Thinkpads Forum

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of the x60 and the x60s, and I have a few questions that I'm hoping you can help me with.

1. Is there a significant weight difference between the x60 and x60s when both are equipped with the 8 cell battery?

2. How much nicer (brighter / more vibrant) is the Ultralight screen on the x60s as compared to the regular one on the x60?

3. How significant is the performance difference be between the 1.83Ghz C2D and the 1.66Ghz CD? These are the two processors currently available from the Lenovo website.

Thanks in advance for your input.
-Fin

Fin wrote:1. Is there a significant weight difference between the x60 and x60s when both are equipped with the 8 cell battery?

When comparing an X60 with an Ultralight X60s, it's 3.61 lbs vs. 3.26 lbs.

Fin wrote:2. How much nicer (brighter / more vibrant) is the Ultralight screen on the x60s as compared to the regular one on the x60?

Much brighter. I've heard that 4 notches on an Ultralight display equals 7 notches on a regular screen.

Fin wrote:1. Is there a significant weight difference between the x60 and x60s when both are equipped with the 8 cell battery?

0.2 lbs difference. (regardless of which battery you use)

Fin wrote:2. How much nicer (brighter / more vibrant) is the Ultralight screen on the x60s as compared to the regular one on the x60?

To quote someone else on this board:

EOMtp wrote:The UL screen is significantly brighter than the other screen. The UL screen intensity set at 4 of 7 bars equals the normal screen set at 7 of 7 bars. It's not the weight that is the benefit; it's the brightness.

Fin wrote:3. How significant is the performance difference be between the 1.83Ghz C2D and the 1.66Ghz CD? These are the two processors currently available from the Lenovo website.

Although a Mac comparison, this site does a decent job of comparing the different CPU's.

Thanks in advance for your input.
-Fin[/quote]

iMav wrote:To quote someone else on this board:

EOMtp wrote:The UL screen is significantly brighter than the other screen. The UL screen intensity set at 4 of 7 bars equals the normal screen set at 7 of 7 bars. It's not the weight that is the benefit; it's the brightness.

The Ultralight LCD is 0.20 lbs lighter than the regular X60 LCD. Such a difference is insignificant to EOMtp, but many people think it is.

Thanks for the excellent information. I have another question for you: How does battery life compare between the x60 and x60s (with the 1.83 C2D vs. the 1.66 CD)? I've heard rumors that they are pretty comparable (with the x60 being maybe half an hour shorter), but that seems hard to believe given the C2D can draw roughly twice as much power. Is their comparable battery time a result of the C2D being able to run lower power most of the time, and only ratchet up to big power draw when required to?

-Fin

RE:How significant is the performance difference be between the 1.83Ghz C2D and the 1.66Ghz CD? These are the two processors currently available from the Lenovo website.

I can't tell you precisely, but there is an article on Anandtech that compares the mobile Core Duo Yonah with mobile Core 2 Duo Merom, and it's roughly 5-15% better performance for the Core2, but it depends. In some cases there is not a significant difference.

Also in the article, there is negligible difference in power use between the two while on batteries.
So I would think that the major battery life difference would come from the difference in screens. Right now the X60s has the Ultrabrite screen, which if I'm correct, uses less power for equivalent brightness, compared to the X60.

Mobile CPU Wars: Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in ... i=2808&p=1
The link was working ten seconds ago, and now, not. Must be some temporary glitch.

A couple of points that haven't been brought up yet, of which you may not be aware;

1. not all X60s models have the Ultralight screen. You'll need to check the tabook.pdf file to double check the specific model-type number you're ordering.

2. The X60s uses the low-voltage Core Duo, whereas the X60 uses the standard notebook variant of Core Duo/Core2 Duo. This is why the CPU model numbers for the X60s start with "L" and the X60 with "T". (The low voltage notebook variant of the Core2 Duo has not yet been released.)

I read that the fans were of different sizes on the X60 and X60s. Is that true? Is there a noise difference?

What is the thickness difference between the two?

codek wrote:What is the thickness difference between the two?

According to the tabook:

X60 = 1.39"
X60s = 1.1"

Regarding the difference in thickness, I believe this is strictly because of the battery. According to Lenovo, the casing is the same.

JosephD05 wrote:Regarding the difference in thickness, I believe this is strictly because of the battery.

The Ultralight LCD lid of the X60s is thinner than the non-UL lid of the X60.

pianowizard wrote:The Ultralight LCD lid of the X60s is thinner than the non-UL lid of the X60.

The lids look identical, undifferentiated from the outside. The Ultralight LCD panel is indeed thinner than the non-UL panel, but there are spacers inside the LCD cover of the UL screen to make up the difference in thickness of the panel.

The bottom case of the X60 has standoff "arcs" similar to those on the cylindrical batteries, and that accounts for the difference in thickness between the X60 and the X60s.

so at the lip of the notebook or where it opens, it's about the same but where the battery is, this is where it differs?

codek: Correct. An X60s using an X60 battery has the identical profile of an X60.

rek wrote:A couple of points that haven't been brought up yet, of which you may not be aware;

1. not all X60s models have the Ultralight screen. You'll need to check the tabook.pdf file to double check the specific model-type number you're ordering.

2. The X60s uses the low-voltage Core Duo, whereas the X60 uses the standard notebook variant of Core Duo/Core2 Duo. This is why the CPU model numbers for the X60s start with "L" and the X60 with "T". (The low voltage notebook variant of the Core2 Duo has not yet been released.)

Oh... the 1705CTO they are offering on Lenovo website are just having the 150nits display, but not at all the 180nits Ultralight display anymore...
180nits only on X60s 1702

Core Duo 1.83Ghz and Core 2 Duo 1.83Ghz. what's the major differences?

don't tell me the difference is the "2" that name it.

gunston wrote:Core Duo 1.83Ghz and Core 2 Duo 1.83Ghz. what's the major differences?

don't tell me the difference is the "2" that name it. :lol:

Core Duo = 32 bit processor
Core 2 Duo = 64 bit processor

vp6459,
ya, there is the only differences?
what about in the performance it self?

Minimal - less than 2% (Core 2 faster)

denton wrote:Minimal - less than 2% (Core 2 faster)

Last benchmark scores i saw,

Core duo 2.0 GHZ 230
Core 2 Duo 2.0 Ghz 263

More than 2 % by a mile. It also depends on the OS. Vista will take more advantage of the Core 2 than XP.

Here is a good article:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 ... 721,00.asp

JosephD05 wrote:Last benchmark scores i saw,

Core duo 2.0 GHZ 230
Core 2 Duo 2.0 Ghz 263

Thanks for these numbers. I've always wanted to know whether the difference is really as big as it's hyped up to be. To me, 230 vs. 263 is a small difference.

pianowizard wrote:

JosephD05 wrote:Last benchmark scores i saw,

Core duo 2.0 GHZ 230
Core 2 Duo 2.0 Ghz 263

Thanks for these numbers. I've always wanted to know whether the difference is really as big as it's hyped up to be. To me, 230 vs. 263 is a small difference.

I mean, I think it's as big of a difference as the .3lbs difference, so it depends if you want better performance or less weight. Both are great machines.

The X60/1.83 was being asked about here. The 1.83Ghz part has 2MB cache in both cases. The 2Ghz part has 2MB in Yonah, and 4MB in Merom - thus the much greater performance increase.

Clay

JosephD05 wrote:

denton wrote:Minimal - less than 2% (Core 2 faster)

Last benchmark scores i saw,

Core duo 2.0 GHZ 230
Core 2 Duo 2.0 Ghz 263

More than 2 % by a mile. It also depends on the OS. Vista will take more advantage of the Core 2 than XP.