bit-tech.net

Samsung X120 Ultraportable Laptop Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 27

Reply
SchizoFrog 2nd April 2010, 01:36 Quote
Aren't netbooks supposed to be cheap? For £500 you can get a much better laptop.
Fizzban 2nd April 2010, 02:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog
Aren't netbooks supposed to be cheap? For £500 you can get a much better Desktop.

Fixed
Dave Lister 2nd April 2010, 02:36 Quote
The whole netbook / ultrathin / ultralight scene seems to me like a big step backwards to me, you seem to get less of everything for a higher price. Laptops were getting to a great price point, i can see these new classes of laptop destroying it all.

And yes i use a netbook myself, but only because i got it dirt cheap, like off the back of a lorry kind of price, otherwise i'd have gone for a regular 15" laptop.
TheLostSwede 2nd April 2010, 05:28 Quote
I'm sorry, but it's impossible that that battery was fully charged before you started the battery test, or something went wrong.
There's no way an 8,850mAh battery only lasts for 1h 49min in a CULV notebook, since the faster SU7300 processor can last 8-10h on an 8-cell battery in similar notebooks. I think you guys really need to re-test the battery life.
stonedsurd 2nd April 2010, 05:29 Quote
Quote:
CULV stands for Consumer Ultra Low Voltage, meaning that the CPUs don’t cost a fortunate
Goty 2nd April 2010, 06:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Lister
The whole netbook / ultrathin / ultralight scene seems to me like a big step backwards to me, you seem to get less of everything for a higher price. Laptops were getting to a great price point, i can see these new classes of laptop destroying it all.

And yes i use a netbook myself, but only because i got it dirt cheap, like off the back of a lorry kind of price, otherwise i'd have gone for a regular 15" laptop.

Less of everything, except battery life (in general, anyhow), which is what people really want nowadays, I think.
docodine 2nd April 2010, 07:31 Quote
Haha April Fools, there's no way the battery life is that awful. You got us. :-|
-EVRE- 2nd April 2010, 08:12 Quote
You guys really bash the atom as a gutless processor. You guys have the hardware lying around, try giving one an SSD and 2gb of ram and Windows 7 ultimate.

I have been using my netbook with a 64gb crucial ssd and 2gb of ram with win7 since the start of college this fall semester and have rarely had issues with horsepower. It plays many of the older games very well, 350mb tv shows play well, no issues playing standard youtube vids, boots reasonably quick., loads all of MS office very quickly.

the only place I have been let down by my nebook is in the use of virtual pc 2007.

I think netbooks are gimped right out of the box with only 1gb of ram, and using a laptop without an SSD is suicidal for your data. I figure the cost of the SSD would pay for itself in the prevention of one hard drive crash.

I think it would be a worthy article to compare the performance difference of a stock 1gb ram, 250mb hd netbook to a 2gb ram, SSD hd netbook.

side note, I use a 115watt hr 12 cell battery and get 8-12hrs run time. :D

-Evre-
p.s. what has the world come to.. an AMD guy defending an Intel processor....
xaser04 2nd April 2010, 08:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLostSwede
I'm sorry, but it's impossible that that battery was fully charged before you started the battery test, or something went wrong.
There's no way an 8,850mAh battery only lasts for 1h 49min in a CULV notebook, since the faster SU7300 processor can last 8-10h on an 8-cell battery in similar notebooks. I think you guys really need to re-test the battery life.

I have to agree I'm afraid. The battery results just seem wrong. My Advent 6555 gaming laptop (which comes complete with a nice power draining Core 2 Quad and dedicated HD4850m) lasts well over 2 hours on its 8/9 cell battery doing general tasks.

Perhaps there is an issue with the battery itself or Win 7 is telling you its full when it fact its more like 40% full.
-EVRE- 2nd April 2010, 08:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Oh and a side note on battery life. WATCH OUT for firefox. Its my fav browser but it has some real bad habits of using excess cpu usage. for some reason it will glitch and max out my netbooks CPU. On my desktop I have seen it use a full cpu power of one of my 940's cores.

The glitch is random, some times its a poorly made advertisement, or a flash video site. It will keep rendering a tab, even if its not active. So unless you keep on eye on CPU usage you may not notice.

so if Firefox F--messed up while you were browsing that would explain the poor battery life.
Odin Eidolon 2nd April 2010, 11:32 Quote
Battery capacity shall not be measured in mAh. It should be measured in Wh, which is mAh x Volt. So a battery with 10V and 1000mAh (=10Wh) will last less than a battery with 14V and 800mAh (=11.2Wh).
_Metal_Guitar_ 2nd April 2010, 11:49 Quote
Sounds fairly decent...but if I had that cash it would be spent on a 5970 instantly.
Instagib 2nd April 2010, 11:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Metal_Guitar_
Sounds fairly decent...but if I had that cash it would be spent on a 5970 instantly.

win!
Cupboard 2nd April 2010, 12:02 Quote
The Core 2 Duo that you say isn't 64 bit capable - Intel list "Intel (R) 64" as one of its features. Isn't that a contradiction?

I like the sound of a recessed keyboard, my current laptop (the 12" Q45 which this seems to be a successor of in many respects) has an issue where the keys have actually marked the screen - it's a glossy screen and when the light is reflecting off it you can see the edges of them all.

The power switch and mouse buttons are weird decisions, they rather put me off. What is wrong with having a power button near the keyboard - you can't accidentally activate it in a bag and it provides a place for a power LED.

And that keyboard suffers from many of the same faults as the Q45, at least the Fn button hasn't been swapped with the CTRL button.

Echoing the concerns about the battery life, my laptop (which is nearly 2 years old now) can get at least three hours doing something similar to that with the screen on full brightness. And that is with a 1.8GHz C2D and 3GB RAM, so not that different. The battery is rated at 11.1V, 4800mAh

edit: oh, and Samsung say it only has 10/100 LAN, not, "gigabite" ;) shame, that.
DXR_13KE 2nd April 2010, 14:10 Quote
A Pentium?
ch424 2nd April 2010, 16:46 Quote
I'd like to echo the battery life comments as well! My ASUS UL30A has pretty much identical specs: 1.2GHz Pentium CULV, 3GB DDR3, 320GB hard disk, Intel GS45 chipset, 13" LED LCD and it does ~8-10 hours on a 84WHr battery. I've been using it about five hours with MATLAB, 10 chrome tabs, iTunes and a latex editor open, full brightness and wifi enabled and the battery meter says 40%/3 hours left.

The X120 looks pretty nice, but as you can get the UL30A for £400 (minus £20 Quidco cashback) from the carphone warehouse, I'm definitely pleased with it :)

Edit: wow, it's gone down to £350!
Farfalho 2nd April 2010, 19:24 Quote
I think there's load of typos that I won't bother mentioning. Still, I have to point out that something is very wrong with the battery life, as many others have suggested, I think a re-test must be done. Leave it charging through the night and re-run the test. I think that "sucker" needs some more points, I can't fail at the most important characteristics of a CULV when it has everything to make it a winner
oasked 2nd April 2010, 20:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cupboard
The Core 2 Duo that you say isn't 64 bit capable - Intel list "Intel (R) 64" as one of its features. Isn't that a contradiction?

Yup, I'm positive the SU7300 has 64-bit report. Might need to edit the bottom of the 1st page of the article. :)
cosmic 3rd April 2010, 09:57 Quote
There are loads of systems that ship with an SU7300 and Win 7 64-bit, this article is just full of errors.
geekboyUK 3rd April 2010, 10:36 Quote
I actually bought the X120 a few weeks ago to be used as follows:
* Mostly used sat on sofa watching TV
* Must be smaller and lighter than 14" Dell I was replacing
* More power than an Atom (I run a dual core Atom server - just not sparky enough for general use)

It almost always is connected via power supply - which is a good thing as the battery really does only lasts just over a couple of hours when unplugged. There is a bigger battery available although I don't think I need this for my use.

It's a great PC though - feels as fast as what I was replacing but lighter, smaller and much better screen and keyboard.
Xir 4th April 2010, 11:52 Quote
Quote:
so it’s more expensive than your typical netbook,
About twice, in the lowest configuration.
Quote:
Our Shrek 4 trailer is a 1080p video with a bit-rate of 9MB/sec...N450 laptop resulted in unwatchable stuttering and CPU loads of 60-100 per cent. This goes to show just how poor Atom is for a conventional modern PC
Aktually it shows that the Intel GMA 4500M HD is better at playing HD content (noticed the HD in its signature?) than the Intel GMA3150 thats inside the N450...

Doesn't say a lot about the CPU...when one system offloads to graphics and the other doesn't.

Something YOU of all people should know...
Yardstick 5th April 2010, 10:44 Quote
I bought an X120 a couple of months ago for £399 (Carphone Wharehouse), which was the price sweet spot for me. I use the X120 for general browsing whilst sat on the sofa in my study and for watching iPlayer and HD downloaded conttent through an HDMI connection to the TV (very neat set up as I have wired up a couple of HDMI wall mouinted sockets with cabling in the wall). I have also used it as a retro gaming platform playing through Jedi Knight 2 again - fun on a 32 inch screen.

The X120 takes all of this in its stride and is light and comfortable to use. On the occasions I run it off the battery I have found that it manages about 2.5 hours but that is working hard running YouTube vids. For me it ticks all the boxes. I have my work Blackberry Bold for browsing / email on the go, so wouldn,t lug a netbook arround anyway.
CozaMcCoza 6th April 2010, 18:00 Quote
Can you offer some alternatives to other than this ultraportable/netbook? Is there a difference between the two?

I'm looking into getting one for general web browsing as I don't want to always want to fire up my main PC (heavily OC'd and general power drainer) to surf the net. Plus I'm looking for something to take with me abroad
ch424 6th April 2010, 18:33 Quote
Ultraportables have much faster CPUs and the capacity for more RAM. If you'd bothered to read the article, you'd notice that the X120 is more than twice as fast as an Atom-based netbook.

I'd go for a UL30A if I were you. I love mine, and they're only £350 now.
CozaMcCoza 6th April 2010, 18:45 Quote
An Atom-based notebook yes, but not all notebooks are Atom-based,
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums