Replacement 2378-FVU Arrived...

T4x series specific matters only
Post Reply
Message
Author
k3vb0t
Freshman Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:04 pm
Location: Rome, GA

Replacement 2378-FVU Arrived...

#1 Post by k3vb0t » Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:55 pm

Well IBM agreed to hot swap with me by sending me a new laptop and letting me choose one and send it back to them within 30 days. I went for this option because I had two stuck red pixels, and a green one that comes and goes on my original laptop.

So I just booted up the new one and into XP, and I am noticing a significantly warmer case on the new one. The heat is coming from under the touchpad and surrounding area to the left and right. Feeling underneath both of them shows the newer one to be much warmer. This was while the new one was plugged in, so I have unplugged it and will see if this evens it out (though I don't see why that would be the case).

I checked the system properties just to make sure I got the same machine. It is a 2378-FVU, just like my old one. The only difference I see is under the General tab, it shows the processor as 1.7ghz, 594Mhz, 256mb RAM. My old machine reads as 1.7ghz, 209Mhz, 768mb RAM (I added a 512mb stick). So my question is: Did they send me the wrong processor (perhaps the plain 1.7ghz vs. the "735 1.7ghz"), and this is causing the extra heat, or would the adding of the RAM bump the 209mhz listed on the new machine down? Would this reduce the heat?

Good news is the display on the new one seems to have no stuck or dead pixels (knock on wood). I thought I saw one during setup, a blue one, but it seems to have disappeared.

My main concern now is the difference in the listed 209mhz vs. 594mhz, and the extra heat.

Edit: Also, the laminate over the wireless, battery, etc. lights on the laptop has a large bubble in it. Not a deal breaker, as my first one has a few imperfections, but combine this with the heat and I begin to wonder. Thoughts?

Thanks for any help you can provide,
Kevin

SimonCC
Sophomore Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:52 pm
Location: England

#2 Post by SimonCC » Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:09 pm

In regard to the bubble, have you taken the sticker off :shock: ?? Also, it appears they have given you a better cpu, the heat you describe is odd, i have a t42 dothan 725 1.6 and there is none of the heat you describe, maybe some slight heat where the hd is located only. Be weary of that strange pixel that disappeared as i have seen case where dead pixels turn up intermitanty in the same spot ober time.

k3vb0t
Freshman Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:04 pm
Location: Rome, GA

#3 Post by k3vb0t » Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:12 pm

SimonCC wrote:In regard to the bubble, have you taken the sticker off :shock: ?? Also, it appears they have given you a better cpu, the heat you describe is odd, i have a t42 dothan 725 1.6 and there is none of the heat you describe, maybe some slight heat where the hd is located only. Be weary of that strange pixel that disappeared as i have seen case where dead pixels turn up intermitanty in the same spot ober time.
Ah ha... its a sticker... no one tells me these things (guessing this is in the instructions? :D).

So you think they pumped me from the "Pentium M 735 1.7ghz" to the simple "Pentium M 1.7ghz"? I noticed there was a price difference when I ordered, so I'm guessing this one is better.

Later I am going to attempt to test the heat of both by plugging both in and letting them run to see if they get to be about the same termpature. But it was pretty warm compared to the old one running on battery.

SimonCC
Sophomore Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:52 pm
Location: England

#4 Post by SimonCC » Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:24 pm

haha-classic! I think the chip you have now is 735 M yes, and there would also be a notable price differance as you have said, i think you have nothing to worry about, just monitor the heat issue and the pixel.

Plinkerton
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:33 am

#5 Post by Plinkerton » Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:24 pm

I thought that all the 1.7 ghz processors were Dothan, and 735. I didn't think there was any difference. Do I just not know? Are there really supposed to be different ones?

daeojkim
ThinkPad Partner
ThinkPad Partner
Posts: 879
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 1:41 am
Location: Houston, TX. USA

#6 Post by daeojkim » Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:55 pm

2378fvu are all Dothans 1.7GHz..
* T60 * X61 * X41 * T500 * ThinkCentre A58 *

entertrust
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Houston, TX

#7 Post by entertrust » Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:57 pm

Plinkerton wrote:I thought that all the 1.7 ghz processors were Dothan, and 735. I didn't think there was any difference. Do I just not know? Are there really supposed to be different ones?
Hello all, been lurking around the site for quite awhile and find it very enjoyable to read everyones posts. I hope to start contributing.

As far as the 1.7GHz is concerned...the 1.7 M 735 (Dothan) has a different core than the standard 1.7 M (Banias). Two competely different processors...the 735 denotes you having a new Dothan. Hope this helps. 8)

AtmosMan
Sophomore Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 5:33 pm
Location: Albany, NY (college) or Pleasantville, NY (home)

#8 Post by AtmosMan » Mon Nov 15, 2004 9:21 pm

Pinkerton,

Therer are 2 different 1.7Ghz Pentium M Processors. The Banias version and the Dothan version (as stated by entertrust.) The 1.7GHz Banias was first used by IBM in the T41 released about 1 year ago. When Intel switched to the new numbering system last spring, the Pentium M Processors were named the 735, 745, and 755. The first being a 1.7GHz Dothan used by IBM in the T42. The main difference between the Banis core and the Dothan core is level 2 cache. Banias has a 1MB level 2 cache whereas the Dothan core has a 2MB level 2 cache.

Plinkerton
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:33 am

#9 Post by Plinkerton » Mon Nov 15, 2004 9:31 pm

Ah, I see. Thanks everyone!

k3vb0t
Freshman Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:04 pm
Location: Rome, GA

#10 Post by k3vb0t » Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:51 pm

so which did I end up with? neither of them "say" '735 1.7Ghz' in the hardware profile, that is just what I ordered on the first one (because there was an option for a non-735 one, but I went with the 735)

Which is why I am wondering why my mhz went up from 209 to 594 between the two? I haven't re-checked the heat yet and probably won't be able to until tomorrow sometime.

none
Sophomore Member
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 5:09 pm
Location: Everywhere!

#11 Post by none » Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:31 am

I got a T41p, that has the Banias 1.7GHz in there.. It always runs at 594MHz stepped down, if that helps
T61p 6460-67U.

SimonCC
Sophomore Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:52 pm
Location: England

#12 Post by SimonCC » Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:44 am

just thought id add that dothans begin at 725 1.6ghz - i know because i have one! :wink:

k3vb0t
Freshman Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:04 pm
Location: Rome, GA

#13 Post by k3vb0t » Tue Nov 16, 2004 7:01 am

none wrote:I got a T41p, that has the Banias 1.7GHz in there.. It always runs at 594MHz stepped down, if that helps
Ah ha! This makes me pretty sure I got the Banias 1.7Ghz with 1MB cache instead of the Dothan 735 1.7Ghz with 2MB cache.

Am I at a disadvantage for not having that 2MB cache? Which is more battery efficient?

admsteiner
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:24 pm
Location: New York City

#14 Post by admsteiner » Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:21 am

There is a Dothan and Banias 1.7GHz.

Intel also has a CPU ID utility (the link escapes me), and that will tell you whether or not it's the Dothan or Banias chip.
IBM ThinkPad T42 (2378-FVU), 14.1" SXGA, ATI 9600, 512MB, 40GB, DVD-ROM/CDRW, 6 cell and 9 cell battery, Waterfield bag (sfbags.com)

lfeagan
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: Leawood, KS
Contact:

#15 Post by lfeagan » Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:59 am

Image
T61p (6459CTO)|T9500|15.4" WUXGA-4GB|200GB FDE|256MB nVidia FX570M|Atheros|Cingular WWAN|openSuSE 11.0
T42p (2373GVU)|PentiumM 1.8GHz|2GB|100GB|ATI FireGL T2|Atheros|openSuSE 10.3
WaterField Designs Cargo + Sleeve

k3vb0t
Freshman Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:04 pm
Location: Rome, GA

#16 Post by k3vb0t » Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:55 am

lfeagan wrote:http://www.cpuid.com/
Ah! Gracias!

This is what CpuID program is showing:

Name : Intel Pentium M 735
Code Name : Dothan
Brand ID : 22
Specification : Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.70Ghz
Core Speed: 599.5 Mhz
Multiplier: x 6.0
FSB 99.9 Mhz
Bus Speed : 399.7 Mhz

Cache:
L1 Data: 32Kb
L1 Code: 32Kb
Level 2: 2048Kb

So looks like I have the right processor. Interesting that the Mhz changed though, from old laptop to new. I guess there is no problem?

Thanks for the link, nifty little program.

davidlg16
Sophomore Member
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:30 am
Location: California
Contact:

#17 Post by davidlg16 » Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:35 pm

how did IBM let u do a hot swap?

did u just tell them you had some bad pixels?

Thanks
David
T60P 20078JU

Technician
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:06 pm

#18 Post by Technician » Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:14 pm

The Pentium M processor is always adjusting its frequency depending on demand,

When on battery, it will run at a slower frequency (by default). Unplug the new laptop, and reboot. Check the general tab again. It will show around 209mhz. Windows doesn't dynamically update the mhz rating on that tab, as far as I know. It just reads it once either when you first open the tab, or when you start up windows. After that, it caches the information and shows the same thing until you reboot.

This is also why the new one was running hotter when plugged in.

EDIT: All T42's are Dothans, and all T41's are Banias. This is the biggest difference between T41 and T42!

Kenn
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 12:07 am
Location: NY, USA

#19 Post by Kenn » Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:20 pm

I'm still trying to get a straight answer about the 200MHz issue.

Under battery maximiser, my T42 used to do:

Maximum: 1.8Ghz
Slow: 600Mhz
Very Slow: 200Mhz.

"Very slow" simply crawled, it was very noticeable.

After reinstalling, it only goes down to 600MHz, so the "Slow" and "Very slow" settings are redundant. This is confirmed in CPUID and Mobilemon.

I'd like to find some way of getting the slowest setting back for maximum battery life, but installing the older Power management and Battery Maximiser software didn't do it. Any ideas?

Kenn

PS - Some have been saying P-Ms only speedstep down to 600MHz - I'm 100% certain this isn't the case, because when it worked, the three clock speeds were marked and unmistakable. Alas...
IBM ThinkPad T42p (2373-7XU): 1.8GHz/1024MB, 15" UXGA, DVD-RW, 80GB, 2200b/g.
T42 (2374-3VU): 1.7GHz/512MB, 14.1"SXGA+, DVD-RW, 80GB, 2200b/g.

Leon
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 6:04 pm
Location: Boston, MA USA

#20 Post by Leon » Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:41 pm

well, I don't know about Pentium "rules". but my T42 never goes lower than 600.

Technician
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:06 pm

#21 Post by Technician » Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:34 pm

Check your BIOS settings maybe? I know there is one pertaining to the scaling of the CPU speed.

Plinkerton
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:33 am

#22 Post by Plinkerton » Thu Feb 10, 2005 1:28 am

IBM will let you hot swap if you talk to the right person. They did it for me also, and all is well. :D

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “ThinkPad T4x Series”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests