Comparing X41 and X32

[aweingrad]

I ordered and recieved both from Lenova, insure which would be most compelling to me, the light weight of the X41 or the power of the X32.
The X41 is the 1.5 centrino version, the X32 is the 2.0 centrino version.

I fell in love with the X41 at first because of its extreme portability. Even carrying it from room to room in my house was a different experience from lugging my T42p. I began to get used to itts slower hard drive, which doesnt have much effect on internet browsing or office apps.

Then I received the X32, only slightly bulkier, only slightly (but noticeably) heavier, but the speed- incredible, blazing compared to the X41.

One problem: and here I ask for feedback from other members of the forum, the screen on the X32 is noticeably dimmer or muddier than the screen on the X41. Both my girlfriend and I noticed the the x41 screen was sharper, crisper than the one on the X32. I dont know if this is a function of the different video cards in the machines or the screen itself.

I had in the past returned a T42p because I thought the screen had a bluish tinge and sure enough the replacement had a different screen, sharper, cleaner colors. I found out that different manufacturers make the screens for IBM/Lenova but I havent found which manufacturer makes the one on my X41 or my X32.

Anybody know how to determine this? And whether the difference in the screens is intrinsic or due to the different graphic adapters in the two machines? I much prefer the screen on the X41 and might keep it on that basis alone, although no question if the screens and graphoics adapters were equak I'd go with the much more powerful X32.

[pphilipko]

go on the ibm site and search for parts information under the warantee page. "support and downloads"

[aamsel]

If you still have both units, do a parts lookup and see which screen shipped with each unit.
You will need the model number and serial number for each unit.
http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site. ... sLookup.vm
(found in FAQ)
I doubt that the video circuitry is the cause of the diminished brightness, although possible.
More likely is that the LCD panels came from different manufacturers.
The X32 could have been Hydis, LG, DBU (whoever that is?) and the X41 could have been Samsung or IDTech.
There may have been changes to this list, but not likely.
My guess is that you got a Hydis panel on the X32 and it is better.
The Hydis panels have been among the best I have seen on Thinkpads, and they are brighter than most Samsungs.

Andrew
Austin, TX

I ordered and recieved both from Lenova, insure which would be most compelling to me, the light weight of the X41 or the power of the X32.
The X41 is the 1.5 centrino version, the X32 is the 2.0 centrino version.

I fell in love with the X41 at first because of its extreme portability. Even carrying it from room to room in my house was a different experience from lugging my T42p. I began to get used to itts slower hard drive, which doesnt have much effect on internet browsing or office apps.

Then I received the X32, only slightly bulkier, only slightly (but noticeably) heavier, but the speed- incredible, blazing compared to the X41.

One problem: and here I ask for feedback from other members of the forum, the screen on the X32 is noticeably dimmer or muddier than the screen on the X41. Both my girlfriend and I noticed the the x41 screen was sharper, crisper than the one on the X32. I dont know if this is a function of the different video cards in the machines or the screen itself.

I had in the past returned a T42p because I thought the screen had a bluish tinge and sure enough the replacement had a different screen, sharper, cleaner colors. I found out that different manufacturers make the screens for IBM/Lenova but I havent found which manufacturer makes the one on my X41 or my X32.

Anybody know how to determine this? And whether the difference in the screens is intrinsic or due to the different graphic adapters in the two machines? I much prefer the screen on the X41 and might keep it on that basis alone, although no question if the screens and graphoics adapters were equak I'd go with the much more powerful X32.

[w0qj]

Notebook Review just posted a X32 vs. X41 vs. T43 review:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2438


the author chose X32 over everything else...

my take?
-X32 use a 2.5" HDD. read: can install your Seagate 7K100

-X32 has Firewire

-does not have built-in CD/DVD reader/writer.


12" screen that fits nicely into airplane coach seat... sounds good to me!

[aamsel]

Yes, I would go for X32 over T series, except:
1.) no built-in CD
2.) no trackpad (never got used to touchpoint, not very good with trackpad either)
3.) XGA only (not a deal-killer)

Other than that, I prefer the model.

Andrew
Austin, TX

Notebook Review just posted a X32 vs. X41 vs. T43 review:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2438


the author chose X32 over everything else...

my take?
-X32 use a 2.5" HDD. read: can install your Seagate 7K100

-X32 has Firewire

-does not have built-in CD/DVD reader/writer.


12" screen that fits nicely into airplane coach seat... sounds good to me!

[aweingrad]

Much thanks for the url's to find the manufacturers of different thinkpad parts. The screen from my X32 is from HIDA and the one from the X41 is from Samsong (sic).

The Samsung screen is noticeably sharper and better saturated at default settings t0o my eyes and my girlfriend's eyes (who is a graphic illustrator).

I'm going to ask Lenovo if they can send me an X32 with the same screen manufacturer as my X41. I know it seems pick but most of us on the forum are so detail oriented, that they ought to understand.

I also appreciate the other comparison articles noted above. I agree, the X32 is the best combination of weight and power.

[aamsel]

Don't even bother asking.
They are NOT going to do it, period.

The only LCD's that can come with a model are the ones that are spec'd for it. They won't take an LCD from the X41's build list and put it in an X32.

Your only option (if you are within 30 days) is to return it, order another one and hope for a different LCD panel, which you may or may not get. That is assuming that a Samsung is possible on the X32. You can tell that from the same link I sent you.

But seriously...save your breath. Your request would never happen.

Andrew
Austin, TX

...I'm going to ask Lenovo if they can send me an X32 with the same screen manufacturer as my X41. I know it seems pick but most of us on the forum are so detail oriented, that they ought to understand.

I also appreciate the other comparison articles noted above. I agree, the X32 is the best combination of weight and power.

[aweingrad]

Andrew,

Thank you. I hadnt thought they would swap out lcd screens, just check what screens are made with what serial numbers.

But in the meantime, I discovered that the X32 screen is much brighter and crisp when the ac adapter is connected, and in this case you are right, the X32 screen IS brighter than the X41. But only with the ac adapter plugged in. The X41 is brighter on battery alone.

But I have found no way to keep the screen at this brightness level when on battery, despite the fact that power management gives me the option (supposedly) of having the screen at its highest level (7) whether on battrery or ac adapter. And the green bars are all the way up.

Is it possible to configure the system to leave the screen at maximum brightness on battery alone, despite the hit the battery life will take.

Also, what sort of hit wil battery life take if I swap out the 5400 rpm drive for a 7200 drive?

[aamsel]

The Hitachi 7K60 60GB 7200rpm drive will not consume any more measurable power than the drive that is in there.
Not sure about your other question.

Andrew
Austin, TX

Andrew,

Thank you. I hadnt thought they would swap out lcd screens, just check what screens are made with what serial numbers.

But in the meantime, I discovered that the X32 screen is much brighter and crisp when the ac adapter is connected, and in this case you are right, the X32 screen IS brighter than the X41. But only with the ac adapter plugged in. The X41 is brighter on battery alone.

But I have found no way to keep the screen at this brightness level when on battery, despite the fact that power management gives me the option (supposedly) of having the screen at its highest level (7) whether on battrery or ac adapter. And the green bars are all the way up.

Is it possible to configure the system to leave the screen at maximum brightness on battery alone, despite the hit the battery life will take.

Also, what sort of hit wil battery life take if I swap out the 5400 rpm drive for a 7200 drive?

[mzd]

I think X32's video card is worse than X41, how do u think?

[LearningThinking]

My feeling agrees with you.

[jokerunm]

I think X32's video card is worse than X41, how do u think?

It is.

The whole platform is better/newer/faster, sans the the slower 4200 rpm drive.

[LearningThinking]

Slow HD is not a big issue as long as memory is large enough, say, 1G.

[jokerunm]

Ram can help. but will only go so far. More ram can reduce disk access but you have to access the disc at some point. Things like slower startup and sleep times are definitely, noticeable. It will depend on the application. I have 1.5 gigs of ram in my X41 tablet, but the slower HD is still noticeable at times.

[bhtooefr]

Hmm... have you looked in the BIOS? I've not shut this X21 down to check, but I think for it there was something to disable the screen dimming when it was unplugged.

And, yes, when I saw the X21's screen at first, I thought, "ugh. That's really dim." (I was installing Windows on battery)

Then, I plugged it in

[aweingrad]

Andrew,

As suggested by another forum member, the X32 screen dims by default when unplugged. But this option is in the bios. Under configuration/display, changing the display option from NORMAL to HIGH makes the screen as bright on battrery as it is on AC.

So far as comparing the graphics adapters of the X41 and the X32, I'm not sure how to do that. The statis screens both look the same when brightness is the same.

[brainpicker]

From my experiences the video cards play a huge factor in how clean/clear a screen appears. I thought my top-of-the-line desktop video card was an all-around great performer until I put in an inexpensive, used, Matrox brand card once while doing some diagnostic work. It was like someone had washed the LCD panel! Yes, these aren't the greatest 3D cards and the frame rates for popular games are not acceptable, but for all 2D uses I wouldn't use anything else in a desktop. So, I'm sure the same applies to laptop video in that some chips are far superior to others in 2D. 3D performance seems to be all that the reviewers and such seem to care about, but I think 3D gets far too much publicity unless you are playing a lot of demanding games all the time. I want really clean & clear text, and readability of spreadsheet cells above all else. I can afford the slight compromise in non-gaming 3D areas and could care less about playing demanding games on a laptop.

'Just my opinion.

Yak

[pphilipko]

From my experiences the video cards play a huge factor in how clean/clear a screen appears. I thought my top-of-the-line desktop video card was an all-around great performer until I put in an inexpensive, used, Matrox brand card once while doing some diagnostic work. It was like someone had washed the LCD panel! Yes, these aren't the greatest 3D cards and the frame rates for popular games are not acceptable, but for all 2D uses I wouldn't use anything else in a desktop. So, I'm sure the same applies to laptop video in that some chips are far superior to others in 2D. 3D performance seems to be all that the reviewers and such seem to care about, but I think 3D gets far too much publicity unless you are playing a lot of demanding games all the time. I want really clean & clear text, and readability of spreadsheet cells above all else. I can afford the slight compromise in non-gaming 3D areas and could care less about playing demanding games on a laptop.

'Just my opinion.

Yak

Really??? Perhaps the settings and gamma settings were different on each video card. Personally, I haven't seen any difference at all...unless the settings of each video card is different..

Or perhaps my eyes aren't as discerning as I think they are..

[aweingrad]

This is an interesting subject. With all display options set as default, the screen on my X32 is brighter, but the text and color not as sharp and saturated, as my X41. Even when I dim the x32 one noch I notice a subtle different in the clarity of the text. I

Is there a review that distinguishes between these two video adapters?

[bhtooefr]

Hmm...

If he was using VGA signal, then that definitely explains why the Matrox won out - they use some of the best RAMDACs money can buy.

However, he said that he's using an LCD. That COULD mean he was using DVI. If it was DVI, then it'd be a narrower race. Still, higher-grade connectors could explain it.

Matrox's goal is not good 3D (anymore - the Parhelia tried, but failed miserably). Their goal is awesome 2D quality.

[coburn]

Personally, I think that the screen on the X32 has more to do with the clarity of text than the actual video card in the machine. I say this because when I use the X32 to output to my Samsung 712N flatscreen via VGA (the only input, no DVI), the text quality is identical to the quality exhibited by the ATI 9700 pro (also via VGA) in my desktop machine.

That said, I don't quite think I'll send my X32 back as I am enjoying it at this point.

[hoya]

aweingrad - did you end up keeping the X32 or X41?

also, which keyboard do you like better? (X41 uses either NMB or Chicony keyboards)