Thinkpad X300

Well it looks like x300 part numbers are starting to appear. The same specs are listed for these two models, but there's a $200 difference somewhere.

64781BU ($2700+)
TOPSELLER X300 SL7100 2GB 64GB DVDRW 13.3-WXGA+ BT BFP XPP

64781TU ($2500+)
TOPSELLER X300 SL7100 2GB 64GB DVDRW 13.3-WXGA+ BT BFP XPP

Sample merchant listing for 64781TU:
13.3 WXGA+ LED, Intel 965GM Intel Core 2 Duo SL7100 processor, 64 GB SSD, DVD+/- RW, 1 x 2GB, Intel A/G/N PRO, 3 Cell, Camera, BT, FPR, XP Pro

but pricey

 

it'll come down eventually

 

Those prices look like a good indicator that this notebook will be in the realm of reasonably priced for many people. Take 15% off those prices (standard Lenovo sale) and the price is doable.

1 x 2GB? I wonder if this notebook only has one memory slot...

I really can't wait for a review of this machine!

 

13.3 is the perfect happy medium for me

 

The Intel C2D SL7100 is a 1.2 GHz Low Voltage CPU in the same form factor as the MBA CPU. So it would seem that the CPU in the leaked specs ( 2 GHz ) turned out to be false.

Actually a 1.2 GHz C2D is rather on the low-end and is a deal breaker for me. IMHO, they should have at least gone for 1.6/1.8 GHz.

 

will the 1.2 be significantly slower than the 1.6 given more ram is installable?

 

why don't the put a quicker processor in there?

 

Since today's Santa Rosa notebooks already support 4GB RAM, I do not think so. While Intel's Core 2 Duo CPUs are speedy little critters, 1.2 GHz is on the low side. I think most will agree that there is a significant difference in performance between a 1.2 GHz and 1.8 GHz notebook.

 

I'm surprised about the 1.2GHz processor too...however, paired with an SSD, the combo may still outperform comparable notebooks (i.e., X61s)

I guess this notebook is intended for road warriors, not gamers and performance geeks - the T-series is better suited for that group. I don't think it is really possible to pack T-series performance into an ultra-portable chassis anyway. I know that when I purchased my ultra-portable, I chose the lowest-end processor available (1.6GHz) for the X61s and have the battery manager set to "lowest" performance (33% max CPU) while on battery. I never notice processor lag for the tasks I perform.

 

1. would this be faster than a pentium m 1.66ghz?
2. is it fast enough to do the occasional video edits?

 

I've done occasional video edits on my last ultra-portable notebook - 1.0GHz Celeron M. So yes, occasional video edits are entirely possible on this new processor. Frequent video edits are probably better suited to a more meaty machine with a larger screen.

 

Perfect Hackintosh !

MBA out of the question - poor battery and no 3G
Vaio TZ - no mini-PCI to change the WiFi to Mac-Compatible

X300 - has miniPCI (well, X61 has..) and hopefully will be 5h+ real-life battery.

BTW - Its Super-Low-Voltage CPU (As opposed to Ultra-Low-Voltage U7600/U7700 from Vaio TZ, and as opposed to the speedy regular low-voltage L7500 from X61s) --> I hope this runs atleast as fast as U7600

 

The whole point of the low voltage cpu is to prolong the battery life. I don't understand why peopel would want a meatier cpu in this kind of laptop marketed towards road worriors for everyday office apps and then complain about battery life not lasting longer than 3 hrs.

Just like it doesn't make sense to put a V6 or V8 into a Toyota Prius.

a 1.2GHz will more than do the job its designed for.

 

Outrigger, to answer your question as to why someone would want a faster CPU, I'm an example of why. I use my Dell m1330 for work and home. I bring it back and forth everyday. When I'm in the office, I use very demanding programs and have multiple programs open at all times. 1.2 ghz is too slow for me and a step backwards. I plug in my monitors and accessories and use it like a desktop. At home, at a clients office, or at the coffee shop, 1.2 ghz would probably be just fine.

As to why I don’t have a desktop at the office? I like and need having all of my files, emails, pics, etc on one computer, I don’t want to sync files everyday between a desktop/laptop. If someone can show me a way to do that easily, I would try it again. I tried some software a year ago, and it didn’t work that well. Also, sometimes it’s a pain to activate software on both my desktop and laptop, and I don’t want to have to pay twice.

I really wish they would've put in a 2.0 ghz at a minimum, I would love to have such a light computer with power and all those features. Thanks!

 

I am not sure! You see when I first discovered this, I thought this was a 1.6 or 1.8, as if that's the case, I can use it as my main machine, as well as I can take it around with me, but now, I think 1.2GHz is just a little bit too slow for me (had tried on TZ), I mean for internet word and such is fine, but anything more fancy will be a big no no.... Now I am thinking of getting a sub notebook/laptop (don't know why, "sub laptop" just doesn't sound right, but anyways), which I am kinda more leaning towards the 11inch x200 or the ideapad U110.

 

I understand your point, but I do believe that the kind of people this notebook is targeted towards, it definitely won't be their main or only computer, more likely second, or even third computer. Again, we all like having a powerful processor, however, battery life takes top priority in ultraportables.

 

I disagree...a 13 in for me would be my main computer..especially for a student

I think they should have put these wimpy processors in the x61..where it is a 12 in ..and more likely to be a 2nd computer

if they are stepping up form the 12 in into a 13 in..they should step up the processing as well since going from 12 to a 13 isn't increasing portability...there isn't one good reason why they shouldn't offer a t7800 on it...who cares if i lose 30-45 mins of battery time? I'll just buy a 2nd batt..or make sure i have the charger on me for extended uses

just my 2 cents

 

i just run speedswitchxp; with 1 click i can switch between locked 800mhz and unlocked 2200mhz full power; gets great battery life and has great performance when i need it; you can have performance AND battery life; and they do have X61's with low power cpu's

 

Thats the whole point. You may not care, but the majority of the user base out there cares. This isn't geared towards students.

 

really? why does my buddy's whole medical class have x61ts as a mandatory requirement? everyone cares about cpu speed...it seems as if you are the only one that does not...

 

not necessarily true - I don't care about CPU speed either. I'd rather have better battery life and smaller size/weight.

My last ultra-portable was a 1.0GHz Celeron-M
My X61s was optioned with the lowest CPU speed available - 1.4GHz C2D.

 

wel..up until you said that...he was the only one...

I'm just saying that sometimes a speed/battery life ratio is better with a fast cpu...the time you save with a low voltage cpu is not worth the decrease in cpu speed for me

anyways, vista automatically down regulates a nomral cpu using speedstep to conserve battery power

 

I disagree also. I think 13.3 inches laptop is not a road warrior. You only have to see how many 13.3 inches models are in NBR database that carries ULV or LV processors. Vaio SZ and Dell XPS M1330 are in this range. Only MBA is the one that is carrying this kind of processors because is a fake 13.3 laptop. Maybe they should move those processors to other size smaller to put them but this is only my humble opinion.

 

Add me to the bucket who would like to see a powerful CPU in the X300 or X200, but that doesn't seem like it is going to happen, especially with the thin profile of the X300.

I love my X61 (non s)

 

http://forum.lenovo.com/lnv/board/m...ds&view=by_date_ascending&message.id=429#M429

 

Woohoo! Thanks for the headsup, Nonny.

 

wow..that looks sweet...but honestly...i rather stick with an x61 with a faster processor

 

who needs a more powerful processer if you are not gaming or doing graphics? with a 1.4 kg laptop? no need for it...

 

well..let's see...I always have many, many programs open and while watching movies (divx), my computer randomly still manages to cough up due to 100% cpu usage and I have a t7300...so yes...I need a more powerful processor

 

I think you need a better organisation or a desktop

 

what does organization have to do with it? should i limit myself to the number of programs I can have open because of this? no way. I shouldn't have to change my habits since computers these days should easily be able to handle multi-tasking...and computers do handle it. The newer penryn chips should be able to even handle it much better...it may be a nice new design, but with wimpy insides, I'll pass

I havn't had a desktop in 10 years and I never plan on buying one

 

I don't need and don't want a powerful processor in an ultraportable. My last portable was a 3lb 12" tablet with 1GHz Pentium M ULV processor. It worked just fine as my only computer when I worked abroad. I know its limitations so I don't do processor intensive tasks like video editing on it. It was perfectly fine even when I'm multitasking between other applications.

A more powerful processor will draw more power, and consequently the laptop will need larger, heavier and bulkier battery packs to achieve the same battery life as before. Unless the processor is not running at 100%, the speed difference is almost negligible.

 

I wouldn't necessarily call a 13 in an ultraportable...that is saved for the x series with a 12 inch

As I said before, vista does a good job in speed stepping the cpu to run at less energy while on battery

 

A 13" widescreen has the same height and more width as a 12". To a traveler, especially one that is stuck in the economy section of a plane, the height makes all the difference.

A T7800 will still draw more power than a L7500 in each's respective full SpeedStep power saving mode.

 

well..they should at least have the option...let the consumer choose

 

Agreed. If Intel made the ULV, LV and regular mobile processors socket compatible, then it could be a CTO option. IBM/Lenovo did the next best thing by creating the X61s/X60s for those that want better battery life, and X61/X60 for those that want better performance.

 

yep..i hope they end up going the same route on this one

 

Hope so. Mossberg's preview did not note the available processors. We will see when Lenovo makes the official announcement.

If Lenovo did exclude the full voltage processor from the X300 options, it may have more to do with thermal than power drain. It is more challenging to engineer a thermal solution for a full voltage processor's TDP of 30W vs 15W for a LV processor. Especially when there is little room to work with in an ultraportable chassis.

 

Good point. The slim chassis, plus the optical drive, must leave little room for heat pipes, fans, etc.

 

Yeah, as slow as half speed according to benchmarks... it's not only 1.2, the ULV parts also seem to be just slower than the normal laptop processors.

Look how a MacBook Air at 1.6GHz wipes the floor with a Toshiba R500 (1.2GHz ULV processor):
http://review.zdnet.com/laptops/apple-macbook-air-core/4505-3121_16-32818756.html

 

About the slow processor: It just shows that you have to make your compromises somewhere. Apple made almost none for the processor, even had Intel make smaller form factor versions of the Core 2 Duo. But they left out the DVD, WWAN, and most ports. Lenovo included a DVD and some ports (though VGA is silly, it should have a mini DVI port like the MBA).

Choose your evil...

PS: I love how the Thinkpad configs above come with Windows XP.

 

no way..i don't believe it...if they can fit all this in a 12in, they can definietly fit it in this one...

think about it..1 inch really isn't that slim...the x series is about an inch thick as well

 

That "almost not compromised" processor is slower than a LV 1.6GHz processor.
Air's Wprime was something like 68 seconds whereas my x61t's L7500 gets something like 52 seconds.

 

Ok, if it's so thin and has wxga+ I would think seriously about buying it even if it has ULV processors.

 

I wanna see this thing in person...I can take the slower processor in exchange for the extra real estate (12" on my X61s is too small for my taste). Perhaps they will bump up the processor in later versions?

 

Personally, I think it's a great looking machine, got that classic ThinkPad styling. However, at $2600 with the SSD, pretty much only those with fairly large IT budgets will be getting any.

I think the main action is going to occur when you have a choice of either a regular HD or the highly spendy SSD. At this point, I'm pretty sure it'll sell like hotcakes.

 

Agreed - with regular HD I'd buy this in a second! Oh and I hope it comes with docking port!

 

As the x300 specs are known now, I would seriously consider the Panasonic Y5 or Y7 as an interesting alternative. Compared to the x300 I see only two negatives with the Y5/Y7. It is almost 1,5 cm thicker at the screen hinge location (but hey it can withstand 100 kgs of preassure) and it would seem that the memory maxes ut at 2GB RAM. However, the CPU is significantly faster (up to 1.8 GHz C2D LV) and it features a 2.5" replacable hard drive (which gives you far greater performance and flexibility both in regards to regular hard drives as well as SSDs).

The 1440x1050 non-glossy standard aspect screen offers more screen real estate than of the x300 at a lower DPI and the Y7 and Y5 especially are more humanely priced than the x300.

 

Here's how Lenovo compares the X300 with its competitors, except the MAcBook Air:

http://www.engadget.com/photos/secrets-of-the-thinkpad-x300-what-walt-didnt-tell-you/641837/

 

Thanks for the comparison with the M1330.

Proper link: http://www.engadget.com/photos/secrets-of-the-thinkpad-x300-what-walt-didnt-tell-you/641837/

The only disadvantage, if you want to call it that, of the X300 is the lack of HDMI output and discrete video card. Other than that, the X300 is superior in battery life, durability, default security, etc. I'm excluding price of course.