Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 2 review: Smallest X1 laptop ever

One of the biggest complaints about the ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 1 was its slow processor. While most other subnotebooks were running on full-fledged 28 W Core i5-1135G7 or i7-1165G7 11th gen CPUs, the Nano Gen 1 was stuck with the 15 W i7-1160G7 . The model may have been super lightweight, but it gave the sense that the low weight had a direct impact on performance levels.

The new ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 2 addresses this issue by swapping out the i7-1160G7 for a proper 12th gen 28 W i7-1280P vPro option which should make the X1 Nano Gen 2 one of the fastest 13. 0-inch business laptops, at least on paper. Aside from the CPU upgrade, the Gen 2 model brings a few other changes including a higher resolution webcam, faster Wi-Fi, and 5G WAN support.

The exterior design is otherwise identical to the 2021 Gen 1 model and so we recommend checking out our existing review to learn more about the physical features of the laptop. Competitors in this space include other super lightweight 13-inch business laptops like the HP Elite Dragonfly G3 , Dell Latitude 13 7330 , LG Gram series, or the Dynabook Portege X30L . More Lenovo reviews: The WLAN module has been upgraded from the Intel AX201 to the AX211 for Wi-Fi 6E support.

We experienced no connectivity issues when paired to our 6 GHz network. LTE 5G Cat 20 or 4G CAT 9 are optional WWAN upgrades. There will be a Nano-SIM slot if configured with the feature.

Dell has updated the webcam from 720p on the Gen 1 model to 1080p for this year’s Gen 2 version. The picture isn’t as muddy as a result, but colors remain subpar. Both IR and a physical webcam shutter come standard for privacy.

The bottom panel comes off easily with just a Philips screwdriver. The internals are mostly the same as the Gen 1 model save for the repositioned M. 2 2242 SSD and other minor tweaks as shown by the images below.

There are no extras in the box beyond the AC adapter and paperwork. A one-year limited manufacturer warranty applies which is disappointing considering the high starting price of the model. A 3-year coverage should have been standard.

Our Gen 2 test unit utilizes a different IPS panel as the one found on the original Gen 1 version (P101ZFZ-BH2 vs. MND007ZA1-2). Nonetheless, their core attributes remain nearly identical for essentially the same viewing experience.

Users are still getting a 450-nit panel with full sRGB coverage and >1000:1 contrast ratio. Black-white and gray-gray response times could be better, but this isn’t an issue for browsing or office-type workloads. The panel is not well calibrated out of the box.

Calibrating it ourselves would greatly improve average grayscale and color deltaE values from 5. 7 and 4. 85 to just 2.

3 and 1. 22, respectively. We recommend an end-user calibration to better exploit the full sRGB coverage of the panel.

Outdoor visibility and viewing angles remain mostly the same as on the Gen 1 model as Lenovo hasn’t upped the brightness or contrast of the display for this year’s model. We set our unit to “Best performance” mode via Windows prior to running any performance benchmarks below. It’s recommended that users become familiar with the pre-installed Vantage software as many Lenovo-specific software updates and features like User Presence Sensing are toggled here as shown by the screenshots below.

CPU performance is a mixed bag. The high initial CineBench R15 multi-thread score of 2118 points is excellent, but this falls dramatically to 1485 points after the next consecutive run to represent poor Turbo Boost sustainability and steeper throttling than most other laptops. In fact, multi-thread performance can drop by as much as 48 percent when stressed as shown by our CineBench R15 xT loop test below.

The Framework Laptop with the supposedly slower Core i7-1260P is able to outperform our i7-1280P over longer periods. In other words, users can enjoy the initial short burst of speed from the i7-1280P in the Lenovo before it falls off a cliff. Despite its somewhat disappointing performance, our i7-1280P CPU in the X1 Nano Gen 2 is still handily faster than the Core i7-1160G7 in the X1 Nano Gen 1 by about 80 percent even after accounting for any throttling issues.

PCMark 10 results are consistently higher than the Gen 1 model and most other 13. 0-inch laptops for that matter due to the Core P-series CPU. The difference is widest in the Digital Content Creation subtest.

LatencyMon reveals DPC issues when opening multiple browser tabs on our homepage. 4K video playback at 60 FPS could have been better as well as we’re able to record 56 dropped frames during our minute-long video test even when on the latest graphics drivers as of this publishing date. Our test unit comes equipped with the Kioxia KBG5AZNT1T02 PCIe3 NVMe SSD for maximum sustained read rates of up to 2700 MB/s.

It’s disappointing that there are no PCIe4 options at checkout considering the high price of the ThinkPad X1 Nano, but at least the model comes with a copper plate over the SSD to aid in heat dissipation. Keep in mind that full-length 2280 M. 2 drives are not supported.

Graphics performance is decent in spite of the steep CPU performance throttling mentioned above. 3DMark scores are where they should be relative to other laptops with the same Iris Xe 96 EUs GPU, but throttling kicks in when running actual games. For example, frame rates when idling on Witcher 3 at the lowest 768p settings can be as high as 106 FPS during the start of the test before quickly falling to just 80 FPS a couple of minutes later as shown by our graph below.

Overall graphics performance is still faster than on last year’s Gen 1 model by about 30 percent or so before accounting for any performance throttling. Fan noise is tied to the three Lenovo Vantage power profiles: Quiet, Balanced or Intelligent Cooling, and Best Performance. The system is quieter than expected even when on the default Intelligent Cooling profile.

When running the first benchmark scene of 3DMark 06, for example, the internal fan would remain very quiet throughout the entire scene much like what we observed on the Dragonfly G3 or MateBook X Pro under similar conditions. When set to Best Performance, however, expect the fan to pulse more frequently at up to 40 dB(A) when running higher loads like games. Otherwise, we recommend sticking to Intelligent Cooling for most scenarios.

It’s worth noting that our test unit would exhibit electronic noise or coil whine when idling on desktop. The noise would go away temporarily when running 3DMark 06 which explains why our noise measurements when running the benchmark is lower than our noise measurement when idling on desktop (23. 9 vs.

23. 3 dB(A)). Surface temperatures aren’t any warmer on our newer Gen 2 unit when compared to Gen 1.

In fact, the hot spot on the bottom is cooler at just 40 C compared to 48 C on last year’s model possibly due to the steep performance throttling mentioned above. Expect the left half of the keyboard to always be warmer than the right half as shown by the temperature maps below since the CPU is positioned on the left side of the chassis. When stressed under Prime95, CPU clock rates and board power draw would spike to 3 GHz and 64 W, respectively.

However, temperature would also spike to an alarming 97 C and so this maximum Turbo Boost would last for just a few seconds at most before clock rates and board power draw fall to just 1. 3 GHz and 23 W, respectively, for a slightly cooler core temperature of 85 C. Running this same test on the larger and heavier Framework Laptop equipped with the i7-1260P CPU would result in higher stable clock rates of around 2.

5 GHz in comparison. GPU clock rates and temperature when running Witcher 3 would stabilize at 948 MHz and 69 C, respectively, compared to 1396 MHz and 83 C on the aforementioned Framework. Performance is not reduced if running on battery power.

A 3DMark 11 test on batteries would return Physics and Graphics scores 13122 and 6668 points, respectively, compared to 11415 and 6937 points when on mains. The system is generally more demanding than other 13-inch subnotebooks since it is one of the few with a Core P-series CPU. Simply idling on desktop draws between 3 W and 15 W whereas the HP Dragonfly G3 , Latitude 7330 , or original ThinkPad X1 Nano would top out at just 7 W or 9 W under similar conditions.

Power consumption differences balloon even further when running more demanding loads. 3DMark 06 or Witcher 3 , for example, would demand between 44 W and 55 W to be significantly more than the aforementioned HP, Dell, or original X1 Nano. The Core i7-1280P CPU may be faster, but it certainly comes at a cost.

We’re able to record a temporary maximum draw of 65. 4 W from the small (~8. 7 x 5.

2 x 2. 2 cm) 65 W AC adapter before throttling kicks in as shown by our screenshots below. Runtimes are much shorter than on last year’s model by almost half (!) even when on the Balanced power profile likely due to the more demanding Core P-series CPU.

At just 5 hours of real-world WLAN usage, the X1 Nano Gen 2 isn’t going to last nearly as long as most other subnotebooks. The ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 2 is the perfect example of what happens when you swap out a 15 W CPU for a 28 W CPU on a laptop originally designed to run a 15 W CPU. You’re going to see faster performance, but that performance boost will only be in short bursts due to the limitations of the cooling solution.

The system is therefore at its best where short bursts of high performance can come in handy such as when launching applications, the occasional picture editing, or unzipping of small files. If you intend to use the laptop for CPU-intensive workloads lasting for longer periods of time, however, then the CPU here may not be as fast as you might be hoping for. Keep in mind that this is a common drawback across most if not all super lightweight (<1 kg) laptops thus far like the Dragonfly G3 , Latitude 7330 , or LG Gram .

Another important aspect to consider is that battery life has been significantly cut since battery capacity remains essentially unchanged despite the newer and more power-demanding CPU. You may need to be more mindful of charging when traveling as a result. The ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 2 is undeniably faster than the original Gen 1 model, but it comes at the cost of shorter runtimes and potential performance throttling.

Despite the limited Turbo Boost sustainability of the CPU, the X1 Nano Gen 2 is still a much faster system than the older Gen 1 model without needing to change anything about the chassis, display, or weight. Users looking to maximize processor performance may want to consider heavier laptops with stronger cooling solutions like the ThinkPad T series instead. The ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 2 is now widely available via resellers such as Amazon and Newegg for $1700 USD if configured with the Core i5 and FHD display up to $2300 USD if configured with the Core i7 and 2K display.

Alternatives, users can purchase directly from Lenovo . .