Lithium Polymer: 46% More Capacity, 0% More Weight

Today Apple is shipping lithium polymer batteries in all of its MacBook Pros. Only the original, white MacBook is offered with a removable battery. Most impressive are the capacities Apple is able to offer thanks to these new batteries.

The table below shows the old and new battery capacities:

  New Lithium Polymer Battery (Integrated)

Old Lithium Ion Battery (Removable)

Increase in Capacity
MacBook Pro 13-inch 58WHr 45WHr 29%
MacBook Pro 15-inch 73WHr 50WHr 46%
MacBook Pro 17-inch 95WHr 68WHr 40%

 

Now there was no 13” MacBook Pro before, so I’m comparing to the old aluminum 13” MacBook. Also, the 17” MacBook Pro was the first and only unibody 17” MacBook Pro so the old battery I’m comparing it to was the previous generation 17” MBP battery.


73Whr?!? Holy crap

The biggest winner is the 15” MacBook Pro, it gains a 46% increase in battery capacity with zero increase in size or weight. The new 15” MacBook Pro is the same size and weight (5.5lbs) as the previous model, it just has a 46% larger battery. Did I mention it’s cheaper too?

Index Other Hardware Changes
POST A COMMENT

113 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    The 9600M was not present in the MBP I tested. I bought the entry level $1699 one.

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Yeah, I don't like that Apple doesn't say exactly what kind of processors they offer. It's depressing.

    Why can't AT tell us what processor the MBP has? Couldn't you just run CPUZ on Windows or something? Is it harder than I think it is?
    Reply
  • aeternitas - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Apple isn't made for people that care that much about that stuff. It just doesn't matter. Faster = Faster. Expensive or not, not everyone wants to hax their way to OS X on a built PC either. Its not depressing, its simplistic and works. Reply
  • PlasmaBomb - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    I should have checked wikipedia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro

    Processors used in the mid '09 refresh are - 2.26GHz (P8400), 2.53GHz (P8700), 2.66GHz (P8800) Intel Core 2 Duo with 3MB on-chip L2 cache or 2.8GHz (P9700) Intel Core 2 Duo with 6MB on-chip L2 cache.

    There is also an optional to upgrade from the 2.8GHz chip to a 3.06GHz (T9900) with 6MB on-chip L2 cache (costs $300).
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Worth noting is that the P series CPUs (P8400-P8800) are generally 25W TDP while the T series (T9400-T9900) are 35W TDP. I think that's correct. Anyway, one thing that likely changed with these new MacBooks is that Apple switched to the lower TDP CPUs. Perhaps Anand can confirm? Reply
  • chrone - Saturday, June 13, 2009 - link

    intel atom combined with this unibody batteray will do 24hours rock solid macbook mini. lol :D hope they bring that to netbook. Reply
  • ltcommanderdata - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    The previous Late 2008 Unibody's 2.4GHz processor was also a P series with 25W TDP so it isn't a matter of just using lower TDP processors since it's unchanged.

    It would be interesting if Anand could do a battery life comparison in Windows under Boot Camp comparing the new MacBook Pro with the previous Late 2008 Unibody. If the margins remain the same between the models, then the optimization is likely in the firmware of the various components or the processor has been undervolted. If the battery life improvement margin falls in Windows, then the optimizations are in OS X.
    Reply
  • PlasmaBomb - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Good call :) Reply
  • ltcommanderdata - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Actually, if you look at Apple's publicly listed processor specs for the 2.53GHz model, I'm pretty sure there is only one processor it can be. Apple quotes the 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo as having 3MB L2 cache. That makes it a P8700. The older T9400 and P9500 had 6MB L2 cache. Similarly the 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo is the P8800 just released by Intel since it too has 3MB L2 cache. Reply
  • PlasmaBomb - Friday, June 12, 2009 - link

    Thanks, it does indeed state the cache sizes on the site under tech. spec., however the older spec. isn't there any more and you have to look.

    It is of interest as the '08 macbook ran a T9400 @2.53 GHz (35W), and the early '09 macbook ran a T9559 @ 2.66 GHz (35W).

    So there should be a greater improvement in CPU heavy tasks between the early '09 and mid '09 2.66 GHz MBPs (although not covered by this review).
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now