Any predictions on battery life with quad cores?

GregGebhardt

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 5, 2010
313
0
I am looking to get a new 15" MBPro and was wondering how much of a hit that battery life will suffer with the new quad core CPUs? I know they run hotter which equal more power.

Will it drops the power available a couple of hours or more?:confused:

If the drop is significant, I will quit waiting and go for a 2.8 or 3.06 dual core and less money!
 

solarein

macrumors regular
Feb 24, 2010
188
0
I am looking to get a new 15" MBPro and was wondering how much of a hit that battery life will suffer with the new quad core CPUs? I know they run hotter which equal more power.

Will it drops the power available a couple of hours or more?:confused:

If the drop is significant, I will quit waiting and go for a 2.8 or 3.06 dual core and less money!
Chances of new MBPs using/being compatible with quad-core CPUs are slim to none.
 

miles01110

macrumors Core
Jul 24, 2006
19,264
30
The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
There won't be a significant decrease in battery life for marketing reasons ("Why did the older versions have 7 hours when the new ones only have 4???!!!"). That being said, quad-core processors aren't going to be put into the notebooks until power technology/management reaches a point where they can continue to claim 7 hours of battery life, which likely won't be for a while.
 

GregGebhardt

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 5, 2010
313
0
Sorry, I was mistaken and thought the new MBPro units were going to get the new I7 processors, glad to hear they are not.

Looks like a 2.8 or 3.06 dual core might be doing it for me. Now the choice is ofr which hard drive, I think I will use a 256gb Patriot SSD which was VERY fast in my last thinkpad.
 

grahamnp

macrumors 6502a
Jun 4, 2008
969
4
Not all the i7s are quad core, I think they will reserve the dual core i7 for the high spec 15" and 17".
 

moel

macrumors 6502
Nov 7, 2007
452
0
Arrandale = 2 logical cores & 4 virtual cores via hyperthreading.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
Not all the i7s are quad core, I think they will reserve the dual core i7 for the high spec 15" and 17".
True. Arrandale, which is suitable for consumer laptops is dual-core but it's still much faster than C2Ds. Quad cores are Clarksfield and hotter than most laptop CPUs so they are suitable for mainly 17".

I can see high-end 17" MBP with quad-core but it's gonna be expensive
 

GregGebhardt

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 5, 2010
313
0
Thanks everyone for explaining. I am really thinking of looking for a good deal on a MBPro 15 with 2.8 or 3.06 dual core rather than waiting. Will be used for Photoshop in the field and if I load it up with RAM, it should do quite well.
 

Max(IT)

Suspended
Dec 8, 2009
8,550
1,640
Italy
True. Arrandale, which is suitable for consumer laptops is dual-core but it's still much faster than C2Ds. Quad cores are Clarksfield and hotter than most laptop CPUs so they are suitable for mainly 17".

I can see high-end 17" MBP with quad-core but it's gonna be expensive
In the real life make that "much faster" as "a little bit faster" ;)
 

pinksatin

macrumors member
Sep 6, 2007
89
0
columbus.ohio
I would imagine that the long wait has been in part because they wanted the battery life to be as good if not better than the previous release...
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
In the real life make that "much faster" as "a little bit faster" ;)
There are benchmarks showing it's up to 25% faster in real life. Sure it won't speed up emailing and text processing but in tasks where CPU performance matters, it's noticeably better than C2Ds
 

alphaod

macrumors Core
Feb 9, 2008
22,046
1,104
NYC
If you look at the quad cores for i7, all of the clocks are slower than the dual core models. That means you should not have a significant loss of battery life or increased heat; At the same time when only 1 or 2 cores are used, turbo boost kicks in so performance issues when using single threaded applications should not be affected. The turbo boost on the quad core part is like 8x multiplier for a dual core usage—that's a 1.67GHz boost!
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
If you look at the quad cores for i7, all of the clocks are slower than the dual core models. That means you should not have a significant loss of battery life or increased heat; At the same time when only 1 or 2 cores are used, turbo boost kicks in so performance issues when using single threaded applications should not be affected. The turbo boost on the quad core part is like 8x multiplier for a dual core usage—that's a 1.67GHz boost!
+ Only maximum power usage is told by Intel, no idle usage. Seeing that most of the time only 1 or 2 cores are used and no Turbo needed, the power usage is very low. Same thing for Arrandale and other CPUs as well. While idling, very little power is needed but when under full load, the maximum power usage may be achieved. The 7-hour battery can't be achieved if doing heavy stuff all the time, no matter what CPU you have, it's achieved with normal usage like web browsing, text processing emailing etc..
 

apw100

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2010
129
0
Jacksonville, FL
Thanks everyone for explaining. I am really thinking of looking for a good deal on a MBPro 15 with 2.8 or 3.06 dual core rather than waiting. Will be used for Photoshop in the field and if I load it up with RAM, it should do quite well.
Unless you absolutely need it, buying a MBP now would be pretty silly since the new ones will very likely be out next week.
Maybe I'll see you on Tuesday at the Apple store in the Towncenter! :)
 

Max(IT)

Suspended
Dec 8, 2009
8,550
1,640
Italy
There are benchmarks showing it's up to 25% faster in real life. Sure it won't speed up emailing and text processing but in tasks where CPU performance matters, it's noticeably better than C2Ds
you don't work with benchmarks ....

Most of the tests I could find show a 7-11% increase in performance in REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS.
Yep, you can have a huge 25-30% in some benchmarks (video encoding most of the time), but the general improvement is not so great.
It's a normal evolution, not a revolution ...
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
you don't work with benchmarks ....

Most of the tests I could find show a 7-11% increase in performance in REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS.
Yep, you can have a huge 25-30% in some benchmarks (video encoding most of the time), but the general improvement is not so great.
It's a normal evolution, not a revolution ...
As I said, it won't increase performance in apps that DO NOT benefit from faster CPUs! It only speeds up things that can actually take advantage of it, such as video encoding, video editing, games etc.. It WON'T speed up web browsing, iTunes, emailing, iWork etc as they are not CPU intensive.

For most people the update is insignificant because their usage is so light that the CPU speed won't matter but some people want and need more speed than the current line up can offer, especially for the price tag as there are i5 PC laptops with dedicated 1GB GPU for 700$
 

Max(IT)

Suspended
Dec 8, 2009
8,550
1,640
Italy
As I said, it won't increase performance in apps that DO NOT benefit from faster CPUs! It only speeds up things that can actually take advantage of it, such as video encoding, video editing, games etc.. It WON'T speed up web browsing, iTunes, emailing, iWork etc as they are not CPU intensive.
I was speaking about Photoshop CS4 and office automation, not iTunes ;)

For most people the update is insignificant because their usage is so light that the CPU speed won't matter but some people want and need more speed than the current line up can offer, especially for the price tag as there are i5 PC laptops with dedicated 1GB GPU for 700$
absolutely agree with you about the inadequate price tag of the actual lineup, it's time for the upgrade.
I was only pointing out that you can't expect a huge improvement in performance with an i5.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
I was speaking about Photoshop CS4 and office automation, not iTunes ;)



absolutely agree with you about the inadequate price tag of the actual lineup, it's time for the upgrade.
I was only pointing out that you can't expect a huge improvement in performance with an i5.
Again depends on your usage. Because Arrandale has Turbo Boost, almost all models can reach 3GHz so when speed in single threaded apps is needed, they are pretty fast. It's going to be a good update in terms of speed but of course, only for people who needs it ;) I agree that for most people the update is unnoticeable and I personally hope that Apple would come up with 700$ MacBook with 2GHz C2D
 

Max(IT)

Suspended
Dec 8, 2009
8,550
1,640
Italy
Again depends on your usage. Because Arrandale has Turbo Boost, almost all models can reach 3GHz so when speed in single threaded apps is needed, they are pretty fast. It's going to be a good update in terms of speed but of course, only for people who needs it ;) I agree that for most people the update is unnoticeable and I personally hope that Apple would come up with 700$ MacBook with 2GHz C2D
indeed. It ALWAYS depends on personal needs.

BTW I'm not going to upgrade my MBP during 2010, so I'm looking forward for the "mid 2011" revision ;)
 

malcolm233391

macrumors member
Oct 20, 2009
43
0
I'm sure the battery life will exceed the current 8 hours from the current gen. Theres new more efficient technologies out there and its just bad marketing to create a product thats worse than the previous generation.
 

wschutz

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2007
284
77
There are benchmarks showing it's up to 25% faster in real life. Sure it won't speed up emailing and text processing but in tasks where CPU performance matters, it's noticeably better than C2Ds
And given that 99% of people buying any kind of computer don't use more than 50% of the power their machines have... it makes those benchmarks very good for marketing...

But.. hey... after all... now many people are going to be able to show their shiny MBPs WITH the latest iProcessor :D to their friends ;)

Jobs must be very proud what kind of consumerism he has managed to create :D I admire him for that
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
BTW I'm not going to upgrade my MBP during 2010, so I'm looking forward for the "mid 2011" revision ;)
Mid 2011 should have Sandy Bridge in it ;)

And given that 99% of people buying any kind of computer don't use more than 50% of the power their machines have... it makes those benchmarks very good for marketing...

But.. hey... after all... now many people are going to be able to show their shiny MBPs WITH the latest iProcessor :D to their friends ;)

Jobs must be very proud what kind of consumerism he has managed to create :D I admire him for that
That's true. People just wants the newest and shiniest :cool: There are people who needs the power too, so I understand if people are pissed looking at those 700$ PC laptops with i5 and dedicated 1GB GPUs and Apple sells 2.26GHz C2D with integrated 9400M for 999$.
 

cathyy

macrumors 6502a
Apr 12, 2008
727
1
That being said, quad-core processors aren't going to be put into the notebooks until power technology/management reaches a point where they can continue to claim 7 hours of battery life, which likely won't be for a while.
And you know this because...?