pride about your machine makes you blind ? there was a simple question here ....

BTW UXGA is not a benefit for everyone , i would not want that for example.
And yes if that’s what you looking for then get a P model.

nirvana0001 wrote:un-true! the P model not only has better game performance. You will also have UXGA, higer clocking CPU and etc.
"the difference in games performance between those machine is insignificant."?! are you kidding me? such as the different between Porsche boxster and Porsche 911?

nirvana0001 · #20 Post by **nirvana0001** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:52 pm

danny_isr, don't you think CPU is important for gaming?
And i am just interest your sentence "the difference in games performance between those machine is insignificant."
UXGA probably make him watch more data in the game. You don't think
paying $929 more is worth it but he might. My pride about my machine makes me blind? Are they related

danny_isr · #21 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:05 pm

Sure CPU is important , but he was asking about video card.
assuming he gets the same CPU speed on both machine , then it's the same CPU right ?

There was a guy here i forgot his name, that purchased 3 machines and compare them all. and even he said , that games works just fine on the non P model. when you compare it to a REAL gaming machine both are not too impressive . so to pay so much for so little ... i don’t think so.
UNLESS you want a P for other reasons.

I just don’t see why to pay 600-900 dollars more for just little bit better games performance . With that kind of money I can build a monster desktop machine for games
But hey this is me , I guess not all the people have the same logic

nirvana0001 wrote:danny_isr, don't you think CPU is important for gaming?
And i am just interest your sentence "the difference in games performance between those machine is insignificant."

nirvana0001 · #22 Post by **nirvana0001** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:12 pm

3 machines of t43/p? I think the gaming machine that you are talking about such XPS2 and Alienware? But they both got lower quality than thinkpad. For me, quality is the major factor of considering. So that's why i paid extra $ for P model because I have no another choice

danny_isr · #23 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:19 pm

well i guess it's preference of each person.
the 3 machines where T42p, T43p and T43.

i went with Thinkpad for the quality as well BTW.

STS06 · #24 Post by **STS06** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:31 pm

Danny is right...this individual quite thoroughly tested the T42p T43p and the T43 model. It was great for us who couldnt decide.

Based on that and others' opinions, I decided on the T42p. I agree with Danny that 700$ is not even worth the increase in CPU or graphics card. But one of the options I have configured comes out to the following:

1.8Ghz
FireGL 128mb Graphics card
1 G ram
15" UXGA
60 Gb 7200rpm HD

It all comes to roughly 1900 after the EPP. Thats one option I have. The only problem I have (which i posted a new thread about) is that I'm wondering if I should increase the CPU speed to 2.0 or 2.1....but a 2.0 is 200-300 dollars more and the 2.1 is 350-450 more. So I'm not sure if its worth it. With the above config though, danny, I'd spend rouhgly a 300 more than you but have a better graphics card, but also a slower CPU...so its not always a huge monetary difference. I'm also assuming you got the EPP discount..or else you cheated!

danny_isr · #25 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:38 pm

Yes i got the EPP as well.
i think you should keep your current CPU.
in real life , doubtful you will see any difference.
i own PCs for about 15-16 years now and i always get disappointed from real life performance over "on the paper/spec" once .

yeah the price is close to yours , i guess each machine got it's pros and cons

STS06 wrote:Danny is right...this individual quite thoroughly tested the T42p T43p and the T43 model. It was great for us who couldnt decide.

Based on that and others' opinions, I decided on the T42p. I agree with Danny that 700$ is not even worth the increase in CPU or graphics card. But one of the options I have configured comes out to the following:

1.8Ghz
FireGL 128mb Graphics card
1 G ram
15" UXGA
60 Gb 7200rpm HD

It all comes to roughly 1900 after the EPP. Thats one option I have. The only problem I have (which i posted a new thread about) is that I'm wondering if I should increase the CPU speed to 2.0 or 2.1....but a 2.0 is 200-300 dollars more and the 2.1 is 350-450 more. So I'm not sure if its worth it. With the above config though, danny, I'd spend rouhgly a 300 more than you but have a better graphics card, but also a slower CPU...so its not always a huge monetary difference. I'm also assuming you got the EPP discount..or else you cheated!

STS06 · #26 Post by **STS06** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:41 pm

Danny when most people here say they got the EPP, there's something that tells me that they aren't IBM employees..which may mean that they are related to or have friends that are employees. Is this the general case? It is in my case, my dad's friends' son works at IBM...so. Its perfectly ok (ethically) since its a discount for friends and family but I was just curious if most got it b/c they are employees or know employees (in your opinion).

danny_isr · #27 Post by **danny_isr** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:58 pm

Io have no idea about the majority (i bet they are not employees but it's just a feeling i got). I'm not .
I have a friend that works at IBM we share the same hobby , that's how i met the guy.

STS06 wrote:Danny when most people here say they got the EPP, there's something that tells me that they aren't IBM employees..which may mean that they are related to or have friends that are employees. Is this the general case? It is in my case, my dad's friends' son works at IBM...so. Its perfectly ok (ethically) since its a discount for friends and family but I was just curious if most got it b/c they are employees or know employees (in your opinion).

IR0NMAN · #28 Post by **IR0NMAN** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 7:55 pm

I can play Battlefield 2 just fine at 1400x1050 with pretty much everything at low-setting.

PM 1.8Ghz, 1GB, ATI FireGL 128MB stock speed.

HamTard · #29 Post by **HamTard** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:45 pm

can anyone give me one or more model numbers for a T43p that has a 1.7GHz or 1.8GHz CPU? And if possible, a list of what it comes with? The Canadian EPP only shows 2 T43p models, and they are the top of the line 14.1" and 15" models, but they cost CAD$5100 (with EPP) and I'm way too poor for that. If I can get the FireGL without paying a $3000 premium over a regular good T43, that'd be great.

nrj45 · #30 Post by **nrj45** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:32 am

HamTard wrote:can anyone give me one or more model numbers for a T43p that has a 1.7GHz or 1.8GHz CPU? And if possible, a list of what it comes with? The Canadian EPP only shows 2 T43p models, and they are the top of the line 14.1" and 15" models, but they cost CAD$5100 (with EPP) and I'm way too poor for that. If I can get the FireGL without paying a $3000 premium over a regular good T43, that'd be great.

I got this one (see sig) for SFr. 2680.- (about 2140$) with a student reduction. It's the 2668g4g. I think it's the best compromise between perf/portatibility. Please no proud theory. I'm just saying i'm happy with this notebook.
14'' sxga+ screen --> little/light enclosure
9 cells battery --> autonomy

T43 - Sucessful gaming?

T43 - Sucessful gaming?

Who is online