The Unexpected: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista

A while ago I started testing the Lenovo X300 with hopes of comparing it to Apple's MacBook Air. The review never saw the light of day but the testing was mostly complete. Obviously the X300 doesn't run OS X, but the MacBook Air can run Windows so I compared battery life between the two under Vista, which yielded some unexpected results.

There are no scripted battery life tests under OS X, while under Vista we have things like MobileMark - luckily, the tests I've put together for OS X can easily be reproduced under Vista. Let's take a look at my tests under OS X:

The wireless web browsing test uses the 802.11n connection to browse a series of 20 web pages varying in size, spending 20 seconds on each page (I timed how long it takes me to read a page on Digg and came up with 36 seconds; I standardized on 20 seconds for the test to make things a little more stressful). The test continues to loop all while playing MP3s in iTunes.

The DVD playback test is simple: I play Blood Diamond in a loop from an image on the hard drive until the battery runs out.

The final test is the multitasking workload. For this benchmark I'm downloading 10GB worth of files from the net (constant writes to the drive), browsing the web (same test as the first one) and watching the first two episodes of Firefly encoded in a 480p XviD format (Quicktime is set to loop the content until the system dies).

The system was set to never shut off the display and never go to sleep, although the hard drive was allowed to spin down when possible. The display brightness was set at 9 blocks (just over 50%), which I felt was comfortable for both day and night viewing.

The first test was easy to duplicate under Vista; web browsing is ubiquitous across platforms and iTunes has been cross platform for a while now. The same goes for the DVD playback test; instead of using Apple's DVD app I just used Windows Media Player 11 under Vista. And the final test also translates flawlessly to Vista.

Below are the results I got when I first ran the MacBook Air under both OS X and Vista:

  Wireless Internet Browsing DVD Playback Heavy Usage
MacBook Air (OS X) 4.98 hours 3.93 hours 2.7 hours
MacBook Air (Vista) 2.55 hours 2.05 hours 1.75 hours

 

Note that this is the same hardware and with the same brightness settings under both OSes. Vista's power management was set to Balanced and the display was set to never turn off under both OSes; the hard drives were free to spin down if possible.

The results are pretty staggering. The same usage model under both OSes results in a significant advantage for OS X. I basically got twice the battery life under OS X as I did under Vista. Now it is possible that Apple's power management is simply more sophisticated under OS X and not optimized for Vista, but what inspired me to include this in today's review was actually something AnandTech's own Jarred Walton brought up in a meeting earlier this week.

In testing the first batch of Centrino 2 notebooks that Jarred received he noted that he can't seem to find a mainstream notebook with a 50 - 60WHr battery that can come close to offering the sort of battery life you get out of the Macs. Even in his idle tests (just leave the computer at the desktop without doing anything or putting it to sleep) Jarred has been finding many mainstream notebooks only seem to last 3 or 4 hours at best. He asked me to run a simple test on the latest MacBook Pro just to confirm his findings: play a DVD under OS X then Windows Vista and see how battery life is impacted by the OS change.

Now I'd already ran this test on the MacBook Air earlier this year, but I had assumed that there was something wrong with my data. Repeating the DVD test (this time using an actual DVD of Sin City in the drive) I measured battery life for looping the entire movie (minus credits) on the new MacBook Pro:

  DVD Playback
New MacBook Pro (OS X) 3.07 hours
New MacBook Pro (Vista) 1.5 hours

 

Under OS X the new MacBook Pro lasted just over 3 hours while playing the DVD, but under Windows Vista I got a total of 1.5 hours. All of the bootcamp drivers were installed and the OS was as clean as could be with no additional background tasks other than what loads by default with a standard Vista Ultimate 32-bit install.

Now it's possible that Apple's notebooks may be at a battery life disadvantage under Vista vs. OS X. To find out here are the results for the Lenovo X300 compared to the MacBook Air under Vista:

  Wireless Internet Browsing DVD Playback Heavy Usage
MacBook Air (OS X) 4.98 hours 3.93 hours 2.7 hours
MacBook Air (Vista) 2.55 hours 2.05 hours 1.75 hours
Lenovo X300 (Vista) 2.82 hours 2.18 hours 1.68 hours

 

The Lenovo X300 actually offers similar battery life to the MBA under Vista, despite shipping with a 27WHr battery vs. the 37WHr unit in the MacBook Air. The comparison isn't that cut and dry however; the X300 uses a Core 2 Duo L7100 with a 12W TDP compared to the 1.6/1.8GHz 20W TDP processor in the MBA. Overall platform power consumption is lower on the X300 than on the MBA and thus the numbers here seem to support my point. The X300 manages to last a bit over 2 hours during the DVD playback test under Vista, while the MacBook Air can pull nearly 4 hours under OS X (despite also staying alive for ~2 hours under Vista).

Figuring out why OS X seems to be better for battery life is nearly impossible, at least without the aid of both Apple and Microsoft. I've brought up this topic with a handful of PC OEMs in the past and they haven't been able to shed any more light on things, other than to confirm that Vista is a strange beast. It's quite possible that Vista's constant performance optimizations are preventing CPU and platform power management techniques from being effective, but that seems a little too simplistic of a view.

All I can do for now is report the numbers as is. An unexpected benefit of OS X appears to be better battery life. Go figure.

Battery Life: Take Two Steps Forward, and Two Steps Back Final Words
Comments Locked

66 Comments

View All Comments

  • plonk420 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    could anyone test this with the new (and even old) Mac Book Pro to test for CPU usage?

    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ADFYX083">http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ADFYX083

    h.264 high profile (QT supports this now, right?) level 4.1 720p60, fairlight/the black lotus's demo Only One Wish (2nd place at Intel's second demo compo) .. has some really handsome bitrate spikes :D ~mid 20s mbps spikes (but not as good as the 60mbit spikes in a 6 or 8mbit (average) encode of ASD's Antisize Matters)
  • michaelheath - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    Having spoken to a few Apple developers I know, the reason for this oddity is Nvidia's software implementation for Mac OS 10.5. While the ideal situation was for them to be able to switch on the fly, the agreement between Apple and Nvidia to develop for the new MacBooks and MacBook Pros happened so quickly it left little time to create a proper application that would allow for this (think of how you had to restart your computer to turn SLI on or off: same slapdash type of programming).

    The hope is that quick-toggling between integrated and dedicated graphics will come with Mac OS 10.6 as it may be too large of an update to patch Mac OS 10.5. It also makes sense in this aspect as Mac OS 10.6 also includes OpenCL GPGPU algorithms, which Nvidia is already promoting and developing under their CUDA platform.
  • RDO CA - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    On my Thinkpad T-400 with switchable graphics all that is needed to switch is to go to the taskbar icon and click switchable graphics and choose what you want and the screen goes dark for a second and thats it.
  • cliffa3 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    I'll test it sometime this week, but on my Lenovo T61 it seems like I get much more life out of Ubuntu than I do Vista 64-bit. Could be a windows thing in general, not just something that OS X does better.

    How was the battery life comparison between XP and Vista?
  • PilgrimShadow - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    Anyone know if the 9400M and 9600M appear in Vista's Device Manager?
  • TallCoolOne - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    I bought the new 2.0GHz MacBook last week as my first Mac and can say I'm not disappointed. The whole chassis feels as solid as, well, a block of aluminum! As Anand said, it feels like you get what you paid for. I actually like the multi-touch gestures, such as swiping with 3 fingers to flip pages and for back/forward when web browsing. I'd like to see iTunes also support that gesture. Two finger scolling is another great feature not mentioned in this article. What I don't like though is the stiffness of the mouse click. It takes far more pressure than any mouse and that required pressure is uneven in different areas of the trackpad. Pressing near the top requires more pressure than near the bottom. As for lack of standard SSD, Anand, perhaps you're a little too spoiled by that speed! I would not expect that as standard on even the fastest MacBook Pro at current prices. That is, unless you'd like to see the asking price for a MBP $500-600 more than it is now.
  • vlado08 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    It is interesting was vista side panel running during the test. Also was this fresh install of vista os. If it was fresh then was the indeing enabled.
  • vlado08 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    edit indeing - indexing
  • jmpt2 - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    Very interesting to read your conclusions about better power management in MacOS vs Vista. This matches my experiences running Vista on the BootCamp partition of my Core Duo MacBook, and is the first time I've seen this discussed anywhere on the web. I found that with a main battery in quite poor condition after two years constant use, it became impossible to use Vista on battery power for more than a minute without the battery deciding it was empty and putting the machine into sleep mode. Under MacOSX the system could still be used for 30min+ (light use) before the same thing happened.

    I'd come to the conclusion that Apple were deliberately playing games with the ACPI tables to confuse Vista's power management code and make their own OS look better. This seemed to be supported by the fact that Vista is unable to correctly detect the charging state on my MacBook - running on battery power it would always report "Connected to mains, not charging". Does it still work that way on the latest MacBooks? In any case, your data does seems to suggest the problem is a more general issue with Vista. Sounds like you should investigate further...

  • BZDTemp - Thursday, October 23, 2008 - link

    I wonder if OS X lasting longer on a battery can be transfered to the world of none portable?

    In other words say I run OS X on my daily, none laptop, work machine doing surfing, writing and perhaps listening to music(FLAC prefered over MP3) or even watching an episode of The Daily Show. Will this draw less power from the wall with a PC running OS X than with the same machine running Windows (and is there a difference between Windows versions). Also Linux should be included in the test.

    Imagine the perspective - with the whole green computing movement this could really make a difference not just in the server rooms.

    Please do check this out - this is not only interesting for us geeks but could make Anandtech something referred to by none-tech news media.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now