Charge Time on New iPad Significantly Increased with Larger Battery

Discussion in 'iOS Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Mar 15, 2012.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    One interesting note on the new iPad revealed in TechCrunch's review is the observation that charging time has increased significantly over previous models. While the increase is not necessarily a surprise given the significant 70% boost in battery capacity from 25 watt-hours in the iPad 2 to 42.5 watt-hours in the new iPad, it is an issue that many users may not have considered.
    [​IMG]


    Logic board and battery of new iPad (Source: iFixit teardown)
    The increased battery capacity is undoubtedly being used to power such enhanced components as the Retina display and LTE networking technology, while also maintaining the same battery life (10 hours on Wi-Fi, 9 hours on cellular data) of the previous iPad.

    TechCrunch also notes that the increased power of the new iPad also seems to manifest itself in the device becoming "noticeably warm" in the lower left corner, something that had not been observed to such a degree in earlier models.

    Article Link: Charge Time on New iPad Significantly Increased with Larger Battery
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Menopause

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    #2
    That's quite understandable and IMO a small trade-off compared to what we're getting in return. I'll just charge it overnight :)
     
  3. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    #3
    Considering it has the retina display and the boost in graphics, i don't mind charging it longer. :)
     
  4. macrumors demi-god

    GeekLawyer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    The post is coming from inside the house!
    #4
    I believe I read in one of the other reviews that this heating in the lower left corner was related to LTE use...

    No surprise that a "larger" battery takes longer to charge.
     
  5. macrumors 601

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #5
    This is actually a legitimate issue. I've always considered the iPad to be fairly slow at charging. Adding several hours on top of that is not good for people on the go—but it's not the end of the world either. I usually charge my iPad overnight anyway—but when I forget to, even if I realize a couple hours before class, I would be out of luck now? Good thing I graduate in May. Office charging!
     
  6. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    #6
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

    What doesn't make sense to me though is if the battery power increased by 70%, how is it that the timing in the wifi only mode is still only the same as before?? The display, and not the 4G, must be the real power hog here...
     
  7. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    #7
    Time for Magsafe?

    Seems like the iPad is going to have to move to using MagSafe for charging, and ship with the same power supply as the Air. Of course, they could still let you charge over USB if you needed to.

    It seems inevitable given that the new iPad battery is larger than the one in the 11" Air (40W/hr vs 35W/hr)
     
  8. macrumors 601

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #8
    For all the advancements we make in technology, it seems that battery tech is always lagging behind. There are constantly new articles about amazing new battery tech being developed at XYZ Super University and it never happens.

    Sure it's cool that they pumped this much juice into a battery not much physically larger than the old one—but I read about 7 years ago about how we would have laptop batteries that lasted for a month and took 15 minutes to charge that were being developed at MIT or someplace like that. I understand that they were probably being optimistic, but we're not even a little bit close to that today. What gives scientists? Oh—some law of nature? Well then, in that case you can stop getting my hopes up. Oh—you were bending the truth to secure additional funding? You sneaky scientists.
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    justinfreid

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Location:
    NEW Jersey / USA
    #9
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

    So retrofitting an iPad 2 with this new battery tech would yield how many hours on WiFi?
     
  10. macrumors 603

    Menel

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    ATL
    #10
    In a year, they increased batt. capacity in same volume 70%? That's very significant advancement.

    Link this 7 year old article you reminisce over.

    ----------

    ~ +70%
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    bacaramac

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #11
    I don't travel with my iPad so I don't see this as an issue. I am guessing the Display is the true reason or the Wi-Fi model would have more use time on it. LTE is probably a drop in the hat compared to the Display.

    I always charge my iPad using the 10W adapter and not USB on my iMac. Wonder what the charge time is using the 10W vs. iMac USB.
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    #12
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

    No surprise there. And the RAM.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Menopause

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    #13
    The last line of your first paragraph contradicts the first line of your last paragraph. Why the rant? Why calling "scientists" names? "MIT or someplace like that"? With all due respect I find this quite bland and juvenile.

    Advance in science doesn't mean it could immediately and effortlessly be implemented in (consumer) technology, simultaneously meeting economic and environmental requirements.

    When it does, the product is something like 170% charge holding capacity in a battery of the same dimensions as the yesteryears. It's here today and frankly, I find it fascinating. But since you hardly appreciate it, I don't think any amount of advancement in technology at any given point of time will ever satisfy you. The day your '1 month long / 15 minutes charging' battery finally comes, I'm certain I'll find you blaming scientists for not having invented 'a year long battery with 10 minutes charging'.
     
  14. macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    #14
    Wouldn't this also mean that listening to music on this thing, with the display off, would last a really long time?
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Eminemdrdre00

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    #15
    Imagine if they put this battery in the iPad 2! The battery life would be insane.
     
  16. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    #16
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

    I wonder - there were rumors or the iPad 2 having retina last year, but with this kind of power consumption, and a 25 whr battery, it wouldn't have gone over well to have 5hrs battery time... Although I'm sure they hade production difficulties too
     
  17. macrumors 603

    notjustjay

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Location:
    Canada, eh?
    #17
    I'm wondering if this improvement in battery technology will work its way over to other products. Maybe the MacBook Air will also have super-long battery life.

    Unless of course the next MacBook Air also has a retina display :)
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #18
    ...

    Well I guess we know now that the only way to get a high res retina like display in a macbook pro is to ditch the superdrive so it can be replaced by more battery and that there is no way they could do it in the air. Guess we can apples 2012 roadmap
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    iapplelove

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Location:
    East Coast USA
    #19
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)

    This isn't an issue for me at all.. And if I can go a few days between charges like my ipad2 then over night charging will be the way to go again
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    #20
    Engineering is about compromises. Good engineering is picking the right things to compromise on.

    I'm going to withhold judgement on both the recharge time and case "warmth" till I've had it in my (sweaty?) hands for a while. If history is any guide, Apple will have erred on the right side.

    Regarding the recharge time, I think the key measure isn't going to be how long it takes to get battery state up to 100%. (It always takes a long time to get those last few milliamp hours into the battery.) Its going to be how long it takes to get it from ~5% to 50%. IOW, "almost outta gas" to "enough juice to get me through the day."
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Location:
    outside the crazy house, NC
    #21
    Yup. Creating new and ever increasingly super powerful mobile gizmos each year is becoming a wall that the tech world is going to hit sooner rather than later.

    It's as if all the auto world just ignored the price and availability of oil and continued to build bigger and bigger engines just so they could go faster, with no regard to how much fuel they use.

    There just isn't enough interest or investment in portable power. Batteries are just not as sexy as flashy graphics or shiny materials and that's going to be the anchor that holds the world back.

    I've said it before. Apple needs to spend it's money acquiring cutting-edge battery research. If they could push development forward in a huge leap that would benefit everyone. Not just Apple products.

    An iPad that charges once a week and has a run time of 48 hours? That would be something.
     
  22. macrumors G3

    charlituna

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #22
    What kind of a charge are we talking about. ARe they saying several hours to go for 0 to 100% or just say 50 to 100%. And define 'several' that could be anything over 2 (which is generally said as 'a couple'). Are we talking 3, 5, 8, 10, 24.


    Remember not everyone is going to drain the battery every day. It takes about 3 hours for my original iPad to go from empty to full (2 hours for my iPad 2) if they are asleep or off and on the wall charger. I would say with 70% more battery power to actually recharge going from 0-100% in 4-5 hours isn't that insane.
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    #23
    While it might be a slight inconvenience, it's a tradeoff I'm glad they made (as well as the extra 0.6 mm and 50 g). The Retina display and 4G/LTE seem well worth it. A 70% increase in battery capacity is an impressive feat.

    I wonder if they will similarly cram some amazing battery into the next iPhone? :cool:
     
  24. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    #24
    I have never seen an iPad 2 charge that fast.

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1120125

    Mine takes four hours. The new may take 6 to 8 hours. That is nuts.
     
  25. macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #25
    I've been wondering something similar - does the Wi-Fi only model have the same monster battery as the 4G model? It would be killer to get 10 hours plus a few more with the WiFi only model. But with all the new components - cameras, display, etc - it seems the costs of the iPad have really gone up, and saving on the Wi-Fi only battery would help offset that. Wondering what the teardowns will reveal...
     

Share This Page