X41 vs. X32?

Message

gst · #1 Post by **gst** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:21 am

Hello,

I ordered my X41 (non-tablet) on friday, but since then i read about several problems with the X41 on several sites (like hdd-clicking and high pitch noise with acpi on linux). As I would still have the possibility to cancel this order, I have some questions to the people who already used both of them (especially the recent versions as some articles suggest that e.g. the hdd-clicking may be solved on later hdd versions).

My requirements for a notebook are:
o Small - It should be possible to carry the notebook around in a bag. I'm currently using an Ibook (about 2.2kg) which is imo to heavy to carry around all the time.
o Robust - I'm not going to throw it around, but my bag i rather cramped.
o Quiet - I don't like running CPU fans or loud harddisks.
o Speed and Diskspace are not really an issue. I'm going to use the notebook as my main computer (together with a docking station) but I'm currently using a 600Mhz Ibook and it seems only a little bit too slow. I'm not going to use Windows but Linux.

Here are the positive and negative points which i found so far:

X41:
- According to some postings not as rugged as the X32.
- According to Thinkwiki and several postings a rather annoying clicking problem with the harddrive. Some postings suggest that this may be fixed in a later revision of the harddrive, but others don't.
- 1.8" format of Hitachi Travelstar disk is listed under "IBM-legacy models" on the http://www.hitachigst.com/ page and Hitachi seems already to use ZIF on the newer drives. This means only one manufacturer for the ibm-harddisks and prices will stay rather high in the future if no other manufacturers build disks in the same format.
- reports of annoying acpi high-pitch noise when using linux. however there are workarounds (like disabling the C3 and C4 states).
+ Very lightweight.

X32:
- Only available with 2Ghz at my shop (which i need to use to get the student discount). So the CPU fan my be running more often than on the X41.
- Heavier by about one third.
- About 300 EUR more expensive at the shop here.
+ If the Hitachi HDDs suck I can use any other 2.5" manufacturer.
+ No reports about clicking HDD noise or ACPI noise.
+ Maybe more rugged than the X41.
+ Only read good things about it.

So what do you suggest? Should I cancel my order and go for the X32 instead? Does someone here who recently purchased a X41 experience the hdd-clicking problem? Is the CPU fan a problem on the X32?

I read some of the older threads about each of these notebooks but I haven't found any direct comparison based on these points yet.

thanks for any suggestions,
/gst

mzd · #2 Post by **mzd** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:59 am

Which model did you get?

joprodse · #3 Post by **joprodse** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:09 am

Personally I will go for the X32 for the reasons you've pointed out

gst · #4 Post by **gst** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:12 am

mzd wrote:Which model did you get?

I ordered the US24CAT which features a 1.5Ghz CPU, 1 GB Ram and a 40GB HDD. With the student discount it does cost 1.340 EUR here in Austria. The X32 (TK1KEAT) with 2Ghz, 512 MB RAM and 40GB HDD would cost 1.680 EUR.

So depending on if the X41 really has the problems i listed above it may or may not be the better choice. At least it is cheaper.

/gst

gst · #5 Post by **gst** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:42 am

joprodse wrote:Personally I will go for the X32 for the reasons you've pointed out

If the X41 really has all the issues which I listed above (especially the HDD clicking) I would prefer the X32 too. The problem is that i'm not sure if newer X41 releases are still affected by this :/.

E.g. according to this thread on another forum the clicking problem may be solved by a newer Hitachi firmware. And while some people claim that their harddrive is really loud others say that they are perfectly happy with their X41.

The reason why I initially didn't buy the 2Ghz / X32 was a) the weight and b) the fact that I haven't found many reviews on the X32 yet - as a 2Ghz CPU frequency is rather high there may be the problem that the fan is running most of the time.

/gst

pphilipko · #6 Post by **pphilipko** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 12:49 pm

The clicking sound isn't really noticeable...

dmdsoftware · #7 Post by **dmdsoftware** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:10 pm

gst wrote:
joprodse wrote: The reason why I initially didn't buy the 2Ghz / X32 was a) the weight and b) the fact that I haven't found many reviews on the X32 yet - as a 2Ghz CPU frequency is rather high there may be the problem that the fan is running most of the time.

/gst

You don't have to run it at the maximum cpu. You can always set the speed you want the CPU run at.

roblim · #8 Post by **roblim** » Wed Sep 07, 2005 3:02 am

I purchased an X40 about 6 months ago as a replacement for my aging X22. After two weeks, I decided to return the X40 for a refund. There were a few things I didn't like about the X40--1. felt kind of laggy, esp. on launching apps, boot up, and shutdown-I blame the hard drive, 2. the palm rest was too small for my medium sized hands and the left side was always uncomfortably warm, and 3. hard drive was audible- pitch and clicks. I liked the weight reduction of the X40 as compared to my X22, but the other stuff bugged me enough so I returned it. Also, I added bluetooth to the X40, and it was a hassle bec. I had to modify the antenna so that I wouldnt have to disassemble the LCD.

Well, I got a new X32 today and I have to say that I like it a lot more than the X40. First, it feels so fast, esp. compared to my X22. I cant believe how quickly windows boots. It's also really quiet. My X22 is dead silent, the X32 is not dead quiet but in my opinion it is better than the X40 bec the X32 doesnt make odd hard drive noises, esp. that high pitch noise is absent. Adding bluetooth was also much easier on the x32 bec the antenna is not located behind the lcd. The X40 was around 1300 and the X32 was around 1000. I'm glad I decided to get another thinkpad. i was about to get a 12" ibook, but decided to wait until apple makes an intel based notebook.

#9 Post by **aamsel** » Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:50 pm

The only other issue that favors the X41 would be the video card.
Even though the X32 has discrete video and the X41 has integrated, the integrated video of the X41 is more up-to-date than the descrete video of the X32. The X41 is DirectX 9.0 compatible, where the X32 is not.

(someone correct me if I am incorrect, please!)

Andrew
Austin, TX

roblim wrote:I purchased an X40 about 6 months ago as a replacement for my aging X22. After two weeks, I decided to return the X40 for a refund. There were a few things I didn't like about the X40--1. felt kind of laggy, esp. on launching apps, boot up, and shutdown-I blame the hard drive, 2. the palm rest was too small for my medium sized hands and the left side was always uncomfortably warm, and 3. hard drive was audible- pitch and clicks. I liked the weight reduction of the X40 as compared to my X22, but the other stuff bugged me enough so I returned it. Also, I added bluetooth to the X40, and it was a hassle bec. I had to modify the antenna so that I wouldnt have to disassemble the LCD.

Well, I got a new X32 today and I have to say that I like it a lot more than the X40. First, it feels so fast, esp. compared to my X22. I cant believe how quickly windows boots. It's also really quiet. My X22 is dead silent, the X32 is not dead quiet but in my opinion it is better than the X40 bec the X32 doesnt make odd hard drive noises, esp. that high pitch noise is absent. Adding bluetooth was also much easier on the x32 bec the antenna is not located behind the lcd. The X40 was around 1300 and the X32 was around 1000. I'm glad I decided to get another thinkpad. i was about to get a 12" ibook, but decided to wait until apple makes an intel based notebook.

Thecla · #10 Post by **Thecla** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:08 am

I just got an X41 and I'm very happy with it (though the screen did come with a stuck blue sub-pixel in the top-center).

It's very slim and light (even with the 8-cell battery which seems to get 5+ hours: not exactly sure since I haven't run it down yet) and I carry it around everywhere. I haven't used an X32, so I can't compare directly, but it the X41 is extremely well built and robust, so I don't think that's an issue.

The hard drive does make occasional isolated clicking sounds, but they are quiet -- not sure what casues them or how much that would annoy you.

The 4200rpm hard drive does lead to noticably slower boot up times than with a faster hard drive, but the machine is responsive once it's on.

I would say the main issue (apart from price) would be how much you want very light and thin vs. a faster hard drive and built in CD/DVD drive.

stgreek · #11 Post by **stgreek** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:58 am

aamsel wrote:The only other issue that favors the X41 would be the video card.
Even though the X32 has discrete video and the X41 has integrated, the integrated video of the X41 is more up-to-date than the descrete video of the X32. The X41 is DirectX 9.0 compatible, where the X32 is not.

(someone correct me if I am incorrect, please!)

Andrew
Austin, TX

You are absolutely correct, and the decision to include such an old chipset into the X32 instead of a more modern (but still fanless) one is indeed weird. An Ati 9000 or 9200 card would be perfectly fine with regards to power/heat and still powerful enough to give a performance edge over the X4x series. Still, the X32 seems like a better buy.

stgreek · #12 Post by **stgreek** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:59 am

Thecla wrote: I would say the main issue (apart from price) would be how much you want very light and thin vs. a faster hard drive and built in CD/DVD drive.

Just as a note, the X32 doesn't have a built in optical drive. It is simply a slightly bigger X40 with support for 2.5 drives, better keyboard and more "robust" construction (in my opinion at least).

#13 Post by **aamsel** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:00 am

My short take on all X series models, video, hard drives, Windows Vista:

Yes. Part of my "video concerns" would be the desire to run Windows Longhorn (Vista) down the road when it comes out. (I don't game so I don't care about 3D for that).
Sure, by then most people will buy new notebooks. My understanding is that Vista will run old notbooks in "compatability mode" so it may not matter.
1.) What is a better video solution for the X series ultraportable, the 16MB Mobility Radeon on the X32, or the new Intel integrated solution on the X41 or X41T ??? Seems like a tossup, but the Intel, much as I don't like it, is probably more advanced????

2.) It has been said that the LCD displays (or the circuitry that drives them) is brighter and sharper on the X40/41 than on the X31/32 at least running on battery. Any comment? I have seen one each but not together.
The best overall X series video is probably the X41T tablet, with the Hydis panel. Also, It is rated 180 nits brightness where all the others are rated 150 nits according to TABOOK. Having just seen one, I would probably agree that it is the best X series video output.

3.) The hard drive solution is much better on the X31/32 than the X40/41 or X41T, no doubt. The 1.8" 4200rpm drives just don't cut it, IMHO. They work fine in an iPod, not in a notebook.

Where the X41T tablet has perhaps the best video output, it unfortunately has the 1.8" hard drive which kills its performance.

Please comment (especially on the video). I am not aware of a better solution in a top-quality ultraportable. I don't like glossy screens.

Andrew
Austin, TX

stgreek wrote:
aamsel wrote:The only other issue that favors the X41 would be the video card.
Even though the X32 has discrete video and the X41 has integrated, the integrated video of the X41 is more up-to-date than the descrete video of the X32. The X41 is DirectX 9.0 compatible, where the X32 is not.

(someone correct me if I am incorrect, please!)

Andrew
Austin, TX
You are absolutely correct, and the decision to include such an old chipset into the X32 instead of a more modern (but still fanless) one is indeed weird. An Ati 9000 or 9200 card would be perfectly fine with regards to power/heat and still powerful enough to give a performance edge over the X4x series. Still, the X32 seems like a better buy.

#14 Post by **aamsel** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:25 pm

Any comments on above post?

Andrew
Austin, TX

bhtooefr · #15 Post by **bhtooefr** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:01 pm

The X32's dim performance on battery is shared by every X2 and X3 - unless you go into CMOS setup, and change the screen brightness from "Normal" to "High" - that's BATTERY screen brightness, FWIW.

#16 Post by **aamsel** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:38 pm

You mean that the screen is dim on battery otherwise, or that it gets poor battery life? Please let me know.
I am assuming you mean dim screen on battery. When it is set to high, how is the brightness and sharpness compared to any other X series?

Right now, the pricing on X32's is really, really attractive compared to ANY X40/41. Much, much better pricing on the X32. Not sure why there is such a big difference.

Andrew
Austin, TX

bhtooefr wrote:The X32's dim performance on battery is shared by every X2 and X3 - unless you go into CMOS setup, and change the screen brightness from "Normal" to "High" - that's BATTERY screen brightness, FWIW.

bhtooefr · #17 Post by **bhtooefr** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:19 pm

I've never seen two X's side by side.

However...

If you see an X32 and an X41 side by side, and you want to compare brightness without adjusting BIOS settings on the X32, plug the 32 in. Yes, I do mean that the screen is dim on "Normal". People have been scared away from X32s when comparing the two side by side, because both were on battery.

As for battery life... I haven't noticed worsened battery life from running my 21 in High battery brightness - and any power draw should have a major impact, because my battery has over a 50% wear level.

As for pricing... the X32 isn't "sexy". The X41 is. Therefore, the X41 sells better. (Also, Lenovo positions the X41 so it's more prominent, further increasing X41 demand vs. X32 demand.)

Also, the 1.8" HDDs used in the X41s are NOT cheap.

#18 Post by **aamsel** » Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:32 pm

But they are slow as Christmas!

Thanks for the comments.

Andrew
Austin, TX

bhtooefr wrote:...Also, the 1.8" HDDs used in the X41s are NOT cheap.

AgenT · #19 Post by **AgenT** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:42 pm

the X32 was around 1000

That looks like a real good price for this laptop. Does it still go for about this price (noticed regular prices are about $300 more)? My guess you need some sort of special discount (EPP maybe?) to get it for a price like that. Looking for a good deal on a X32.

#20 Post by **aamsel** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:50 pm

Nobody here is going to be able to provide any specifics on pricing. It goes against the "Rules of the Road" posted at the top of each forum page.

However, undoubtedly, the X31/32 is the best "bang for the buck" right now in the X Series.

Now...back to our topic!

Andrew
Austin, TX

AgenT wrote:
the X32 was around 1000
That looks like a real good price for this laptop. Does it still go for about this price (noticed regular prices are about $300 more)? My guess you need some sort of special discount (EPP maybe?) to get it for a price like that. Looking for a good deal on a X32.

AgenT · #21 Post by **AgenT** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:07 pm

Sorry, I was actually not asking for "specific narrow groups" pricing just making sure I was not missing anything because IBM's website is really hard to use right now. Different prices and different availability depending on where you navigate to (for example, certain CTO laptops are not available from CTO page but are available from regular page). I know that no one can reveal EPP pricing/codes here. I just wanted to know if I was missing something using the regular/sale (non "specific narrow groups" discount) pricing.

pphilipko · #22 Post by **pphilipko** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:26 pm

AgenT wrote:Sorry, I was actually not asking for "specific narrow groups" pricing just making sure I was not missing anything because IBM's website is really hard to use right now. Different prices and different availability depending on where you navigate to (for example, certain CTO laptops are not available from CTO page but are available from regular page). I know that no one can reveal EPP pricing/codes here. I just wanted to know if I was missing something using the regular/sale (non "specific narrow groups" discount) pricing.

If someone reveals the prices for EPP, how is Bill able to have any business?

If you're not part of EPP, than use the VISA discount.

javanaut · #23 Post by **javanaut** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:28 pm

Although an X40 is not an X41 and I'm not sure what the differences are (if anyone has a link to the tabook where the 2371-7GU is described please let me know), I am lucky enough to own an X40 (2371-7GU about a year old) and an X32 (2885-K4U about two weeks old) including a few other Thinkpads. Side-by-side on battery or AC the laptop screen of the X32 in my opinion is crisper and brighter than the X40. I have not adjusted the BIOS settings for either laptop and I am comparing the two screens by looking at this page. The white background at the top is whiter on the X32 while on the X40 it is more of an off-white color. The light blue background to the right of the "Post a reply box" is a brighter blue on the X32 than on the X40. In fact my first impression of the X32 was how bright the screen was and the keyboard seemed to be better (maybe because I haven't been pounding on it for a year).
The main attraction of both are their size and weight. I've been really happy using the X40 as my main development machine (running Oracle, Tomcat, Java and Flash front-ends, various ides, browsers, etc.). I got the X32 because I wanted a laptop just as light as the X40 (at about a half-pound weight difference it's close enough) with the ability to go to 2 GB of RAM, and most importantly to be able to use a 7200 rpm disk drive (the Hitachi 07k100 100 GB disk drive when it is readily available).
I have not had noisy fans or clickety disk drives and I got my X32 in about a week instead of the original targeted shipment date of September 15 (now I'll have to pay the bill sooner!). I think they both look fine. The only problem I've had is that the USB ports stopped working on my X40 and at this point I think it is either the OS (Win XP Professional Service Pack 2) or the motherboard. I'll find out when I have the time to offload my work onto the new X32.
I've not had the X32 long enough nor had enough time to use it enough to tell which one will be my favorite but it's a pretty good guess it will be the X32!

Danton
Pelham, NY
__________________________

X32 (2371-7GU) // X40 (2371-7GU) // T30 (2366-42U) // A31P (2653-H6U) // 600 (2645-PNT)

bhtooefr · #24 Post by **bhtooefr** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:50 pm

First things first... an X41 is an X40, except it's got DDR2 instead of DDR RAM, and an Intel 915GM chipset instead of the older 855GME (this also means that the X41 has an integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900, instead of the older and slower Extreme Graphics 2).

tabook is linked in the FAQ.

Also, could you please go to the FAQ? There's a link that'll tell you the parts shipped with your system. Please put the FRUs (and, if possible, manufacturers) of the LCDs used in each system.

BTW, I think your sig is wrong - you've got the same type/model on the X32 as you do the X40...

#25 Post by **aamsel** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:07 pm

It would be interesting if he got a Hydis panel on the X32, which is not possible to get on the X40 or X41.

Andrew
Austin, TX

javanaut · #26 Post by **javanaut** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 2:46 pm

See what I mean -- you just listed all the differences between the X40 and X41!

The FRU of the LCD Panel of my X32 is 13N7008 which is a Hydis panel. Wow, what a great panel -- "...30% increase in brightness and a 20% decrease in power consumption ..."! The FRU for the X40's LCD panel is 92P6687 which is an ID Tech panel.

And you're right my sig was wrong.

Danton
Pelham, NY

________________________
X32 (2885-K4U) // X40 (2371-7GU) // T30 (2366-42U) // A31P (2653-H6U) // 600 (2645-PNT)

#27 Post by **aamsel** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:51 pm

That was a pinch unlucky. The good panels for the X40/41 are Samsungs. However, the Hydis panels that I have seen (14.1" on a T43 and 12" on an X41T) are the best that I have seen IBM/Lenovo use so far.

Andrew
Austin, TX

javanaut wrote:...The FRU for the X40's LCD panel is 92P6687 which is an ID Tech panel...
Danton
Pelham, NY
________________________
X32 (2885-K4U) // X40 (2371-7GU) // T30 (2366-42U) // A31P (2653-H6U) // 600 (2645-PNT)

javanaut · #28 Post by **javanaut** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:47 pm

Yes, I guess so but at least I don't have a noisy disk drive or fan. The Hydis LED panel is far better than the ID Tech panel.

Danton
Pelham, NY

_______________________
X32 (2885-K4U) // X40 (2371-7GU) // T30 (2366-42U) // A31P (2653-H6U) // 600 (2645-PNT)

gst · #29 Post by **gst** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 7:13 am

dmdsoftware wrote:You don't have to run it at the maximum cpu. You can always set the speed you want the CPU run at.

Ok - i totally forgot about this possibility :) The advantage of the X41 would still be that it is using a LV CPU while the X32 is using a normal Pentium M CPU. So at the same speed the X41 will run cooler than the X32.

/gst

Greg Gebhardt · #30 Post by **Greg Gebhardt** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 7:15 am

I have not had my X41 but for a few days. My screen has no visible dead pixels and the screen is bright enough that I only have it set 1 step over the middle brightness, leaving two more steps if required.

As far as noise, no clicking and overall the X41 is dead silent, NO fan orharddrive noise heard here. After hours of use, I can only describe the X41 tablet as being slightly warm. I would say it is COLD compared to the T43p.

I know the X41 table is not the hottest performer, but users are rewarded with a small tablet that only "sips" power and runs cool. The low voltage processor is a trade off for power conservation. Most people will be willing to make this trade off, I know it is a winner for me. I will be using mine most the day today, on and off and will not charge till the end of the day, I am betting I get everybit of 5+ hours of use. We shall see.

X41 vs. X32?

X41 vs. X32?

Re: X41 vs. X32?

Re: X41 vs. X32?

Who is online