Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Apple's Redesigned MacBook and MacBook Pro: Thoroughly Reviewed
Apple's Redesigned MacBook and MacBook Pro: Thoroughly Reviewed
Date: October 22nd, 2008
Topic: Mac
Manufacturer: Apple
Author: Anand Lal Shimpi
Buy the BTI MA348GA-BTI Battery Apple Lithium
Blank
 PC Connection $118.03
 TigerDirect $112.99
 CircuitCity $112.99
 
 

Battery Life: Take Two Steps Forward, and Two Steps Back

If we look at the power consumption comparison we did in our GeForce 9300 review you'll see that the NVIDIA chipset pulls around 10W less power than G35 at idle, extending up to 15W under gaming loads. NVIDIA's 65nm GeForce 9400M used in the new MacBook and MacBook Pro is effectively the same chipset and thus it's safe to assume that there's a healthy reduction in platform power consumption afforded by the new hardware.

Apple reduced the capacity of both the MacBook and MacBook Pro batteries by 10W (60WHr down to 50WHr for the Pro and 55WHr down to 45WHr for the standard MB). Given that total platform power consumption should go down by around 10W, Apple's efforts here seem to make perfect sense. Smaller batteries mean lighter and potentially thinner notebooks; unfortunately it also means that battery life won't improve at all.

To test this theory I ran two of the battery tests I did back when the first Penryn MacBooks launched:

Battery Life: Wireless Web Browsing

The web browsing test shows that the MacBook Pro battery life remains basically unchanged, while the MacBook takes a slight hit compared to its predecessor. For all intents and purposes, these notebooks won't last any longer than the old ones.

The same thing is true about the heavy usage scenario: battery life basically remains unchanged:

Battery Life: Heavy Downloading + XviD + Web

Note that in both of these tests the MacBook Pro's GeForce 9600M GPU was disabled and only the chipset's internal GeForce 9400M was used. Apple indicates that you lose 20% of your battery life if you use the 9600M on the MacBook Pro; to test this I ran the heavy usage scenario benchmark but with the 9600M enabled:

  GeForce 9600M Disabled GeForce 9600M Enabled
Battery Life (Heavy Usage Test) 3.13 hours 2.37 hours

 

Using the dGPU dropped battery life by 24%, which is close enough to Apple's numbers to call them relatively honest. I also appreciate that Apple's 5 hour battery life is about what I got with the MacBook Pro in my web browsing test. Honesty is very important in any relationship, even if it's one between a manufacturer and a consumer.

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

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

65 Comments - Last by MacMatte, 153 days ago
Username:
Password:
Final comment by themadmilkman, 394 days ago
Thank you for the honest assessment about whether to buy or wait. You just kept me from blowing $1300 by upgrading too soon.

Reply
RE: Final comment by Ronbo13, 391 days ago
If you're basing this on the reflectivity of the screens, you need to look at them in person. The pictures are misleading, in that the new MBP is positioned to be reflecting a wall in direct daylight, and the one on the left is reflecting a wall in shadows. The new MBP is a pretty glossy screen. I have one, and I used to have a matte MBP. But the screen is, nevertheless, beautiful. Don't make up your mind until you see it in person.

Reply
Backlit keyboard on MacBook 2.4 by acfoltzer, 394 days ago
Hi Anand,

I just want to point out that the keyboard on my 2.4GHz MacBook IS backlit. It seems to be a little-documented difference between the 2.0 and 2.4.

Cheers,
Adam

Reply
RE: Backlit keyboard on MacBook 2.4 by andreschmidt, 394 days ago
Indeed, that was one of the things I noticed in the article as well. The 2.4Ghz MacBook does have the backlit keyboard.

Reply
Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by jonmcc33, 394 days ago
Maybe you should test the power settings with Vista on Power saver setting? My Latitude D610 lasts over 3 hours with Vista. I wouldn't use Balanced unless it was plugged into the AC adapter.

Reply
RE: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by wilkinb, 394 days ago
yeh I agree the diff will be how the OS is set to manage each device etc etc...

On my Sony laptop i get around 2 hours on high performance and a bit over 5 hours on battery saving...

The results they posted dont really tell us much other then a bootcamp vista install isnt as good as an osx install at managing power on apple laptop... amazing right?

I am sure if i dont use the Sony install and tool/drviers etc I will also get less battery life on my laptop. So the question would be do you think apple put more effort into power management on their OSX install then they did for Vista?

Reply
RE: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by JarredWalton, 394 days ago
Let me just say that I've tried testing various power saver setting under Vista on several notebooks (see review on Friday) and I just can't get anywhere near 5 hours of battery life. Sure, the CPUs are a bit higher spec on some of the notebooks, but as one example a 12.1" laptop with 55 Whr battery, 320GB 5400RPM HDD, 4GB RAM, LED backlighting, and P8400 pulls an "amazing" 138 minutes of DVD playback and 142 minutes of web surfing... though it does manage 261 minutes when sitting idle at the desktop.

As best I can tell, the CPU and HDD just don't seem to be entering sleep modes much if at all, unless the system is 100% idle. Even then, 261 minutes idle battery life doesn't compare favorably to the MacBook pulling 286 minutes of web surfing.

How big is the Sony battery, if I may ask? (Just for reference, take Voltage * mAhr to get Whr.) What sort of CPU, GPU, HDD, RAM does it use? What we need to see to prove it's possible is a Vista laptop with a 20W TDP CPU, 2GB RAM, 5400 RPM HDD, and 13.3" LED backlit LCD that can still get close to five hours of battery life with a 55 Whr battery. If you think you have one, get the manufacturer to send me one for review! :)

Reply
RE: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by Spivonious, 393 days ago
Are you guys turning off the Vista indexer and SuperFetch? Those two things would run the harddrives pretty constantly on a fresh install, which would definitely drag down battery life.

Reply
RE: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by JarredWalton, 393 days ago
Do normal users disable SuperFetch? I've disabled indexing as much as I know how, since I don't use it, but SuperFetch is part of Vista. Besides, it shouldn't run on battery power (and neither should indexing).

Reply
RE: Battery Life in OS X vs. Windows Vista by jonmcc33, 393 days ago
No, normal users do not disable SuperFetch. That's just bad tweaking advice, as much as turning Indexing off is as well. Both are amazing features added to Vista.

I tested a Latitude D630 (2.6GHz Core 2 Duo Penryn, 2GB RAM) with Vista Business and a 9-cell 85WHr battery. Life was over 5 hours.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 7

Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
Special Offer from The Economist
Get 12 issues of The Economist for $12. US subscribers only.
Free Forrester Risk Management Report
Demystifying Enterprise Risk Management. Download Free With Registration.
DOWNLOAD vWire Today - FREE TRIAL
Take Control of Your Virtual Infrastructure. Manage VI Data & Prevent Problems.
Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank




pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information