x120 or wait for x220

Assuming the price difference is not a concern, is there any reason to go for an x120 over the x220, disregarding the minor size difference?

I originally was eyeing the x120 as a portable second laptop, but now seeing that the x220 has a significantly better battery life and better reviews all-around for not too large of a price jump, I'm considering the 220 even though my primary laptop still has probably 1-2 years left in it. Alternatively, what's the possibility of a price drop on the 120? I know it just came out but I don't see it as a strong contender against the dm1 or even now the 220, considering its price.

 

The x120e is not likely to drop in price all that much.(New) If your going to use it as a primary machine, I would consider the x220.

 

well if price is not the consideration, the x220 is the clear choice.

but there is a world of difference between those two models (esp. with the IPS screen and extended battery life on the x220) besides the small form factor.

you get a lot more for your money on getting a x220 but i think the x220 will wind up costing you at least twice as much. the real question is what will you be using the laptop for, how long do you plan to keep it, how much money do you regularly spend on laptops, etc.

for example, i have a decent job, work in IT (and need a very specific hardware configuration) and don't have a problem spending a $1000+ every year to buy a new laptop. someone who's a student or just needs to do mundane basic stuff on a laptop may not need anything beyond a x120.

 

I would get the x220, not to say that the x120 isn't a good machine. The x120 screen is just average and the pixel density is too much for people less than a perfect eyesight. The X220 would be a lot better machine with the better screen, arguably better keyboard, better performance, and more durable throughout.

 

Price is the only thing the determines which you should buy. Both are so close in size and the x220 will blow the x120e out of the water performance wise. So really it only comes down to whats in your price range.

 

If price is not a concern, the X220 is pretty much all-around a stronger machine. The main attraction of the X120e is that it provides quite a bit of power (especially graphically) for the price and size, particularly if you got lucky with the DOS or Acrobat X price glitches.

 

Edit: Looking up benchmarks, I'll get back to you about this. (The only advantage of the x120e over the x220, other than price, is probably the graphics. If you need a better graphics capabilities, maybe for light gaming, the x120e is worth it. )

Otherwise, the x220 murders the x120e in all other areas. If I had the money, I would go get the x220, but I got the DOS deal for the x120e. Note, If you put an SSD in the x120e though, it really flies.

Also, the x220 will probably last longer as a second laptop because it has a decent CPU and GPU along with better chassis. The x120e is very well built, but I plan on keeping it for only 2 years.

 

The x220 Intel graphics are about twice as fast as the x120e.

 

Really? I thought intel's integrated graphics were decent but not as good.

Wait, I'm thinking of the recent Llano Fusion vs. Sandy bridge video I saw, not the Bobcat.

 

Take a look at the new macbook gaming with the sandy bridge platform, it is only slightly low than the 320m, but is should beat the 6310.

 

Thanks, will do my HW first.

x220 wins then.

 

I think the two are very different macines...

Price-wise the X220 will cost more than double. Performance wise, the second gen Core CPUs also have double or even more then performance of AMD Fusion (depending on how CPU dependent the applications are of course). The screen and overall build quality of the X220 are much much better.

The X220 is a highend ultraportable laptop. The X120 is a medium to low end machine, designed for people who are considering among netbooks with slightly better performance. A cheap ultraportable alternative.

 

The keyword is "were". The Sandy Bridge brought along a giant improvement in integrated graphic performance. Still nothing compared to a dedicated graphic chip, but more than enough to make a lot of people happy. Honestly, I was happy with previous gen Intel graphic chips. I don't play games on my X series Thinkpad. As long as they provide hardware acceleration for HD and Flash videos I'm satisfied.

 

I don't that a fair comparison as I've read a few place the drivers on the intel hd models are more optimized vs the 320m, unless that was proven to be false.