How good or bad is T530's 1600 x 900 screen?

I understand that it is better than the one on T430. But I wonder how actually it is. The 1366 x 768 is of course garbage, and I wonder if the 1600 x 900 on T530 is of average quality or it is actually 'good'?

Or perhaps people hate so much about the 1366 x 768, the feel the higher level upgrade is acceptable in comparison with the low end screen .

Having been search video and posts about the 1600 x 900 on T530, but haven't found any.

By the way, if money and dpi is not a problem, anyone should choose a 1920x1080 because its display quality is much better, is it correct?

 

It is more usable than the HD 1366x768 screen. Colors are okay, black is more like black, white is rather like a faint shade of yellow, brightness is okay, contrast is so so, viewing angles are limited. And, of course, more pixels.

This statement is totally unnecessary.

Yes. Display quality very high, color gamut almost complete.

Note that I did not use the terms "good," "bad," "love" and "hate" in the above answer.

 

Then I will need to get the 1920 one. I don't know how to describe it and now you have made it very clear.

 

Although I do notice that you use the word bad, though not as frequently as I did. I will be careful with my writing next time. I didn't get enough morning coffee today.

:thumbsup:

 

You'd better get more coffee. I checked again, but found no word "bad" in what I wrote:

It is more usable than the HD 1366x768 screen. Colors are okay, black is more like black, white is rather like a faint shade of yellow, brightness is okay, contrast is so so, viewing angles are limited. And, of course, more pixels.

This statement is totally unnecessary.

Yes. Display quality very high, color gamut almost complete.​

However, that doesn't mean I consider that Lenovo produces great products, especially regarding its choices of displays.

 

I'd definitely go with the 1080p display if money is no object, as Kaso says. Played with both the 1080p and 900p displays (in my W520, and in a review W530, respectively, but they all use the same panel options), and aside from the obvious pixel count differences, the increased color gamut makes images on the display more "lively" and vibrant.

 

I had two T530's at the same time for a trial. One had the HD+ screen, the other had the FHD screen.

The HD+ screen is the one I sent back. Notice I didn't use the words "better" or "worse" or "good" or "bad" or their cognates.

But now I will.

The HD+ was a very good screen compared the the Z61t screen I was replacing. However, the FHD screen seemed to me to be clearly better. It had more resolution, better coloration, more real estate, better sharpness, and significantly more brightness. I spent the extra money on it even though I was already over budget. I'm very happy with it.

 

A 15" 1600x900 screen is garbage, by its very nature. Unusable for any serious multitasking, reading documents, etc.

 

Then I will definitely get the FDH one. I read from my screen for long hours and I don't want to face a lousy screen. The display quality of my current X220 is satisfactory.

I do have one concern, though. I feel more comfortable reading larger fonts in web browsers and MS word, is the high dpi on FHD for a squinter like me? Or I can just zoom in the text like I am doing right now on X220?

 

Garbage? Many posts say it is better than the one on T430 even though the resolution is the same.

 

I am looking for a replacement for my Dell D820 15.6" notebook and looks like I will be jumping ship to my first non-Dell, the T530 with the FHD screen, Win 7 Pro, and an I5. I will not be playing games, but will occassionally stream Netflix when on the road. My first thought is to stay with the Intel HD4000 video to keep the heat down and avoid the issues of the system swapping back and forth between the video chips as we have a Dell at work that seems to have issues with it. If a person goes with the 1600 X 900 FHD screen, does it also make a difference with which video chip? Or does the HD4000 have sufficient power?

 

900p isn't FHD, so I'm assuming you mean 1080p. Anyway, the HD 4000 has plenty of juice to run the FHD display and any non-gaming, non-professional task you could do on it. The HD 3000 certainly has no issues with this either.

 

Yes I did list the wrong resolution. Been looking at too many numbers and too many models this past week. Thanks for the confirmation.

 

Curious, why switch to a non-Dell?

Btw, I have used the Latitude E6530 with the FHD and have the FHD on my T530 - the latter is better in every way. Other than that, both notebooks are excellent in their own ways.

 

We have Dell E Series Latitudes and Vostros at work and one of them is a E5530 with a 1600 X 900 screen which is physically the same size as the E6530. With the 10 key pad added, they are bulky for transporting and take up a lot of real estate. Thought hard about the E6430 as I also use a D630 at work, but I want something larger than the 14" screen for my 50+ bifocal eyes. Did a lot of reading on the XPS15 and the 15R SE and came away with mixed feelings as I did with Ultras. I know the IBM/Lenovo T Series are very comparable over the years to the Latitudes and have kept up on them. Came close to purchasing a T series when I purchased my D820, but Lenovo was having some screen quality issues at the time. I have looked briefly at Toshiba & HP units and reviews but nothing grabbed me. I need a good sturdy/reliable Win 7 Pro computer yet before they are gone and for an upcoming trip. I think the time is right to try a Lenovo, and possibly move my tractor service techs away from the Dell E5530's to Lenovo if I can convince management that the Latitudes are too bulky for working with in a tractor/combine/sprayer cab. They sure don't need the 10 key pad, but they do need the 15+ screens for wiring/hydraulic schematics.

 

I had exactly the same concern but it turns out to be no concern at all.

Within Windows 8 (and 7, I assume) you can change the size of all text and icons in Control Panel (Display) to three different pre-set levels or to custom levels. There's another control for changing the size of icons on the desktop, which you can do with your mouse.

In addition, browsers let you implement various zoom levels. I find Firefox with the NoSquint add-on feature to be the best. You can set a global zoom in NoSquint but then easily change the zoom level for different web pages, and then NoSquint remembers the different zoom levels for each site.

Because of the high resolution of the FHD screen, the characters remain sharp at the zoom levels I use.

 

Thank you!

This is exactly the answer I am looking for. Now I will definitely get an 1920 screen.

Although I am not so sure if I can change font size on my win7 as you do on win8, but I mostly just use word and Firefox, both of which have zooming functions. I also found the add-on NoSquint a week ago and I love it feature of changing even the background of any webpage. I chose black background and white fonts and it seems to have eased my vision.

 

Like some of you I just went through the same decision: deciding between 1600x900 or 1920x1080 res screen and whether or not to get the chosen screen in a Lenovo Thinkpad T530 or Dell Latitude E6530.

First I compared 1920x1080 and 1600x900 (2 different Latitude E6530's) and I opted to go with 1600x900. I was using Windows 7 to compare so perhaps the font/icon scaling isn't as robust as Windows 8, but I still felt that some software program tools I use do not get scaled so the program fonts are still tiny. Also, while I do multi-task, I usually have each program full-screen and just alt-tab between them often (i.e. I don't run multiple programs side by side in smaller windows) so i felt that 1600x900 suited me best with my less-than-stellar vision.

With 1600x900 resolution selected, next choice was whether or not to get the Dell E6530 or Lenovo T530. I got one of each with 1600x900 res screen and it was a pretty tough decision actually.

While the Dell E6530 certainly felt quite robust (build-quality wise) and the extra 10-key numpad on the side did come in handy some-times, the Lenovo T530 just edged out the Dell E6530 in terms of screen quality (color contrast, deeper blacks, etc.) and a slightly better keyboard (subjective of course) and pointing stick. That and the fact that the T530 weighs less made me choice the T530.

For the screen quality difference it could have just be a parts variation. For example, the E6530 I got had the "Samsung 156KT" screen and the Lenovo T530 I got had the "LG Philips LP156WD1-TLB2" screen. The LG was noticably better so if my Dell E6530 came with the LG screen (Dell may use them too) then I may have opted to stick with the Dell E6530 over the T530. Hope this helps someone with a similar dilemma.