Incredible Battery Life Under OS X

Over the summer I stumbled onto something interesting: the new 15-inch MacBook Pro delivered an ungodly amount of battery life. By shrinking the battery, Apple was able to cram a 73Whr battery where they used to only have a 50Whr pack:

The rest of the lineup got a similarly sizeable upgrade in 2009:

  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%

 

I only tested the 15-inch over the summer, but recently I had the opportunity to try the entire lineup. I brewed up some new battery life test and put Apple's "up to 7 hours" claims to the test.

Light Web Browsing

Our first test is the one that yields the longest battery life: the light web browsing test. Here we're simply listening to MP3s in iTunes on repeat while browsing through a series of webpages with no flash on them. Each page forwards on to the next in the series after 20 seconds.

The display is kept at 50% brightness, all screen savers are disabled, but the hard drive is allowed to go to sleep if there's no disk activity. The wireless connection is enabled and connected to a local access point less than 20 feet away. This test represents the longest battery life you can achieve on the platform while doing minimal work. The results here are comparable to what you'd see typing a document in TextEdit or reading documents.

All of the new unibody MacBook Pros here get over 7 hours of battery life. This isn't idle folks, this is actual, real world battery life with real world settings. The worst was actually the 15-inch MacBook Pro at only 7.4 hours, while the 13-inch and 17-inch MacBook Pro got closer to 8 hours.

If you own a previous generation MacBook Pro (non-unibody) then the battery life is nearly double (a 76% increase). My personal 15-inch MacBook Pro is the first laptop I've owned where I was happy with both the performance and the battery life. It's what a notebook should be.

Flash Web Browsing

Our next test more closely simulates a very heavy web browsing scenario. The test here has three Safari windows open, each browsing a set of web pages with between 1 - 4 animated flash ads per page, at the same time. Each page forwards onto the next after about 20 seconds.

As always, the display is set to 50% brightness, audio at two bars, screensaver disabled and the hard drive is allowed to go to sleep if idle. The wireless connection is enabled and connected to a local access point less than 20 feet away.

Battery life drops significantly. Our 7.4+ hours now drop down to 3.7 hours on the 13-inch MacBook Pro, 4.6 hours on the 15-inch and 4.4 hours on the 17-inch. That's still not bad but between these two numbers you get a reasonable idea of how long one of these systems will last while browsing the web. The smaller capacity battery on the 13-inch appears to be really holding it back here as the 15-inch manages nearly another hour of battery life.

Here we're actually doubling the battery life of the older 15-inch MacBook Pro from early 2008. It's interesting to note that Apple's lightest notebook, the MacBook Air, offers similar battery life to the MacBook Pro from almost two years ago.

XviD Video Playback

Watching movies on your laptop is very realistic usage model, but I wanted to spice it up a bit. The DVD playback test is so done, I wanted something a little more forward looking. I ripped The Dark Knight to XviD and played it back continuously in QuickTime X with Perian installed.

For this test the display was set to full brightess and audio was set at two bars below maximum. Once more the hard drive was allowed to go to sleep if it was idle. The AirPort (wireless LAN) was enabled and connected to a local access point less than 20 feet away.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro comes in with the shortest battery life of 3.45 hours. The 15-inch is the winner at 3.83 hours, with the 17-inch close at 3.76 hours. All of the notebooks promise good enough battery life to get you through one long movie, but not quite enough for two back to back at full brightness. A couple of short ~100 minute movies is definitely doable though.

The older notebooks could only do a single long movie, the MacBook Air could barely finish one. Apple was very smart with its roadmap - when Intel could not provide significantly better performance, it delivered much better battery life to give users a reason to upgrade.

Multitasking Battery Life

Our final battery life test is the worst case scenario. In this test we have three open Safari windows, each browsing a set of web pages with between 1 - 4 flash ads per page, at the same time. We're also playing an XviD video in a window all while downloading files from a server at approximately 500KB/s.

This test proved to bring our notebooks to their knees. The 13-inch MacBook Pro managed under 2.5 hours, while the 15-inch came close to 3 and the 17-inch actual broke it with 3.1 hours.

Between these four tests you can get a general idea of how long these notebooks will last. The 13-inch will last you between 2.5 and 7.4 hours, the 15-inch is more like 3 - 7.8, and the 17-inch is fairly similar at 3 - 7.9 hours. On average expecting four to five hours of battery life while doing real work isn't unrealistic.

Which, I should mention, is freaking awesome on these notebooks. It's also worth noting that these aren't just benchmarks, these are scenarios I've created and also vetted with my own experience with the 15-inch MacBook Pro. For a writer, any of these MacBook Pros are perfect, especially when traveling. The lack of a removable battery just isn't an issue.

Ugh, SSDs in the MacBook Pro Snow Leopard: Bad for Battery Life
Comments Locked

115 Comments

View All Comments

  • sprockkets - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link

    While in general their stuff just works better with OSX for the general public, and this issue will never affect any of them, still, this issue, plus the stupidity of having unlocked iphones legally purchased in other countries lose their ability to teather and other stuff makes for a big disconnect.

    They didn't handle the SATA issue well at all, and the efi update didn't help either when there was no easy downgrade option.
  • martinw - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link

    Not really news, it's just the way Apple works, particularly towards developers. For some reason they do not admit to faults, they just go away and fix the problem in a future version. Not ideal from a developer angle as I'd prefer to get an acknowledgment that something is definitely wrong and that it will be addressed, but at least the problems do get fixed eventually.
  • windspast - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    I was a bit disappointed with this article. In a technological website, an article like this with many pages only spent ONE single page on the actual TECH. This article only spent ONE PAGE talking about the spec and it wasn't even any comparison on how fast (or slow) this computer is. For a technological website, this article only talked about things that didn't matter.

    When it comes to comparing Mac and DELL or HP, the rest of it is irrelevant. Design is purely objective. I don't care if the MacBookPro is thinner by a tiny little bit. It's not that big of a deal. 2 pounds worth of difference? WHO CARES. I buy a computer for the power that it offers, not whether or not it's thin enough to be a coaster.

    I don't care if the DELL is one or two pounds heavier if it cost half as much and is twice as fast. I don't care if the MacbookPro has a "stylish" design. I think it's plain and boring looking. I don't care if it has a longer battery life. That's not important to me. I want POWER out of my machines without having to sell a kidney to buy one.

    This is a TECH website, not a style website. I bet if you spend one second showing how much the i7 blows the core 2 duo out of the water, none of the other stuff will even matter.

    Mac isn't a BMW or a Lexus or a Cadillac.

    Mac is a beat up Honda with a new paint job and a higher price tag.
  • jhl654321 - Wednesday, April 14, 2010 - link

    Send Gifts. Buy more to send. On this site __
    http:// www.oppell.com
    _________________________$$$$$$$__________
    ________________________$$$$$$$$$$________
    ________________________$$$$$$$$$$$_______
    _________________________$$$$$$$$$$$______
    __________________________$$$$$$$$$$$_____
    _____________________________$$$$$$$$$____
    ___________________________$$$$$$$$$$_____
    http:// www.oppell.com $$$$$$$$$$$$$____
    ________________$$$______$$$$$$$$$$$$$$___
    ______________$$$$$$$$_____$$$$$$__$$$$$__
    _____________$$$$$$$$$$_____$$$$____$$$$$_
    ___________$$$$$$_$$$$$$$$__$$$$______$$$$
    __________$$$$$_____$$$$$$$$_$$$$_______$$$
    ___ _____$$$$$_________$$$$$$$$$$$$_______$$$
    _______ $$$_____________$$$$$$$$$$$________$$$
    _____$$$__ ______________$$$$$$$$$$________$$$$$$
    sneaker: airmax 90, 95 etc $35-42 free shiping.
    boots: UGG etc $60 free shiping.
    Jeans : polo etc $35-49 free shipping
    T-shirts : A&f etc $12-18 free shipping.
    hoodies: 5ive etc $28-40 free shipping
    handbags: Ed hardy etc $35-68 free shipping
    Sunglasses: LV etc $17 free shipping
    Belts: BOSS etc $15 free shipping
    Caps: red bull etc $12-15 free shipping
    Watches:rolex etc $80 free shipping
    http:// www.oppell.com
    How to order
    1. Visit our website browse our products or send the picture of product to us if there are not in our website.
    2. Please email us the product's name (picture), size, quantity that you need.
    3. Negotiate the Price and then you make order confirmation to us.
    4. We tell you Western Union Information for payment transfer.
    5. You transfer the payment via Western Union to us.
    6. You send the track MTCN to us, and tell us you?e Name, Address, and zip code for deliver.
    7. We deliver your products after we receive the payment.
    8. We send the tracking number to you.
    9. Give us feedback after you get the products.
    For more informations, please visit our website:
    http:// www.oppell.com
  • roxyland - Thursday, April 15, 2010 - link

    Anand, while the rest of your article seems like a very objective analysis, I couldn't agree less with your comment "virtually anything you can do in OS X can be done in Windows 7"...

    I don't even want to touch on the subject on UI capabilities on each platfrom, where it all comes down to user preference, but if you were more than the average desktop user, OSX give you all the power and flexibility of UNIX via a shell. It wouldn't even be fair to compare the far limited command line utility available on Windows to a UNIX shell.

    Anyone with experience on either linux or any flavour of unix will tell you how invaluable this is for more serious work on an OS. On these terms Windows 7 is still more comparable to "buying a car with it's hood welded shut".

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now