'7 hour battery'

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by thepf, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. thepf macrumors newbie

    Feb 8, 2011
    Whats the word on this? Is it really less battery time than last years?
  2. Tiki35 macrumors 6502

    Oct 25, 2009
    Nanoose Bay, BC, Canada
    I am sure no one has even had it in their possession for 7 hours yet. But the battery life should not be less than the last model. They are just posting more realistic usage tests which is good.
  3. pricej636 macrumors 6502

    Mar 30, 2010

    They revised the testing process and this is a more accurate estimate based on real world usage.

    Also, the faster processors are eating some battery life for sure.
  4. iShater macrumors 604


    Aug 13, 2002
    As other threads have noted, they are using the newer battery tests, which are supposed to be more indicative of close-to-real-life.
  5. simplydat macrumors member

    Nov 12, 2010
    They're using a different test standard on purpose to cover up the loss of battery life. And when people asked, they would use that as an excuse. Very typical apple.
  6. alust2013 macrumors 601


    Feb 6, 2010
    On the fence
    There is likely to be a small loss in battery life, as the new CPUs are more power-hungry (35W vs. 25W), however the GPU is included in that 35W, so 7 hours should be pretty accurate.
  7. Mal macrumors 603


    Jan 6, 2002
    Yep, I would suspect slightly less actual battery life compared to previous due to the processors sucking up more power, but they also changed their battery tests so probably not 3 hours less battery in real life.

  8. jdaniel macrumors 65816

    Mar 21, 2009
    Lviv, Ukraine
    exactly why would you change your test methods then what do you say to past customers? who bought it based on a supposed 10hr life.. LOL I bet the battery life is just not as good as previous year's.
  9. VictoriaStudent macrumors regular


    Jul 20, 2010
    Hey, you had some grammatical errors. FTFY.
  10. fs454 macrumors 68000

    Dec 7, 2007
    Los Angeles / Boston
    At this point they NEED to just kill the optical drive or we're gonna see battery time go down and prices for new battery tech go up.
  11. LoganT macrumors 68020

    Jan 9, 2007
    It's called being honest.
  12. ddarko, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2011

    ddarko macrumors 6502

    May 7, 2007
    Proof? Evidence? Facts for your conspiracy theory?

    It's not hard to find data and testing that demonstrates TDP has little correlation to battery life. Like this Anandtech review of a quad-core Sandy Bridge notebook:


    The Anandtech testing showed the quad-core Sandy Bridge notebook had the LONGEST battery life among all the notebooks tested:

    In other words, the quad-core Sandy Bridge in the Macbook Pro very likely has nothing to do with the smaller quoted "wireless web" battery life. We won't know this for sure until more thorough reviews test the new Macbook Pro but based on how other quad-core Sandy Bridge notebooks have performed, there's NO evidence to suggest the new processor sucks up battery life. None. At this point, the reduced battery life quoted by Apple is almost purely an artifact of measuring battery life with wi-fi turned on, as Apple points out:

    We know Apple's previous tests didn't use wi-fi. Now, it does. What is the reasonable conclusion to draw from this? That Apple is engaged in conspiracy theories and or that a notebook using wi-fi drains power faster than one that doesn't? Apple moved to the new wi-fi enabled tests with the Macbook Air and now, the Macbook Pro.
  13. tigress666 macrumors 68040

    Apr 14, 2010
    Washington State
    Ok, if they are being honest, can I find what they are basing these real life tests on?

    I know on the old tests they would tell you it was running Safari and Word with wifi on with half brightness on the screen. Which I found got me 7.5 hours of battery life.

    So, what are they doing in the new tests? Are they just being more honest about the average they are finding with the same tests? On the old tests where they just quoting the top times they found in the tests and in the new ones they are averaging out?

    Or are they running different programs that require more battery usage that is closer to what most people would use (I don't think a web browser + word is unreasonable to expect of your casual user anyways which is what a lot of users of the 13" would be).

    I guess the problem here is that while they did tell you some of what the specifications were on the old test, they didn't say how they used them. It is quite possible I suppose that they are running the same programs but using them differently (web browsing more, going to more flash pages, watching more video. I found if I am constantly looking around pages my battery goes down vs. leaving it on one page).

    So yeah, I would be curious what differences the old vs. new test had.

    edit: I kinda realized while writing this that my original assumption that maybe they used different programs was only one way they could have changed the test and that there were several ways the test could be different and that I don't know the full of how they used Safari and Word on the old test so that in itself could be a big change.
  14. Reddmanz macrumors regular

    Jul 23, 2010
    I've just got home from work with my 13". Started at 11am on 100% and it is just after 7pm now and I'm just down to 18% with about an hour left apparently.
  15. Kissaragi macrumors 68020

    Nov 16, 2006
    Surely the battery life has actually gone up on the 15" and 17" if they are doing more honest tests and they now match the 13"?
  16. LoganT macrumors 68020

    Jan 9, 2007
    Here's the proof:


    "Apple is using a new, more rigorous battery test that measures the results you can expect in the real world — like surfing your favorite sites in a coffee shop or catching up on the latest web videos. Even using this new test, MacBook Pro delivers amazing battery life. For your real life."
  17. jdaniel macrumors 65816

    Mar 21, 2009
    Lviv, Ukraine
    Yeah... ooooookkk
  18. jdaniel macrumors 65816

    Mar 21, 2009
    Lviv, Ukraine
    Since you bothered to post something quite irrelevant, my response to you is:

  19. juicedropsdeuce macrumors 6502

    Jun 23, 2010
    No wonder Steve took a break. I wouldn't want to be around for this lackluster update. Throw in some new chips, lower the battery life, and add a port that can't even be used yet. Way to go Cook! :rolleyes:
  20. MacbookSwitcher macrumors 6502


    Mar 13, 2007

    My current MBP is broken so I have no choice but to upgrade...but a higher price for a modest upgrade with lower battery life is a bit disappointing.
  21. juicedropsdeuce macrumors 6502

    Jun 23, 2010
    I'd score a refurb. You can get a 15" for the price of a new 13". With that SLOW a$$ 5400rpm hard drive, you will NEVER notice the difference in processor speed.

    5400rpm? Wow.
  22. VictoriaStudent macrumors regular


    Jul 20, 2010

    speaking of non relevancy.

    "LOL I bet the battery life is just not as good as previous year's."

    too true. Apple states so. Unless, of course, you are erroneously suggesting that Apple has somehow gone backwards in terms of battery technology?

    Additionally, what does Apple say to a prior customer such as myself? They really don't have to say much.

    My 13" MBP actually easily gets 10 hours battery life with wireless and low-brightness settings. W/o wireless, and not too frequently saving (in Pages) - I get more like 12-13 hours. Pretty impressive. However, with frequent saves, higher brightness and wireless...it manages around 7 hours. Sounds like Apple is doing a good job of offering consumers more realistic expectations - especially built around the new, higher-draw chips.

  23. jdaniel, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2011

    jdaniel macrumors 65816

    Mar 21, 2009
    Lviv, Ukraine
    Btw it is: irrelevancy - speaking of grammar..... pot + kettle ...AND you really shouldn't be correcting the CASUAL postings of someone from a better college than yourself (Trinity- U of T) because it is only going to lead to your embarrassment, it is only fair to assume that you are of 'lesser stock'.

    Really? Is that what they teach you in BC, to 'swallow' everything 'wholesale'. Please tell me you are a foreign student studying in Canada, because it would be a disgrace to find out you are Canadian too. They are not teaching you/taught you to think independently?

    Till a few people/sources out there tests these figures out and does a review on them, I am not just going to believe, what Apple says.

    AND to finish, I did not suggest Apple's battery technology is back tracking, I mentioned battery "life", this could be affected by a variety of reasons.
    For eg Technology remaining the same, but the requirements placed on it by a 'higher' processor etc.

    *And stop being a punk by trolling my posts and start off by making stupid remarks, obviously manners and decorum is not something they teach you at U Vic or wherever it is that you 'go to'/'went'*
  24. C1raider macrumors member

    Feb 24, 2011
    Picked up the new 13in today, fully charged it, while using wifi and 60%-90% brightness, I changed it a few times adjusting for ambient light conditions, I received just under 4 hours of battery life. I was using safari, youtube, downloaded a few movies, added some songs to itunes (didn't listen to them), installed a few programs, adjusted system settings, made a call on skype. I don't know what everyone here calls "normal usage" but I would call my actions "normal" for me at least. Sitting in a coffee shop writing an email on a barely lit screen with NOTHING else going on, i.e. no other applications in use, is NOT normal for me.

    Im seriously wondering how much of a performance boost this new i5 gives....???
  25. FYDave macrumors member

    Feb 24, 2011

Share This Page