x301 OS: Vista, Xp or Seven ?

Hi,

I'm going to buy an x301, but don't know wich OS to use !
My priority is battery time.
X300 runs longer with XP, but is it the same with x301?
(for example, my vaio z11 runs longer with vista than xp !)

XP pro:

I made some search, and it seems XP pro can't be installed on x301 (problems with thinkpad software).
Can anyone confirm this ?

Vista:

Version used by Lenovo.
But which one is better, 32 or 64bit ?


Seven:

Does Uprade Software will work with Seven ?
Anybody test it ?

Thanks

 

XP can be installed on x301. All ThinkPad softwares for XP are listed on Lenovo's support page. Go to this link

64bit is generally considered faster although it isn't noticeable. Also with 64bit you may add more than 4GB of RAM.

I have no answer for this one :/

 

Thanks.
Any comparasaion between XP and Vista batterie time ?

 

XP and 7 will both be higher than Vista.

 

Using 64 bit in x301 is way much slowerrrrrrr!!!
I'm currently using x301 with windows 7, 7057!
Really smooth. 7000 has some problems, but 7057 already fixed them

 

Don't get the 64 bit, unless you have 8 G memory and specific use(some program require 64 bit OS), otherwise it doesn't make any sense!

 

Really 64 bit with 4 GB RAM vs 32 bit with 3 GB RAM models with only a $20 price difference is not worth it?

I was hoping to be able to hold out to Win 7, but not sure I can.

 

ummm.....
Let me explain to you

most people thinking more memory should be faster. So that's why they really want the OS display all 4G memory in their laptop .

But the true experience, 64 bit is much slower than 32 bit even you are using 4 G vs 32 bit 4G.

you also can get 4G in 32 bit, it's just not looking great because your OS can't run all 4 G

but if your purpose to get 64 bit with 4G running is making your computer faster and faster.

There is no sense you get the 64 bit version. unless you have 8G which my desktop is.

 

How is 64-bit slower? Your advice is don't get 64 bit on most laptops unless the memory will be 8 GB that is found mostly on desktops?

 

boot time like 7-10 seconds slower,

not only me, manufacture don't recommend the laptop install 64 bit. but they have to offer this option because ....there are lots of people want 4 G display in the OS, if not, they will complain or return...ya, like a joke. but there are lots of case like this.

I would said, 4G with 32 bit is very enough and super fast. unless you need some specific 64bit program, don't get 64 bit

I'm using 64bit in desktop with 8G because my desktop is running by SSD, I set it up without virtually memory

 

Food for thought, is the Lenovo IdeaPad Y530 only expandable to 4 GB?

If so 64 bit may not be a good idea unless you specifically use 64 bit programs utilizing huge files.., right?

 

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4719

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/lenovo-ideapad-y530.aspx?mode=specs

both say

"supports up to 4GB" - I'll confirm with Lenovo site but perhaps 64 bit is not a good idea for laptops unless aforementioned specific need.

 

64bit is only slower in booting. Otherwise it is fine (just make sure you have all the driver support). You can't address a full 4gigs in 32bit environments generally because other devices use memory. So even if you have 4gigs of ram 64bit is worth looking into so you can actually address ALL of it. I currently only have 3gigs addressed on my 32bit vista install. I am going to put windows7 64bit on it to play around with.

 

64 bit is what I recommend. It runs fine and I have very few compatibility issues. Also, I think complaints about boot time largely depend on your drive. On my 5400 RPM drive, Vista x64 took >60 seconds to boot. However, on my new SSD, Windows 7 x64 takes <15 seconds to boot. I find it hard to believe that the 32-bit version would boot much faster.

In my experience, I get better battery life on Vista than XP. Windows 7 should be better still, but I haven't done extensive testing on it yet. I didn't use system update on Windows 7, but the Vista drivers/applications for most Lenovo software works fine.

 

Ok, I think I will test Vista and Seven 7057...and keep the one with greeter battery management.
Thanks

 

And what about SSD on x301 ?
Did you make some tweaks ? (Superfetch, Indexer, Page caching...)

 

There is a wide variety of information (often contradictory) about tweaking SSDs.

My advice would be to ignore most of it, as the majority of tweaking guides apply to budget drives with JMicron controllers and seek to avoid the infamous stutter problem.

The x300 used a Samsung SLC drive (same model I have in my x200 Tablet), and the x301 and new ThinkPads use a Samsung MLC drive (reduced cost substantially, with only a minor hit in performance).

I think Superfetch is quite useful as it utilizes all of your RAM, it really is Vista's best feature in my opinion. Indexing can also be quite useful as it allows you to do a quick search from the Vista start menu of a files contents (the SSD will only enable you to search headers faster).

If you have an MLC drive, you may want to disable the Page File and/or 8.3 name creation if you are really concerned about running out of write cycles. However, I think these features are also best left alone.

You bought an SSD to improve disk performance, and it just seems silly to take extra steps to reduce disk activity.

 

There are many errors here, especially those by Mr. Yun. Seven is the way to go. It will get better battery life than either XP or Vista. From everything I see, Vista will be tuned better than XP or Vista.

I worked as a software engineer on the first 32 bit machine.

-Renee

 

Please tell me the errors, if you don't have x301, I don't think you know what something going on.

I'm talking about the truth experience with x301. show me some evidence

I never made something out by my mind, show me the data.

 

x301's SSD is really MLC ?
I thought it was like x300, SLC !

It'as a big disapointment, because I encounter some issues (freezes..) with my current SSD :s

 

Mr. Yun,

Your posts have been misleading. I dont know x301s - I know computers. Where I doubt that we need to go to 64 bits, it is 9.5% faster than 32 bits. 32 bits is not faster than 64 bits.
-Renee

 

Mr.Renee,

Please give us evidence show that, when the computers are running 4G memory, how 64 bit is faster 9.5% than 32bit , please, evidences.
I don't know computer too much,

but I usually use my personal experiences instead of reading article online, or reading the technical informations

 

For me, Vista 64-bit felt snappier than Vista 32-bit (on my desktop - I haven't reformatted my T500). Boot time seemed about the same (no noticable difference, although I didn't bother timing it). I also find it to be a waste, if you have more than 3GB of memory, and your computer can't even use it all.

Windows 7 is nice, but being a beta, doesn't have great support yet. Its power management is also inferior to Vista's from what I've heard.

Windows XP isn't bad, but its power management is poorer than Vista's (lower battery lifetime).

Therefore, I would recommend Windows Vista 64-bit.

 

Actually I think the 64GB on the X301 is SLC while the 128GB is MLC.

 

I'm still trying to get a handle on Windows 7 power usage. I am experiencing a higher drain at the minimum settings (0 screen brightness, all radios off, processor forced to slow) in 7 than Vista (7.0 watts vs. 5.25 watts).

However, I think this may actually be because Windows 7 can't control the LCD through as many levels. The screen at 0 brightness on Win7 feels about as bright as the screen at 6 brightness on Vista. Also, when set to maximum brightness, both Vista and 7 are around 10.0 watts.

I'm still making the decision between Vista and 7 myself. I like the 7 UI, it has superior support for tablets, and it feels much faster (boot time is about 25 seconds less). However, support for the ThinkVantage software (Presentation director, on screen display, Fingerprint/CSS) and a few other drivers is making me consider holding onto Vista for a while longer.

The 64GB drive that originally shipped with the x300 was SLC (you can buy the exact drive off Newegg for $175 right now [I did]). However, I believe Lenovo has completely switched to Samsung MLC drives at both 64GB and 128GB capacities.