Oh, I do enjoy a plot twist! But I'm eager for the 17's to be announced so we can begin seeing the hardware leaks for the 18's.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 17 Pro's Metal Battery Allegedly Revealed [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They always tout SoC power effeciency to justify smaller batteries, but it's always been the screen that drains batteries the most.
Well, depends on the use case. Increasingly, battery life depends on how you use the thing.
At idle, modern processors are incredibly efficient. At full bore, they burn more power than ever (albeit doing even more work than ever), and innovation is increasingly spent on improving the thermals (cooling system).
Meanwhile the displays are getting bigger and brighter. Not enough attention is given to the fact that, unlike any previous ultra-thin Apple device, the 17 Air will have a huge display (showing that Apple has learnt from previous market failures).
No doubt that huge display will also have a high peak brightness. That large display will burn a huge amount of energy outdoors on a sunny day.
On the other hand, the radios are becoming ever more efficient, so the Air will likely spend relatively little of its energy budget on network activity (5G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, NFC), by comparison to previous phones, especially old ones like the 13 mini that had a barely viable 5G modem that ripped through the battery (I have a 13 mini and know about that).
That last point is debatable. The incredible battery life that Apple quotes for its mobile devices (e.g. 29 hours) is based on video playback at low screen brightness – a “stuck on a long-haul flight” scenario. That is because Apple Silicon devices have advanced hardware acceleration for video codecs, meaning they use remarkably little energy to play back video.
In real life, that is not how anyone uses the device (except maybe on that trans-Pacific flight).
I personally use Safari a great deal (downloading data with a radio, rendering wildly bloated modern web pages with moving ads everywhere), open and close all manner of apps for daily activities (messaging, synchronised Notes, banking app, a terrible BMW car app, Google Translate, use the camera a lot (for video too), play music (constantly downloading small amounts of data that don’t let the radios idle for long, running an inefficient Spotify app, running the Bluetooth radio for hours), and use my 13 mini for navigation in an older car that doesn’t have a screen (meaning the 4G/5G radios are running at high power, plus I have to have the OLED screen at high brightness to see anything on the screen in sunlight, plus Google Maps is burning through CPU cycles).
That’s my real world, but everyone has their own real world – usually not indoor video playback when you’ll have access to a charger anyway.
2900 Mh is for the 17 Air, not Pro model. The C1 modem was initially thought to be the reason behind the iPhone 16e great battery life, but it was not this at all but the large 4,000 Mh battery, so wouldnt hold your breath in this regard.
Well, short battery life is a very common complaint with the 13 mini.
2900 mAh is now stated to be for the 17 Pro. However, this doesn't make sense to me, since the 16 Pro is 3582 mAh.
Actually, 3025 is a millennium into the future, so even more impressive on GIZBUG’s part!GIZBUG's living a century in the future.
A bigger physical battery is always better. Sure they can make it better with software tweaks, but once it degrades, you'll will notice it right away.
I had a 13 Mini, brand new, battery was good for 3 months, after that, it became a SE.
I had a 13 Mini, brand new, battery was good for 3 months, after that, it became a SE.
Same here. The Air will have a much more power efficient CPU and Apple modem chip.
Still... many like to go for the sky is falling, the sky is falling.... before even reading a review from a credible source.
Extremely unlikely. That number was the rumor for the 17 Air.
Where is there a rumor that the 17 Pro will have that capacity? This rumor was that the photos showed the 17 Air battery and the Air would have about a 2900 mAh battery. The update is that the photo is of the 17 Pro battery pack but the capacity would still be for the Air.
Yeah, it’s not going to be the phone for anybody who is constantly away from power. It’ll be a phone for people who are willing to sacrifice convenience for looks, and that’s a lot of people.
It’s like “let’s make an incredibly thin phone with a horrible battery so that you can throw on a case, double the thickness, and have good battery again! Oh.. and that battery case will cost you $499”
That’s how I read it too. That’s ridiculous though.
The MacRumors article was updated.
However, perhaps MacRumors is mistaken, since it's not 100% clear.MacRumors said:
Maybe the camera bump taking all that space means there are components that need more room, and they reduced the battery size? I don’t know, it’s the only thing that makes a bit of sense…
What is clear tho, is that with the new design in aluminum instead of steel (or titanium) and a smaller battery, they are probably aiming for a drastic weight reduction on the iPhone Pro.
Definitely some miscommunication in this article. The 17 Pro will definitely have a battery with at least 3500 Mh at minimum.
Why would Apple dilute the impact of the Air by optimising the weight of the Pro on this generation?
Nah.
The move to aluminium is about cost and cooling, now that the Air will take over as the stylish choice and the Pro doesn’t need to be as glamorous.
Meanwhile the cameras and batteries will likely get even heavier. I doubt the overall weight of the Pro models will change much.
With a smaller battery? Nah. Anyways I’m not gonna argue over possibilities. You have your opinion and I have mine. In a couple of months we’ll see if the Pro models reduce their weight or not.
