Power Consumption

Unsurprisingly, power consumption hasn't changed much in the past year. The Thunderbolt Display draws a bit less at its dimmest setting (likely just panel efficiency variance) and draws a bit more at max brightness:

LCD Power Draw (Kill-A-Watt)

LCD Power Draw (Kill-A-Watt)

While powering a 15-inch MacBook Pro and reading data from an attached Pegasus R6 (copying to a local SSD at around 200MB/s) I measured total power consumption for the display (max brightness) at 179.6W. That number could go up if the battery in the MBP was near empty and thus being charged at a higher rate.

Display Testing - Brightness/Contrast & Uniformity Multi-monitor with the Thunderbolt Display
POST A COMMENT

290 Comments

View All Comments

  • A5 - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    No shit. Every single review, everywhere, where the hardware is provided by the manufacturer is advertising of some form. This is why you rarely see truly negative reviews of anything. Reply
  • ltcommanderdata - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    And what monitors are you looking at to get those prices?

    http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC914?mco=MjQ1Mz...

    The Thunderbolt Display is $999 not $1200.

    Dell's most comparable device is the U2711 which is IPS and is $1099 regular price, although it's currently on sale for $719.

    http://accessories.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors_...

    I don't know how frequently Dell does sales, but at regular price the Thunderbolt Display is in fact cheaper than Dell's while including more dock features like ethernet, firewire, speakers, etc.
    Reply
  • Stas - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    Do a google search on the model and you will find at least 5 online sellers that have the Dell monitor for <$850 Reply
  • Constructor - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    Sure. The Dell doesn't have an LED backlight, however, so apparently they're selling off the old stock with CCFL backlights before moving on to LED as well.

    It's tougher to get a larger colour space with a (white) LED backlight, but on the other hand it's mercury-free, uses significantly less power and lives longer than CCFL.
    Reply
  • doubledeej - Sunday, September 25, 2011 - link

    CCFL backlit monitors still have a better image. That's why you find them on the high-end monitors from other manufacturers. Apple is sacrificing quality by moving to LED. Look at the charts in the article. The Thunderbolt and Cinema Display monitors both fall in the bottom third of nearly all of them. They aren't that great. LED gives better power usage, but it comes at a price in terms of image quality. Reply
  • Constructor - Sunday, September 25, 2011 - link

    Better power efficiency, better longevity, zero mercury.

    Quite significant advantages.

    And in most metrics the TBD is actually pretty decent, particularly for its resolution and price.

    CCFL makes it cheaper to get a larger colour space than with RGB LEDs again at the very top.

    But for that it's far dirtier in all three dimensions (wastes power, turns the display into e-waste a lot sooner and releases mercury if not dismantled very, very carefully – and even then the mercury remains hazardous waste).

    Very few people actually have a use for an expanded colour space. Still few people actually experience limitations with brightness uniformity (my iMac 27" is fully sufficient for all my uses, with no problem noticeable). And all people benefit from the advantages.

    It would have been silly for Apple to make a display that's specialized to only very few people's needs and saddling everyone with lots of disadvantages. Eizo can do that. They've got many models and they are largely specializing on these kinds of uses (and even they are on their way towards LED backlights).
    Reply
  • jecs - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    He went to the Apple store and confused the starting iMac to the Thunderbolt display. Some are so eager trying to look calm and cool but forget to check the facts.

    And you started saying "Nice but..."
    Nice to what? if you did not check the real price you are objecting
    Are you going to say now that you like the Apple display?
    Reply
  • TypeS - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    Better check the price again there bud, it's $990.00USD

    http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC914LL/A?fnode=...

    The Macbook Air also starts at $990.00USD as well:

    http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/fam...

    That's a grand total of $1980 before taxes

    The 13" Pros starts at $1199 as well.

    Dell lists it's U2711 at $1099 retail, with a current sale price of $949.

    If we take your assumption that ASUS/Samsung have similar spec'd and functional alternatives or $900, the total savings is $150.That is a far cry from half.

    Anti-apple critics are just as bad as the brainwashed Apple fanboys when they start pulling facts out of thin air.
    Reply
  • cactusdog - Saturday, September 24, 2011 - link

    The prices I quoted are from the Apple website in my country and they are accurate. Apple charge us a lot more than they do in the US.

    You're choosing the cheapest/smallest macbook that nobody wants and saying they are cheap. They are not. You can get a similar speced notebook for much less from Asus.
    Reply
  • mcnabney - Friday, September 23, 2011 - link

    Didn't you read the review? This display has poor color accuracy so you really can't compare it to displays that have it. Anand indicated that people accustom to laptop displays wouldn't notice it, but I guarantee that people who have historically bought and needed high quality displays WILL notice it. So you can't really compare Apple's new display to competitors that make displays for the publishing/imaging business. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now