W510 or W701?

[r00sta]

I know they're very different machines, but I can't choose which I should buy.

I'm coming from a T42p which I love - it's been a real workhorse for me since new. I have a 1600x1200 screen, 2GB RAM. My main work is as a software developer and so screen real estate is very important to me. I also do some photography work, but have a high end desktop rig at home (quad core, overclocked, 8GB RAM, 3 monitors, blah, blah).

My day job (where I don't use the laptop) has me commuting 3 hours each way, of which about 1h 20m is 'usable' laptop time. During that time I develop web apps in C# ASP.Net, using MySQL or SQL Server. On top of that, I use Adobe Flash and Photoshop for web design and content.

I have access to IBM employee discount which gives a pretty significant discount off list price.

So now my quandary. My T42p *needs* retiring - the latest Visual Studio 2010 is killing it. I was originally looking at a W510 after reading Ayende Rahein's review (.Net coder) who has one and loves it. But since I'm going to have this next machine for 5+ years before replacing it I'm thinking I should *go large* with this purchase.

So I've currently spec'd up a W510 with FHD (when available), 4GB RAM, 320GB 7200RPM for about $1,700 with discount. The W701 spec I went all out ... 4GB RAM, SSD main drive, 320GB 7200 secondary drive, calibrator and Wacom pad, coming in at around $3,000. Clearly a lot more money and a lot bigger machine physically.

The extra size and weight of the W701 I don't *think* concerns me. Recognising they are very different machines, does anyone have experience with both to comment on which they consider might be best for my requirements?

Thanks!

[Marin85]

Unfortunately, I don´t have real life experience with neither of them. However, it seems to me that coming from the 4:3 T42p you may not be very pleased with the 16:9 W510, especially since you are a programmer. On the other hand, with the W510, while using vertical space, you gain horizontal space, which you may like for the Visual Studio. Aside from the screen (including here size and weight), the other two significant differences are the available gpus and the second HD bay. FYI, the Quadro FX3800M has almost the double performance of that of the Quadro FX880M, found in the W510. As for the second HD bay, it of course allows for bigger storage and RAID. However, the gpu and second HD advantage are probably not of much relevance to you since you have a workstation for more demanding purposes. It is also worth noting that both models can be configured with up to i7-920XM Intel cpu, so cpu-wise there is no difference. It seems the only thing that really matters here is the screen.

There is also another thing that comes to mind, and that is upgradeability. If I am not mistaken, both the cpu and gpu in both models are replaceable (since they are not soldered to the motherboard). One could even speculate that the next batch of Intel cpus for mobile and nVidia mobile gpus might be backwards compatible with the current models... If that is so, W701 would have clear advantage since it is designed to handle gpus with higher TDP.

Hope this helps,

Marin

[AMATX]

I'm writing this post on a 16:9, 1920x1080 monitor and I can't stand it.
I use external monitors hooked up to laptops, and all of them except this one are 1920x1200.

BIG diff; much bigger than I would've ever thought. First time using this monitor for 'typical' work, as I had it dedicated for something else, where size didn't really matter much. Going right back to my usual monitor asap...

So, that right there would push me into 1920x1200 WUXGA territory.

Considering your stated needs, I've gotta think that a bigger screen is gonna be way better, so I'd recommend some sort of 17" screen, as in the W701 or even a W700. I recently purchased a W700 and I really like the screen, altho I mainly use it hooked up to a 24" WUXGA monitor.

If you have the space to use a W70x laptop, I'd recommend you go with that.

Also, be sure you consider battery/juice requirements during your commute. That may also be a factor, especially if you're on battery power exclusively.

[archer6]

For comparison I have: T500, W500, T510, W510, W700 ThinkPads.

The T's are good all around business machines. In my case, I do a wide variety of resource intensive work, thus a workstation class ThinkPad is a must. For a first gen model the W700 has been quite good. That said, by comparison the W701 is fantastic! I just ordered mine with great enthusiasm. I carry mine daily & the extra weight just isn't a big deal for me. Although the W510 is a good machine, nothing in my opinion beats the new W701!

Cheers.

[QFoam]

r00sta,

Being a software developer myself, I can appreciate the need for a higher-resolution screen.

But 1920x1080 resolution at 15.6" is useless to me, because the dot pitch is too high. And unlike people who are just watching videos or surfing the web, when running a software development environment you really need to be able to view the text in all of those open windows at pretty-much native resolution. If you can see a knat a 50 yards, then it may be fine for you.

I have a W700, which is essentially the same size/weight as the W701, and the 1920x1200 display on that is fine for me. I literally printed out full-size mockups at the proper resolution of the different screens I was considering before I bought my laptop.

The problem with the W7XX is that it is rather large and heavy to carry around, the battery life of the W700 is not so great, and battery life of the W701 may be even worse if you're stressing the higher-end graphics processor (which can draw up to 25 watts more power than the higher-end GPU in the W700). Although the RGB-LED backlit display on the W701 may save you 10 watts or so over the dual-fluorescent backlights of the W700 (at full brightness). Frankly, I don't want to carry around the W700 all day (I instead carry a 12.1" netbook) -- my W700 is basically my desktop replacement. But test it out for yourself: add the extra weight required for the W701 to your normal laptop & carrying case, carry that around for a few days, and see what you think. Be sure to include the weight of the megalith power brick as well, unless you plan to buy an extra power brick for work.

A problem you may run into with the W701 (and the W510 for that matter) is that its spiffy display has a brightness of only 280 NITs, and some of that brightness will be consumed by any color calibration that you turn on. The display of the W700, on the other hand, is 400 NITs, which is bright enough to view in direct sunlight (to see a photo of the W700's display in direct sunlight, click here). I've used laptops many times before on trains, and I've found that I need a fairly bright display to see much during the day. And, on top of that, if you're trying to see tiny text on a 1920x1080 15.6" display that isn't so bright, reading the display will be even harder.

So you have some tradeoffs to consider. Good luck!

[r00sta]

All - thanks for the great replies, all very constructive.

The resolution issues with the x1080 do seem to reflect my fears - I keep trying to tell myself that 'it's only 100 or so pixels' shorter than my x1200 T42p, but the extra width is probably going to make it seem like more. Of my desktop 3x monitor rig, I have a 24" 1920x1200 flanked by 17" 4:3 at the same vertical resolution, so having 1920x1200 on the laptop would be a smooth transition.

The short battery life won't bother me too much - I only use it on battery power for about 1h 20m at a time, getting a recharge at the office before the home run. I've heard the W701 power supply is a monster - I'd probably get a spare and keep at the office - unless my T42p 16V/4.5A would work? I hear quotes of 2h - am I likely to run out of juice?

The weight and size - well, I'd need a new bag For the weight, I'm not actually carrying it a huge amount. I drive to a ferry terminal, then walk a short distance to a train, and my office is right next to the station, so not like I'm trekking miles. It's on the ferry that I get my 'laptop' time - direct sunlight isn't an issue as I sit on the shady side inside each way.

The dual drive bays interests me on the W701 - thinking that a SSD for the primary drive will give me fast start up times, and then use a 7200RPM for the data and swap drives. I've read that SSDs have a limited write life, so I'd be a bit worried using it as a primary drive, especially with the swapping that will happen when running with VS2010. This was one of the concerns I had with the W510 that I'd be restricted to a mechanical drive.

Upgradability is a plus for both, would be nice to know that it has a degree of future proofing - it would be more for the CPU than the GPU for me though - blistering graphics speed isn't a top priority for me. The resolution on the 1600x1200 T42p I find just about perfect - not sure how the DPI compares?

So it looks like I'm swinging to the W700 series. Archer6's comments are really pushing me to the W701, but QFoam has me wondering if I should snap up one of the really cheap W700 models that are shifting on the Lenovo outlet. I'd rather go i7, but would be saving a huge amount if I go W700. I take it they're not upgradable?

[QFoam]

...wondering if I should snap up one of the really cheap W700 models that are shifting on the Lenovo outlet. I'd rather go i7, but would be saving a huge amount if I go W700. I take it they're not upgradable?

You can't upgrade the W700 to the i-series processors. That requires a whole different motherboard. Also note that the W700 officially supports a max of 8GB of RAM using two memory slots, whereas the W701 officially supports a max of 16GB of RAM using four memory slots (and so it's cheaper to fill with 8GB than the W700, right now, since 4GB memory modules currently have a higher cost per gigabyte than 2GB modules).

The W700 is more mature, and thus has had more of its bugs already shaken out. But the W701 uses the next generation of technology. With the new CPUs/GPUs in the W701, you draw less power at idle. However, the highest-end processors available for the W701, when running at full speed, can draw significantly more power than those of the W700. At the same time, they will perform significantly faster than the W700 when running at full speed. But virtually all of that additional power that's drawn is converted into heat. We're not yet sure how well the W701 will deal with that extra heat. Will it have to throttle back the new processors to prevent overheating, thus partially negating their extra capacity for speed? Will the extra heat affect reliability? We don't yet know. We have seen this to be somewhat of a limitation in the W510.

Anyway, here are a couple posts that address and summarize those issues:

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 35#p566135

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 74#p565274

In the first post, be sure to look at the section describing current bugs in the W700, which may also be potential bugs in the W701. Of particular importance to you may be the audio stuttering bug, which is caused by bugs in the Powermizer feature of the NVIDIA graphics processor under Windows 7. As you'll read, this has affected a broad range of recent laptops, has been a huge albatross around NVIDIA's neck, and everyone hopes that it will be solved as soon as possible. I mention it so that you'll go into any purchase with your eyes wide open, and so that you won't be unpleasantly surprised.

In theory, according to NVIDIA, that bug will be solved in the first drivers for the new machines such as the W701. And perhaps those new drivers will apply to the W700 as well. Only time will tell. As people get their hands on the W701, we'll get a much better idea of the situation with that machine.

[AMATX]

All - thanks for the great replies, all very constructive.

...
The dual drive bays interests me on the W701 - thinking that a SSD for the primary drive will give me fast start up times, and then use a 7200RPM for the data and swap drives. I've read that SSDs have a limited write life, so I'd be a bit worried using it as a primary drive, especially with the swapping that will happen when running with VS2010. This was one of the concerns I had with the W510 that I'd be restricted to a mechanical drive.
...

I have a W700, purchased in February. SSD drive. I was concerned about the writability vs. wear issue, too. So, what I did was max out the memory to 8Gig, then went here to get a really nifty Ramdrive app:

http://memory.dataram.com/products-and- ... re/ramdisk

I run an app that does a large amount of writing to disk very quickly, for 6.5 hours straight.
So you can see why I'd want to avoid repeated slamming of an SSD...

And, btw, the ramdrive app allows me to 'permanently' install an app on the ramdrive, too. So, if I blow out the app, I just reboot, and the ramdrive is reinstalled in it's original form, including the installed app. Very handy, in addition to the typical data & I/O stuff for which one would use a ramdrive.

Solution:

* 4Gig Ramdrive for the 6.5 hours of slamming. NO wear to the SSD
* 4Gig left over for Win7 system/apps usage; ok there, for now...
* at end of day, save what I want to either the SSD, or to a convention HD, located in slot #2

A further level of data staging/storage can be done with a 3rd drive in the Ultrabay slot.

So, for -me-, a very tidy solution wrapped up in the W700 package.

If $$$ work out, I'll eventually go to a W701 platform for more mips and 16Gig(larger Ramdrive, too ).

Btw, anyone know if the W700 platform could drive 12 or 16Gig, if using 8G chips? W700 has two memory slots, and eventually, 8G chips will be available/affordable. I've not yet found out if the W700 8G limit is hardware related or just due to no 8G chips being available when Lenovo drafted the original specs.

[Marin85]

Btw, anyone know if the W700 platform could drive 12 or 16Gig, if using 8G chips? W700 has two memory slots, and eventually, 8G chips will be available/affordable. I've not yet found out if the W700 8G limit is hardware related or just due to no 8G chips being available when Lenovo drafted the original specs.

When such modules are available, we will see

Regarding upgradeability, I was referring only to W701/W510 ThinkPads. As QFoam already mentioned, Nehalem is unfortunately not backwards compatible to the Montevina platform (found in W700), so the future upgradeability options of W700 are pretty limited. QFoam made a good point about the RAM slots. The 4 RAM slots provides great expandability. In the spirit of the above comment, when 8 GB modules are eventually available, W701 will be most likely able to utilize a total of 32 GB RAM

As for SSDs, I think it is important to note that there are great differences across the SSD models. If you want SSD-like speed, but you are concerned about longevity of the drive, maybe it is time to start considering investing in one of those SLC SSDs. They offer even greater speeds and have far better reliability and life expectance. Another thing that comes to mind is that W701 is capable of RAID 0,1, which is actually great for all the reads/writes of Visual Studio. In fact, W701 is most likely capable of up to RAID 5 if one decides to use the ultrabay slot (where the CD/DVD device resides) as a third HDD slot.

Cheers,

Marin

[Marin85]

Actually, I have certain doubts that we will be seeing 8 GB RAM modules in laptops anytime soon. 8 GB modules would have such a price that buying any of them wouldn´t be justifiable against the anyways sufficient 4x 4 GBs, not to mention that buying only 2x 8 GBs is pretty much beyond the point of having 8 GB modules...

EDIT: editted in accordance to the information posted by Vempele.

[Vempele]

Nehalem "program", which means the next great step will be adopting the triple-channel design to the mobile platform.

Stop right there. You're just completely wrong. As of April 9, 2009, Intel's mobile processors are going to be dual-channel for the foreseeable future (Q1 2012).

[Marin85]

Stop right there.

And if I don´t raise my hands, you will shoot me?!

Jokes aside, I stand corrected, for which I thank you. But to be honest, I am kind of disappointed now that Intel does not intend to introduce the tripple channel to mobile platforms (and it is not like they are not having the technology yet...).

[r00sta]

Another thing that comes to mind is that W701 is capable of RAID 0,1, which is actually great for all the reads/writes of Visual Studio.

Marin - I've only ever considered RAID for redundancy, and never performance, so hadn't even considered RAID 0 on the laptop. What's the consensus on having 2x 320GB 7200RPM drives in a RAID 0 configuration compared to a SSD/320GB 7200RPM setup? The difference to my total price is $240.

Also how much is running 2 mechanical drives going to dig into the battery runtime? Remember, as long as I can get about 90 minutes, I'm ok.

[Marin85]

Marin - I've only ever considered RAID for redundancy, and never performance, so hadn't even considered RAID 0 on the laptop. What's the consensus on having 2x 320GB 7200RPM drives in a RAID 0 configuration compared to a SSD/320GB 7200RPM setup? The difference to my total price is $240.

Also how much is running 2 mechanical drives going to dig into the battery runtime? Remember, as long as I can get about 90 minutes, I'm ok.

My understanding is that RAID 1 provides redundancy while thus still delivering improved reading performance. RAID 0 delivers improved performance for both reading and writing, but if one of the HDs happens to fail, recovery is nearly impossible or very expensive. So, if you decide to go for RAID 0, given that you are programer, keep in mind to do very regular backups (which is actually anyways a Must). If I am not wrong, there was a guy on this forum who has benchmarked RAID configurations in W700. Right now I can't find this information as I am not posting from my computer, but the forum search function should provide you with the relevant posts.

I would highly recomment you googling for SSD + software development or similar. In general, SSDs are known for their not so great performance in random reads/writes of small files (compared to HDDs), that is found in software development, in particular with Visual Studio. I even remember of a guy complaining about his SSD being too slow for his programing work... But that was long time ago, and things have changed a lot since.

So, find out the model of the SSD you would like to configure your W7xx ThinkPad and search for some benchmarks (random reads and writes of small files), then compare them to the RAID benchmarks you find on this forum.

Running 2 mechanical drives in RAID will definitely eat a good amount of battery time. Let us not forget that W7xx is not exactly the laptop offering great battery times. Unfortunately, I can't give you any exact measurements on this.

EDIT: I think I found the link -> Extremely Fast W700 Drive Configuration "Cookbook" by tinkererguy. You will find interesting posts there.

[r00sta]

Does anyone know the specs on the Lenovo installed SSD? The more I read, the more I'm leaning towards one for the boot drive - and even wondering if I try it out first alone before getting a secondary drive. Many of the newer posts regarding SSD do suggest that most of the original issues just aren't there any more - especially with Windows 7.

If I do that, of course, it comes down to whether I get the Lenovo installed one, or get the 7200 HD and buy an SSD somewhere else and swap it out myself.

Buying something is so much easier when you're completely ignorant ...

[AMATX]

Offhand, I don't know the specs, but like you I wondered about 7200 vs. SSD. I chose SSD(glad I did), and one of the reasons was to divert the $$$ I'd spend on the 7200 drive into the SSD. Didn't need one more too small HD lying around; would rather dump it all into SSD.