If Core-i chips save energy, how does 13" MBP have the most battery life?

[thinkdesign]

The 13" has the core duo chip said to be more energy consuming, but the 13" gets an extra hour of claimed battery life compared with the 15" and 17" models with the reputedly "more efficient" CPU chips.

I wonder, has anyone tested the three sizes of Macbook pros, with the assumption that the 15" and 17" will not be called upon to switch to the Nvidia graphics? In that sort of comparison, then would the 15" and 17" beat the battery life of the 13" MBP?

A test like that would suggest what would happen if the 13" got the i-core CPU-GPU package (but not the 2nd nvidia graphics chip, since the 13" cases haven't room for that).

Is there something about the details a d the arithmetic of cramming a battery into the leftover space... in laptop cases all of similar inside depth... that somehow worked out a little more favourably in the 13" MBP?

 

[KirkL]

Because MBP batteries were already superior to begin with. Apple made it bigger or something by making it irremovable.

Edit: Nevermind, I thought you meant why does MBP have better battery life vs. other laptops.

 

[Meever]

Larger screens = higher battery consumption.

They also have larger speakers and while the i5 are much more energy efficient when not being used (they basically underclock themselves) when working all the way hyperthreading and turbo boosting I think they consume the same amount of energy for like double the performance in certain situations.

 

[Tmacfan4321]

Core I chips consume more energy than C2D chips under load.

 

[Tim018]

If a hybrid saves on gas, then why does the hybrid tank get worse gas mileage than the honda civic?

thats essentially your question. yes the i series saves on energy but the battery has to power alot more screen real estate and other things because it is a larger more powerful computer

 

[mark28]

Core I chips consume more energy than C2D chips under load.

Nope.

The 15 inch 2010 i5 > 15 inch 2009 C2D when it comes to battery life.

The 13 inch has the advantage of a small screen, 1 fan and only 1 GPU.

 

[Tmacfan4321]

Nope.

The 15 inch 2010 i5 > 15 inch 2009 C2D when it comes to battery life.

The 13 inch has the advantage of a small screen, 1 fan and only 1 GPU.

Read through this.

 

[wordoflife]

The 13'' does not have decrete graphics and a larger screen.

 

[thinkdesign]

So it somes down to more performance takes more energy?

OK. Thanks for that.

I'm wary of the "powering a bigger screen" thing though. Assuming all 3 batteries are chemically same, and the same thickness.... and the design allows the battery's 2 larger dimensions to essentially mimic the screen's dimensions... then doubling the square inches of screen should at least aproximately double the cubic inches of battery. Minus maybe a few design details around the perimeter. Maybe not precisely "a wash", but close to one.

Does it look like the next generation of Intel chipsets will get into the 13" MBP? (Presumably without any nvidia as 2nd GPU.) If that does happen when the Core Duo chips are no longer available (end this year)... then do I understand correctly? Battery life may climb again, though graphics performance might decline?