TomsHardware.com Core Duo Review

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by macfreek57, Jan 22, 2006.

  1. macfreek57 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
  2. steve_hill4 macrumors 68000

    steve_hill4

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Location:
    NG9, England
    #2
    Let's hope not. I would be happy for the MacBook Pro to have comparable battery life to the current PowerBooks, not less. I could happily sacrifice say 10 seconds to keep a longer battery life. Let's think, anything up to a minute now, reportably down to about 20 seconds. I would settle with about 45 seconds for a slightly longer battery or maybe set it to be user selectable.
     
  3. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #3
    Hopefully, the difference in energy consumption between the Pentium M & Core Duo is negligible. However, some of the tests conducted by toms were a little disturbing.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Archmagination macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    #4
    Yeah that is a little disturbing, but what that review goes on to say is that the Core Duo(both proccessors) running at max only consumes 21watts.. that extra 17watt consumption is coming from somwhere else.

    They go on to mention that it could from the 512mb graphics card or in their mind the more likely culprit is USB 2.0 conflict with the proccessor.. apprently they have been hearing rumors that there is a conflict that is causing extra power consumption with the Core Duo.
     
  5. dblissmn macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    #5
    Anandtech also did a Core Duo review/preview and if their figures are anything to go by, the Core Duo system should be tying or slightly beating the previous generation Pentium M system at that clock speed (and note that a Core Duo at 2GHz is substantially faster than the previous generation Dothan chip at 2GHz). I wonder if there is a defect specific to the laptop model that Toms Hardware tested?
     
  6. sigamy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Location:
    NJ USA
    #6
    I understand that battery life is very important and that we shouldn't just take whatever the chip makers give us but isn't there a bit of "no pain no gain" here? I mean, we all complain that the G4 is too slow, we all know there is no way a G5 was going into a laptop. So isn't this Core Duo the best available?

    Seems to me if you want processing power, you give up on battery life. You want long battery life, go for a lower powered machine.
     
  7. unixfool macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #7
    I agree. As the saying goes, "You can't have your cake and eat it, too."
     
  8. Badandy macrumors 68040

    Badandy

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #8
    I think the Core Duo on that graph is the high voltage one used in the iMac. I read that the Macbook's at 1.67 and 1.87 gHz are low voltage.
     
  9. BornAgainMac macrumors 603

    BornAgainMac

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    Florida Resident
    #9
    It is does use more power, I wish there was a slider control that you can use to reduce the power usage when needed. Then when you plug your laptop in the wall, you slide it on maximum speed.
     
  10. Catfish_Man macrumors 68030

    Catfish_Man

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2001
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #10
    Check the energy saver prefs. It has a [Highest | Automatic | Lowest] dropdown menu for processor performance.
     

Share This Page