Power consumption with video cards

[Exinor]

I'm planning on getting either the low end 13" or mid 15", the deciding factor between the two being the graphics card. Here's two questions:

BOTH pertain to battery life...

1. In EVERYDAY use, does the 9600M GT give more or less battery life than 9400M?

2. When GAMING, does the 9600M GT more or less battery life than 9400M?

Thanks and cheers.

 

[spinnerlys]

found on http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html

1. less
2. less

The 9600M GT is its own chip that needs to be powered.
The 9400M is integrated into the chipset, thus it uses less power, as the chipset is in use all the time anyway.

 

[Exinor]

Even if I ATTEMPT to run a game on the 9400M, the power will stay at 7 hours?

 

[spinnerlys]

Even if I ATTEMPT to run a game on the 9400M, the power will stay at 7 hours?

No. A game uses CPU and GPU resources, and unless the game is very low in using those resources, the power from the battery will be drawn faster.


1.
13-inch MacBook Pro testing conducted by Apple in May 2009 using preproduction 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based MacBook Pro units. 15-inch MacBook Pro testing conducted by Apple in May 2009 using preproduction 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based MacBook Pro units with a Better Battery Life setting. 17-inch MacBook Pro testing conducted by Apple in May 2009 using preproduction 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based MacBook Pro units with a Better Battery Life setting. Battery life depends on configuration and use. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information. The wireless productivity test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing various websites and editing text in a word processing document with display brightness set to 50%.

again found on http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html

 

[Exinor]

*Scratches chin* interesting info.

My mind is trailing a bit. I'm thinking over all 9400M will have higher battery life, BUT if I try to run a game on both systems.

Something like 5-6 hours on the 9400M and perhaps still 5-6 hours on the 9600M GT, considering it's already using that power for graphics anyway.


Also--the mid range MBP is faster, and although I have to deal with shortened battery life, my experience with laptops is that when you have high battery life, you have to wait long for things to load ANYWAY...

Thanks so far for info.

 

[spinnerlys]

*Scratches chin* interesting info.

My mind is trailing a bit. I'm thinking over all 9400M will have higher battery life, BUT if I try to run a game on both systems.

What do you mean by "both systems"?
As of now, Mac OS X does not allow any hybrid use of the graphics cards, either it uses the 9400M or the 9600M GT.

Something like 5-6 hours on the 9400M and perhaps still 5-6 hours on the 9600M GT, considering it's already using that power for graphics anyway.

You will get less battery life with the 9600M GT any way you spin it, even if you don't do any graphic intensive tasks.

Also--the mid range MBP is faster, and although I have to deal with shortened battery life, my experience with laptops is that when you have high battery life, you have to wait long for things to load ANYWAY...

That is not true with MBPs.
Mac OS X uses the full capacity of the CPU and GPU, even when on battery power.

The reduction in processing power and the resulting slowness might be an experience you had with older laptops and their handling of CPU resources.

But when a Mac laptop does need 100% or 47% or 14% CPU power while on battery, it gives you that power anyway.
It just does not need 100% or 47% or 14% all the time, only when needed.


It's like with your cellphone, while it is in standby (on, but no activity except keeping the signal) it lasts longer, but as soon as you interact with the phone, SMS, call, gaming, the CPU is in use more than when in simple standby mode, thus the battery gets drained faster.

 

[Exinor]

By both systems, I mean comparing the 13" and 15" side by side.