16GB Ram = Less battery?

Sinochick

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 4, 2010
39
9
Vancouver, BC
Hi guys,

I have the new 2017 13in Macbook Pro. (MBP 13.3SG/3.1GHZ/16GB/512GB). I previously had the same laptop but with 8GB ram and the battery life on that MBP was amazing....could get 10+ hours easily.

Using the same applications (everything is the same), I noticed my new MBP with 16GB Ram drains the battery...I probably can only get 7-8 hours battery on my MBP.

Is this normal? Does more RAM mean less battery life?

Thanks,
 

Nave29

macrumors member
Sep 12, 2014
52
13
Hi guys,

I have the new 2017 13in Macbook Pro. (MBP 13.3SG/3.1GHZ/16GB/512GB). I previously had the same laptop but with 8GB ram and the battery life on that MBP was amazing....could get 10+ hours easily.

Using the same applications (everything is the same), I noticed my new MBP with 16GB Ram drains the battery...I probably can only get 7-8 hours battery on my MBP.

Is this normal? Does more RAM mean less battery life?

Thanks,
I won't pass judgement yet because battery takes a bit to settle down... but I had same exact situation as you except 256 GB.
 

AppleMacFinder

macrumors 6502a
Dec 7, 2009
794
139
The difference is tiny; also: if you have more RAM your computer works faster,
so you will be able to do more things before your computer completely discharges
 

Populus

macrumors 6502a
Aug 24, 2012
886
803
Valencia, Spain.
Maybe it is the new Kaby Lake CPU. I've read that they are more power hungry than the Skylake equivalent. More MHz and same process, same architecture... More power demand.

I'm looking for a non-touch bar unit, and been wondering wich one to buy. I really want to buy the 2017, but man I want the 10-12 hours most people are getting from the 2016 model.
 

ZapNZs

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2017
2,310
1,150
With every upgradable RAM-model Mac I have used, I have not personally noticed a significant difference between 8 vs. 16. I'm not sure how much that experience carries over to the non-upgradable models tho.

Some of the differences could also possibly be explained by the strength of the individual batteries in the two machines (they can vary quite a bit.)

Were you using a different 10.12.x version with the older one versus the current one?
 

TMRJIJ

macrumors 68040
Dec 12, 2011
3,197
5,167
South Carolina, United States
Maybe it is the new Kaby Lake CPU. I've read that they are more power hungry than the Skylake equivalent. More MHz and same process, same architecture... More power demand.

I'm looking for a non-touch bar unit, and been wondering wich one to buy. I really want to buy the 2017, but man I want the 10-12 hours most people are getting from the 2016 model.
It is actually the opposite. Kaby Lake CPU are more efficient with power than its predecessor. Real world performance may not be much different. Intel is doing away from the old tick-tock development cycle.
 

leman

macrumors G3
Oct 14, 2008
9,964
4,550
Yes, more RAM consumes more battery. It's in the ballpark of 2-4 Watt per 8 GB, but with laptop battery sizes, the difference is far from being negligible. One problem is that unlike persistent storage, RAM needs to be powered all the time so that your data is not lost.