How much will the rMB 1.3GHz option hurt battery life?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by xraydoc, Apr 17, 2015.

  1. xraydoc macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #1
    Does anyone think the 1.3GHz processor option will significantly negatively impact battery life?

    I have a 2011 11" MBA with the i7 processor option and the battery life from day one wasn't nearly has good as friends' i5 versions.

    I don't want to repeat the same situation.
     
  2. PDFierro macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    #2
    When you say not nearly as good, how big are you talking? From my experience with the Air/Pro, the battery life difference between i5 and i7 processors has been minimal. 30 minutes or so.

    I expect the same from the 1.3 Core M, perhaps even less so since it's a low-power processor. But of course you'll take a battery life hit if you're really pushing it.
     
  3. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #3
    The settings and workload you put on your Mac impact battery life far more than which processor you choose. There are many factors that impact your battery life. See the BATTERY LIFE FROM A CHARGE section of the following link for details, including tips on how to maximize your battery life.
    The link below should answer most, if not all, of your battery/charging questions. If you haven't already done so, I highly recommend you take the time to read it.
     
  4. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #4
    I5 vs i7 isn't a good measuring stick when it comes to battery life for this instance.

    The chip used in the 1.3 core m actually uses .5-1w less than the 1.1 variant so the battery life should be near as damn it the same.
     
  5. lch6257 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #5
    Clock speeds come at a cost - heat and power

    Performance by overclocking has a cost as is most likely the case with the 1.3. The cost will be heat and energy. So yeah, battery would be affected when running at peak performance levels. The bigger factor is heat and throttling. So far, the graphs I have seen seem to indicate that the fanless design comes at the cost of processor throttling to control heat. It is always a trade off. You can't have something for nothing. Also, of note, the benchmarks for single core processing on the base 1.1 model (like web browsing) is outperforming the 1.2. Only in multi core processing is the 1.2 showing an advantage and the avg process we utilize on our machines may or may not utilize. The best thing to do as I am doing is look at your activity monitor for awhile and see how you are using your current laptop (macbook pro base for me). I am systems architect and do some development work and I rarle put a scratch on this machine IO wise I tend to see CPU idle times >80%, 95% of the time. So YMMV depending on how you use your machine. I am considering this new macbook seriously as I type a lot(coding/tickets/IT stuff) and a nicer keyboard an lighter weight machine ( I work remotely) would be a good trade off for CPU utilizations that I barely scratch as an IT professional working daily on the i5 rMBP with 8GB Ram and 128 SDD.
     
  6. RaveHole macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    #6
    That is not entirely accurate. There are several cases where the 1.2 is clearly faster than 1.1 in geekbench single core. But to be fair, there are also quite a few low scores as well.
     
  7. xraydoc thread starter macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #7
    Yeah, began as a 30+ minute difference, but even when the battery was new, I never saw more than 4.5-5 hrs of use anyway, so 30 minutes is a significant percentage. Over 9 hours, it's less of a concern.

    I think I'm likely to go with the 1.2GHz model to balance power and battery life, but also because the 1.1GHz model isn't an option with a 512GB SSD.
     
  8. lch6257 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #8
    Sounds like you are making the right decision for you then, I would not do the price bump for the overclocked processor, but if you want the extra storage, then it is the right move, just an expensive one.
     
  9. legioxi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    #9
    This. The 1.2/1.3 use less power than the 1.1.
     
  10. xraydoc thread starter macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #10
    Then I guess I should definitely go with the 1.2 to eek out the most potential runtime on a single charge (presuming the bump to 1.3 will use whatever power advantage the 1.2 held over the 1.1).

    Yes, may only be talking 20-30 minutes over 6 hours. Duly noted.
     
  11. tecnho macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    #11

    Based on that, if I were to conduct the same exact light weight usage (email, Facebook, browsing, streaming) on both the 1.1 and 1.3, what kind of battery performance difference would you expect to see?
     
  12. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #12
    All other factors being equal, the difference would be minimal. There would likely be a larger difference by adjusting screen brightness a few notches than there would be between the two processors.
     
  13. tecnho macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    #13

    Noted. Thanks
     

Share This Page