Choosing T42 or T42p?

I am in the process of ordering a T-series thinkpad to use for radiology research (a lot of 3D volume rendering) and work (image reading). I will probably not use it much for gaming. The 15' flexview screen has apparently got nice qualities, of which I expect the wide viewing angle to be something I can appreciate when reading images. In volume rendering applications, I aim to use the Fire GL T2, although I'm just guessing it'll perform somewhat better than the other available HW. Anyhow, I want/need the most high-end grapics system available in a T-series frame, with 1600x1200 native resolution.

1. I have trouble seeing what the difference between T42 and T42p really is, though, as there is one model T42 with Fire GL T2 and 1600-resolution. It seems that T42p should be my choice, since it is presented as the model for demanding graphic applications?
2. I also wonder what the "DVD recordable" drive with 2x speed really signifies. As of now, I don't see that I'll really need DVD-recording. Does anybody know if this device is any good?
3. The battery life - how much shorter is it compared to a basic T41, for example? Any experiences?

My current first choice is the T42p UC2HTxx with 1.8GHz, 60GB HD, 1GB RAM (preferrably 2GB to be preinstalled though), 15' with 1600 x 1200 native res'n, Fire GL T2, and the "dvd recordable".
Any suggestions on other configurations?

 

you can build a t42p as well. i did 1.8ghz, firegl, b/g wireless, 256mb, 60gb/7200rpm, highcap battery, office basic 2003, leather case, port replicator. total with tax and shipping was $2930. added 1gb crucial memory (2x512mb, cheaper than ibm) aftermarket for around $200. i don't feel the need to record dvds on the road, and i can put a 16x nec nd-3500a in a macally 5.25" usb enclosure for $150 from newegg.com. the leather case, particularly the arm strap, rules. highly recommended. also, the port replicator is capable of powering two displays: one via dvi (digital) and one via standard vga.

 

Sounds like a good alternative although in my case I am told I should not go below 1GB RAM. I finally got some more information from our vendor (who had mispelled one of the model names to begin with and also gave somewhat bewildering pricing info) and ordered a UC2HTGxx. This is in Sweden, by the way, so I don't know if we might have fewer choices than on the big markets. Choosing between the two available T42p:s with similar performance, I noticed that one has to pay a lot for the extra "0.2" GHz to get the 2.0GHz processor, so I went for the 1.8 which should be great too. That meant that I got the DVD recorder (no option), although I think I'd preferred to omit that as you suggested, and get it at a little lower price. Well, I think it'll work out fine... I'd be surprised if I dislike anything about this thinkpad, even the weight.
2 weeks to go...

 

I am also in radiology and looking for a notebook for similar uses- research and work. Is 1GB RAM really the minimum to consider? Do I really need the T42p rather than the T42? Will 1024x768 do or is 1400x1050 the minimum you would consider?Do you view /post process MRI/MRS on your notebook? What other systems have you looked at?

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by doba

 

Hi doba,
I agree with bootleg2go, that the T42 should be great with the 1400x1050 resolution. I have no experience with MRS postprocessing, although I'm guessing the processing power of the T42 should be acceptable if, for example, you're using a high-end stationary PC for that purpose ordinarily. I went for 1GB of RAM because the datasets and applications in my case gobble up a lot of memory (1GB should be fine right now, but I need to be able to expand to 2 GB later.) I've seen the T42p with 14' screen and I liked it. I still chose the 15' screen since I finally decided that I don't mind the extra weight.

 

I am about to order the T42P however the final decision to make is whether the 2.0Ghz jump from 1.8Ghz is worth the cash. Anyone know how much of a difference it would make?
Also, is the 15" UXGA that much better that the 14.1 SXGA+?

I will be taking it back and forth everyday, however the size seems nominal.

What are your recommendations?

 

bootleg2go:
You said the difference between the the T42 and T42p also included a difference in battery time? Meaning the T42p gets less time because of the better video card?

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by kknudsen12

 

I'd take 14" SXGA+ over 15" UXGA, but I guess it's a personal preference. Do you need 1600x1200? Text will look pretty small, it weighs almost a pound more, eats up battery life, etc. But if you really need the extra res, get it.

 

I've used my T42P 2374-HTG for about six weeks now. The ergonomic features are great, as expected. To carry it around is no problem - I don't find it heavy anyway. The 1600x1200 res was a good choice for my radiology applications and I really like the greyscale it can produce (of course not possible to calibrate, but that is not as crucial as many monitor vendors say). Volume rendering software works ok, but I'm not done adjusting it yet. The machine runs HOT those times, though. I guess it's the same for those who use it for gaming.
Battery time is difficult to estimate, since I do so different tasks and seldom work continuously for 4 hours. It seems to be well in excess of four hours when I don't do a lot of image processing etc.

Initially I had a lot of trouble going through the upgrades of Bluetooth SW from the ibm website, but surprisingly it suddenly worked just fine. I connect via my nokia 6230 without any problem nowadays.

WLAN: no problems whatsoever.

Screen: No pixel errors. Somewhat uneven backlighting towards the upper left corner - difficult to say if this is within normal limits or not.

Noise: I'm no expert...but I'm not bothered at all. When the fan runs on max, I hear it, but nothing more than that.

Considering the huge resources in this machine, I wonder at the fact that Word sometimes takes five seconds or even a little more to start up, even when I access a local file. It is very quick sometimes, and sometimes not. (Sorry, just had to say that out loud. Don't bother reacting to this...)