x200, x200s or x301?

Which of these is the quickest for Web browsing?

Most of my work (90% plus) is reviewing Web sites and business videos. When I'm looking at a Web site, I need to check all elements -- the links, attachments, PDFs, all the pages. So I'm trying to move thru the site as fast as I can, viewing all the pages and links. Lots of opening and closing pages.

Which of the above is fastest for Web surfing? And which configuration is quickest?

(I was looking at the T400, but I think either the 200 or 300 series are in the sweet spot for smaller/lighter.)

Thanks for your 2 cents.

 

In performance-wise, X200 is recommended since its chip isn't low-voltage chipset. X200s and X301 both use undervolted CPU's for lower power-usage and heat, but I heard the performance difference isn't critical.

If you need a monitor with high resolution for more sufficient desktop space though, X200 is NOT for you since in comes with only 1280x800, while X200s and X301 comes with 1440x900.

Personally, I think X301 is an overkill unless you're a busy businessmen who has to run from an office to another frequently and optical drive is a must-to-have. I'd go with X200s if I were you.

 

Huh? The X200 and X200s have the same Intel 4500 graphics chipset, so they are both going to be able to drive the same resolution, which is much higher than 1440 x 900. The x200's onboard display is limited to 1280 x 800, but it can drive an external display at a higher resolution.

 

I'm talking about CPU. Did I mention graphics? Generally you use CPU on web-surfing so graphics chipset doesn't play much of role here.

Same here, I'm talking about onboard display. Considering the OP's preference on lighter/smaller laptop, he/she would want a better onboard display, not external display capability.

 

Honestly I don't think the OP needs to be concerned about performance of the machine, as I think any of the machines in question will have enough CPU and/or GPU muscle for the web tasks mentioned. You will most likely be bound by the speed of your internet connection, not the speed of the computer. Sure, a very slow/old computer will lag at this kind of thing, but I think that any of the ones being considered would be more than adequate.

So I think any x200 or x301 would be fine in terms of performance, just get the X301 if you want the larger screen.

I would make sure to just load it up with plenty of RAM, I think that would be what would affect the OP's stated use for the machine the most.

 

Any of these would do fine. The biggest consideration in reviewing websites would be connection speed (both downstream throughput and especially latency). The processor only comes into play with Flash/Java content, and the GPU should rarely if ever be touched.

The x200s and x301 have the advantage of superior screen real estate (1440x900 vs 1280x800) and this should help YOU go through pages faster because you can see more at once. The x200 is marginally faster and will thus work with pages that are heavy on Flash/Java a bit quicker, but the difference is unlikely to be an issue.

I would lean towards an x200s with 3GB+ of RAM, the fastest connection you can afford, and possibly an SSD (overall performance, improved speed of tab switching, minimizes the penaly for paging to disk, less lag when navigating folders to download content). The 1.86GHz SL9400 is more than fast enough for almost any kind of web content.

 

I misread what you said. I thought you stated that an "external" monitor was limited to 1280 x 800 on the X200.

Also, I wasn't referring to the CPU; I was referring to the GPU because I mistakenly thought you stated that the resolution on the X200 was limited to 1280 x 800.

To the original poster, I do think that the X200 is the best value between the three units. It has the fastest processor, has fantastic battery life (9+ hours on 9-cell), and is very well priced. I have 20/15 vision, and I honestly think that 1440 x 900 is too small on a 12.1" display.

 

Also consider 12.1" HP 2530 against say a X200s. It has the advantage of being able to do dual SSD and HDD storage via it's 1.8" and optical drive bay. Eg: X18-M SSD in 1.8" drive bay or the new Samsung 1.8" 220MB/s MLC SSD, and a 500GB Seagate 7200.4 in the 2.5" HDD bay. There is a couple of different configs available, probably the one *without* the optical drive would be best for this hybrid storage idea. If viewing a lot of data from disk/cache, storage speed might prove to be the biggest bottleneck.

In saying that I think a P8600 equipped X200 is an awesome piece of gear.

 

I think SSD vs traditional hard drive is going to be your biggest performance issue. Look at screen size/resolution/quality of screen as well (with pricing in mind).

 

I'd also throw in the Dell Latitude E4200/4300 to compare with.