T42 2378FVU 64MB ATI 9600 vs T43 266846U 64MB ATI X300

I spent more than several hours comparing the 266846U to the 2378FVU today.

I have a few days to return the 2378FVU and just received the 266846U.

The 2378FVU is 1.7, 768MB, 64MB ATI 9600.
The 266846U is 1.86, 512MB, 64MB ATI X300.

I was trying to see if the X300 tested out better than the 9600, but now, ager running them, I have no true better knowledge.

I ran a variety of benchmarks and did some “eyeball comparison” of the two.
I am not about to post all of the benchmark results, but I will post the most important data, and my conclusions.

I tested them both right out of the box, except that I added 512MB to the 2378. So, the 2378 had 768MB and the 2668 had 512MB. I did not put my 7200rpm drive in either of them, so they had the factory pre-load. The 2378 has a Hitachi 5K80 40GB 5400rpm, and the 2668 has a Hitachi 5K100 40GB 5400rpm. For whatever reason, the older 5K80 benched a hair faster, but I am not going to be using it anyhow, so that is irrelevant.

I set power to be full-power on A/C. The 2668 ran at 1.86GHz, and the 2378 at 1.7GHz.

To finish up with the question of the 3DMark05 scores:
2668 with 64MB X300 got a score of 710 (with 512MB system memory)
2378 with 64MB 9600 got a score of 688 (with 768MB system memory)
(no real difference).

Then I ran Aquamark version 3 benchmark:
2378 got a score of 19,575
2668 got a score of 17,269
(not sure why, or how accurate Aquamark is, although it is supposed to be “real world” based.

I then ran all of the SiSoft Sandra Lite 2005 SR1 benchmarks:
I won’t post all of the scores (too many, too boring).
In general, the 2668 beat the 2378 by about 10% (not surprising.)
This included CPU Arithmetic, CPU Multimedia.
However, the 2668 TROUNCED the 2378 in all memory-related testing.
It beat the 2378 BY ABOUT A THIRD, in Memory Bandwidth, Cache and Memory Bandwidth !!!
Everything else was either a wash or a 10% victory to the 2668.

I also ran some older versions of 3DMark. I realize that some of the techniques used for these tests is obsolete but some is still valid, I believe.

Anyhow:

3DMark03 v.3.6.0
--------------------
2668 got 1909 3DMarks
2378 got 2515 3DMarks !!!!
(the 2378 put the 2668 to bed!)

This is a DirectX 9.0 enabled benchmark


3DMark01 Second Edition Build 330
----------------------------------------
2668 got 7021 3DMarks
2378 got 9751 3DMarks

This older version of 3DMark uses DirectX 8.1
However, the 2668 got smoked by the 2378 on this as well.

General:

I looked at color purity of the screens.
Each has a Samsung panel. The 2378 has FRU # 92P6760 and the 2668 has FRU # 11P8348. Not sure what the difference is. Neither have any dead pixels. Both have the little light leakage on the right-side of the LCD frame, but you have to put your nose up to it to see it! Both are darker on the top than the bottom, due to the backlighting method.
Color clarity was about the same, the pure green looked a hair better on the 2378. Pure green seems to be the hardest to get nice on an LCD panel from what I have seen.

Haven’t compared the sound yet, but I expect they are identical.

Each had the same DVD/CD-RW.

The 2668 came with SONY 6 cell FRU # 92P1089 and a free Panasonic 6 cell promotion. Neither of them latches in as solidly as the SONY in the 2378 does. Need to do the heat-gun trick. I was surprised that even the SONY was not snug, but no big deal there.

Quality of fit, finish and assembly appear to also be identical. There are no substantial gaps in either.

The fan in the 2668 is louder on startup, but then quiets down a few moments after Windows boots. It is a faster, hotter CPU after all.

NOW...I REALLY don't know what to do !!!
But...I have to return (at least) one of them.

I think I would have favored the 2668 until the older 3DMarks and Aquamark all favored the 2378.

CPU is going to favor the 2668 since it is, of course a faster CPU.

Memory also favors the 2668.

I don't know how much difference the 768MB in the 2378 vs the 512MB in the 2668 made???

Your opinions, comments, and snickering will all be more than welcomed!

(also, I ran more benchmarks and posted more benchmark scores than I ever intended to when I woke up today...SORRY.)

Andrew
Austin, TX

Well, the 2378 is not cheaper, at least, not for me.
I bought from the IBM Educational site. Adding a 3 year warranty to the 2378, it was within $25 of the 2668, which comes with a 3 year warranty.
So, it is truly an "apples-to-apples" comparison.

The 2668 has:
1.) Faster CPU
2.) Faster memory interface
3.) Don't know whether the X300 is slower, the same, or faster than the 9600. Some benchmarks put it behind, some put it just ahead of the 2378.
It is truly confusing. Some articles say that the X300 replaced the 9200. Some say it replaced the 9600. If the 9600 had 128MB there would be no contest, but in 64MB vs. 64MB configurations, it is really a toss-up.

Any other opinions, or more comments, please reply.

Thanks!!
Andrew
Austin, TX

Well, I have no desires to game on any notebook, so I probably will take the newer one, since it will probably have higher resale value.
I tend to change hardware often, so that is a factor for me.
Not sure, however as to what I will finally decide.
Thanks,
Andrew
Austin, TX

Base price for the T42 with 1year warranty was about $1,400, for the T43 with 3 year was about $1,600. By the time I made both 3 year and added Thinkpad Protection (accidental damage coverage) and tax they were both within $25 of each other. You have to pay tax on direct IBM purchases.

Andrew
Austin, TX

Well, that is just what I have done.
I went with the T43, knowing that the GPU might be a slight downgrade.
I usually don't hang onto PC hardware very long, and I figured that the T43 would have slightly higher resale in a year or so.

Thanks,
Andrew
Austin, TX

If it doesn't, it doesn't.
Won't matter that much to me.
For what I intend to do with the notebook, the two series are going to be virtually identical.
If I DID want to game, etc. (which I don't) then I would blow off IBM and get something 9700 based, X700 or whatever.
Since I don't, as I said, it is almost irrelivent.
I do appreciate your advice, however.

Thanks!
Andrew
Austin, TX