Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
RAM plays very little in battery consumption when you actually use the device.

During most of our interactions with the computer (emails, internet, office), the machine spends an eternity waiting in a low-power mode, only briefly waking up to process your input. This is the reason why we get such good battery runtimes to begin with. Almost everything in a computer, you can either turn off or power down significantly if its not being used. You can totally turn off the GPU logical units if there are no updates to the screen. You can even put your CPU in an ultra-low power mode between user's keystrokes (and modern OSes do that). If your activity monitor tells you that "10% of your CPU is being used", this roundly means that out of each 1 seconds, 9/10 of this second the CPU spends sleeping since it has nothing to do.

So the thing about RAM RAM, you can't really turn it off. It needs to be supplied with power constantly or you'd lose your data. You can put it in a lower power state, but AFAIK that doesn't save you that much energy. So of course, if you are doing something intensive (number crunching, video editing) with your machine, RAM power consumption is negligible. But when you are doing office stuff (and this includes things like writing papers, programming, doing research on the internet, answering emails), RAM becomes a significant factor. Laptops such as 15" MPB use around 12 Watts of power while idling. At the same time, 32GB of DDR4 RAM alone uses around 12 Watts, as measured by independent tests. And even if one can cut this down with some smart utilisation of low power modes etc., it is still a very significant part of idle power consumption.

Bottomline: if you care about battery life, RAM is probably one of the worst offenders nowadays, since it can't be turned off, consumes power constantly, and battery life is mostly about idle anyway.
 
Have you seen the battery in these newer MacBook Pros? It's in multiple pieces so they can fill half the case with battery. What's wrong with an external USB-C battery if you're willing to carry an extra battery anyway?

An external usb-c battery cannot charge nor run a mobile workstation and remain under TSA requirements for lithium battery carry-on. I've tried. I also dislike attaching things to my laptop while travelling. In any case, when my battery gets old I can just slap a new one in without having to send the laptop in to the manufacturer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
I probably will get refuted, but not by experience of using any other device besides MBP, but by the love for MBP itself :)

But to be fair, I don't own XPS. I used it a lot in my company, but I own and use Lenovo P51. That one is a beast compared to any laptop mentioned here.

And every laptop has it's flaws. Every. XPS has some major flaws, not just the ones you can read online, but some that you simply have to experience to be aware of them in the first place. And that guy sticks to battery life, even though XPS has great battery life even when using double the ram of MBP, and 4K screen.

Next week I will receive a iMP from my company. And that one will do great for me. But I will stick to my Lenovo laptop for work on the go, since Apple simply doesn't produce any 'pro' laptops any more. I would switch in a heart beat if they did, since I love MacOS way more then I love Windows. But if that switch would hurt my productivity, well, goodbye MBP then :)

Very much agree, all notebook's are compromised by the necessitation to be portable, they all have positive and negative attributes according to the use. Nor by default is Windows based hardware lesser than Mac's simply different with much of that being subjective.

The RAM argument is mostly BS, with those being productive actually using their systems rather than having them sleeping for days on end, then again I guess that's the real difference...

Same I would very much like to have a Mac in my professional rotation, however the same applies that Apple simply doesn't produce adequate hardware, preferring to defer to ever thinner at the cost of functionality & usability...

Q-6
[doublepost=1518891888][/doublepost]
Bottomline: if you care about battery life, RAM is probably one of the worst offenders nowadays, since it can't be turned off, consumes power constantly, and battery life is mostly about idle anyway.

Correction: If Apple cared about battery life it would have never neutered the MBP in the first place; form over function, aesthetic over practicality, usability and common-sense out the window.

Naturally Apple no longer strives for longevity, rather a nominal value which is fine if all you do is surf the web and watch YouTube, meanwhile in the real world...

Q-6
 
Last edited:
Correction: If Apple cared about battery life it would have never neutered the MBP in the first place; form over function, aesthetic over practicality, usability and common-sense out the window.

Apple's battery life is perfectly fine. Also, congratulation on turning a technical point I was making into a polemic burp :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: haydn! and afir93
Naturally Apple no longer strives for longevity, rather a nominal value which is fine if all you do is surf the web and watch YouTube, meanwhile in the real world...

This really is the issue..
Even on their computers, they've pivoted to selling what are essentially sealed appliances across all product lines.

Although, even that is somewhat off base, as most all appliances around a house, despite some being harder to get into than others, do actually have a really high degree of repairability. I guess the term "sealed" covers it.

I don't know - It's all so frustrating to me right now..
 
^ The modular MacPro better be dope then...

I find the MacPro situation to be a real harbinger for Apple's future in my life.

Given that the upcoming MacPro wasn't even going to exist save for the pro user base literally screaming out loud for it and being highly vocal about how the 2013 direction was all wrong...

...if Apple doesn't come up with a super functional, upgradeable, pro machine that hits all the right notes at this point..

Well - it would be pretty concerning...let's just say that..
 
Last edited:
Apple's battery life is perfectly fine. Also, congratulation on turning a technical point I was making into a polemic burp :p

The norm we expect; it's ok as long as it's Apple :rolleyes: Another provider you'd spend the next six months ripping to shreds. 25% or more reduction in battery capacity is a factor for anyone who actually uses the computer in anger; 25% more runtime versus 3mm thinner, little lighter, factor in revenue? Randomly guessing more runtime would prevail.

Then again shiny toy's...

Q-6
 
Not saying that the MBP wouldn't last maybe a few minutes longer without it, but the big possibilites for improving battery life right now are the power consumption of the CPU/GPU, aswell as a more sophisticated battery shape that uses up the empty space in the MBP more efficiently (i.e. something like the terraced battery design in the 12" MBs). I hope we see battery life improvements in the 2018 models in at least one of these two ways.

Agree 100%. There's also the possibility of additional power savings with IGZO display technology, which was rumored for late 2017. It hasn't shown up yet (AFAIK) on Macs, but a 2018 MBP refresh might be the perfect time.

More on IGZO here:
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/01/06/macbook-pro-igzo-displays-rumor/
 
Seems like there would have been more murmurings if anything was going to happen before June, right? Or are there usually next to no leaks before a MacBook refresh?

If you really need 32GB of RAM in a powerful, portable workstation running macOS, look into the Clover EFI bootloader and hackintoshing and get an XPS or similar. It's not trivial, but if you're a pro user it's absolutely doable, and a 2018 MacBook Pro is almost certainly not going to be what you want.
 
During most of our interactions with the computer (emails, internet, office), the machine spends an eternity waiting in a low-power mode, only briefly waking up to process your input. This is the reason why we get such good battery runtimes to begin with. Almost everything in a computer, you can either turn off or power down significantly if its not being used. You can totally turn off the GPU logical units if there are no updates to the screen. You can even put your CPU in an ultra-low power mode between user's keystrokes (and modern OSes do that). If your activity monitor tells you that "10% of your CPU is being used", this roundly means that out of each 1 seconds, 9/10 of this second the CPU spends sleeping since it has nothing to do.

So the thing about RAM RAM, you can't really turn it off. It needs to be supplied with power constantly or you'd lose your data. You can put it in a lower power state, but AFAIK that doesn't save you that much energy. So of course, if you are doing something intensive (number crunching, video editing) with your machine, RAM power consumption is negligible. But when you are doing office stuff (and this includes things like writing papers, programming, doing research on the internet, answering emails), RAM becomes a significant factor. Laptops such as 15" MPB use around 12 Watts of power while idling. At the same time, 32GB of DDR4 RAM alone uses around 12 Watts, as measured by independent tests. And even if one can cut this down with some smart utilisation of low power modes etc., it is still a very significant part of idle power consumption.

Bottomline: if you care about battery life, RAM is probably one of the worst offenders nowadays, since it can't be turned off, consumes power constantly, and battery life is mostly about idle anyway.

LPDDR3 and DDR4 uses about the same power when active.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Not true. DDR4 uses about the same amount of power when active compared to DDR3L. LPDDR3, however, still uses a lot less power.

I think Ries is actually right. It seems that DDR4 and LPDDR3 use comparable amount of power when active. However, if I understood this correctly, LPDDR3 has additional lower power states for idle operations that DDR4 lacks. So again, when you are doing something intensive, there is no different, but as long as you machine spends most time idling (which is the common case), LPDDR3 is ahead.

P.S. This tread has a lot of great information on the topic: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5dimal/lpddr3_vs_ddr4_power_usage/

P.P.S. For technically inclined, this is the thing to read:
www.cs.rochester.edu/%7Eipek/micro15.pdf
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
A couple of weeks ago I posted about a hybrid device akin to MS Surface Book. With recent rumors I actually start believing that is is a real possibility. With rumors that certain Macs get more custom Apple Chips.
iOS/macOS bundled apps... that now really seem like universal binaries that scale across devices. Paired with iPad Pro redesigns rumored for Fall. With FaceID and no home button.

Make an iPad Pro in 13", and 15".
Change the main orientation (camera) to landscape to align with the bottom connector. Have it be a normal iPad with an A CPU, RAM, A battery, WiFi and LTE, and Storage.
Have a headless MBP with an Intel CPU, A GPU, RAM, battery. But NO storage and NO wifi.

Have it undocked and you have a regular iPad.
Dock it... and the iPad acts as a display and the machine runs macOS. With a shared file system and shared apps. Instead of Handoff between devices you have handoff between App layouts (iOS vs macOS layouts).

Don't make this an experimental low end device (no MBA level device!!!), but throw everything at it that you got: hexacore i7/i9, 32GB RAM, Vega GPU, 4k display for native 1080/1200p workspace @2x
If Apple did that... I'd prepare the Pickup truck and load it with money to drop in front of one of their stores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
I think Ries is actually right. It seems that DDR4 and LPDDR3 use comparable amount of power when active. However, if I understood this correctly, LPDDR3 has additional lower power states for idle operations that DDR4 lacks. So again, when you are doing something intensive, there is no different, but as long as you machine spends most time idling (which is the common case), LPDDR3 is ahead.

P.S. This tread has a lot of great information on the topic: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5dimal/lpddr3_vs_ddr4_power_usage/

I was actually just going to link this exact reddit thread, it's a great read.

After reading through all the resources linked in this thread, I'm positive that there is a difference in active power use, but it's not really relevant for real world use scenarios. Most of the RAM in a system is idle anyway in most use cases I can imagine, and the power consumption difference when just passively holding data is huge.

And yeah, that might only translate into a reduced useable battery life of an hour or so (and a lot more when standby), but Apple obviously thinks extending the battery life makes a more compelling product for the majority of their customers over offering the option of 32 GB RAM. Same can be said for the argument that increasing thickness, thous adding more batteries, could more than compensate for the additional energy use of DDR4 RAM. Yes, it could. But again, Apple obviously thinks offering a thinner, lighter notebook with LPDDR3 RAM maxed at 16 GB make a more compelling product for their audience compared to a thicker, heavier device with a RAM limit of 32 GB.
 
Question for those more knowledgable of this topic:

When discussing the idle power draw, it is extremely important to consider the idle power draw of other devices (CPU, radio, mainboard, etc.), because that's what determines the % change when comparing LPDDR3 vs DDR4.

If other devices consume, say 2 W idle, while DDR4 consumes, say 0.5 W idle, even if LPDDR3 has 90% less idle power draw, the overall impact on the total idle power draw is only about 20%. So unless you know the denominator for calculating the % change, you're just grossly overestimating the impact of LPDDR3 vs DDR4.

Now those numbers are just out of my ass. Does anyone know actual reasonable numbers?

There are plenty of laptops that use DDR4 out there that have 'good' battery life, and we don't hear of their batteries draining rapidly on idle. I feel like the DDR4 fear is indeed grossly exaggerated.
 
If other devices consume, say 2 W idle, while DDR4 consumes, say 0.5 W idle, even if LPDDR3 has 90% less idle power draw, the overall impact on the total idle power draw is only about 20%. So unless you know the denominator for calculating the % change, you're just grossly overestimating the impact of LPDDR3 vs DDR4.

The problem is that DDR4 apparently lacks a quick low power mode. So while you can power everything else (CPU, GPU, SSD etc.) down and up quick enough so that user doesn't even notice, you can't really do much with DDR4. In another words, you can't really put DDR4 in idle. The LPDDR3 has a quick power mode, so it can be put in idle. I guess this is where most of the difference comes from.

There are plenty of laptops that use DDR4 out there that have 'good' battery life, and we don't hear of their batteries draining rapidly on idle. I feel like the DDR4 fear is indeed grossly exaggerated.

I don't think there is any fear of DDR4, and of course its power draw is not a lot compared to other components. Still, when you are optimising, every watt you save makes a difference. And with RAM it adds up. If 32GB of RAM means increasing your idle consumption by 25% or more, there is not much one can do. There is a reason why a lot of manufacturers of premium laptops nowadays use LPDDR3.

In the end, Poki sums it up very nicely in the post above. Its all about tradeoffs and delivering the product that one is satisfied is. Apple's decision was to ship a more mobile product while sacrificing certain more marginal use cases (e.g. people needing a lot of RAM). Whether one agrees or disagrees with this decision depends on what they need the computer for.
 
And again, doing so in the body of the nTB MBP is not a good way of doing this. Apple did indeed redesign some products faster, like the original MacBook Air, which got a redesign just two years after its launch. Having one thin and light entry level notebook and one thicker and more powerful notebook is much easier to understand for consumers. Also, the MacBook manages to be cheaper than the MacBook Pro by skipping on Thunderbolt and using a cheaper screen, among other things – they could continue some of these cost saving measurements without making the proposition even more confusing.

The importance of having products which are not confusing can not be overstated. Remember the Wii U?

Apple will probably just update the CPU of the 12" MacBook, offer a model with just 128 GB of storage, and cut the price a little. This might be enough to discontinue the MacBook Air as an entry level notebook, and people who want a notebook with a little more power and ports can simply purchase the entry level MacBook Pro.
Idk why everyone is doubting it the 13inch model of the MacBook will be a thing in 2018 to replace the Air. It will take the current macboooks pricing tiers and the 12 inch will drop to $999 magic price
[doublepost=1518969675][/doublepost]
^ The modular MacPro better be dope then...
Starting at $9,999
 
So
An external usb-c battery cannot charge nor run a mobile workstation and remain under TSA requirements for lithium battery carry-on. I've tried. I also dislike attaching things to my laptop while travelling. In any case, when my battery gets old I can just slap a new one in without having to send the laptop in to the manufacturer.
sorry pal,but i didnt Get what you said,i have the anker powercore + 20100mah and it definitly Can give you A Few extra hours Of use even on the 15inch rmbp which consumes 87watts on full load If this thing charges at 30wats then the maximum intake would be 57 so were probably getting 1.4-1.5X of the Original battery i dont get that
And which TSA requirement would it fail?
Batteries under 27,000mah (100wh) Arent illegal to take on airplanes or what ever
Thanks in advance❤️
 
NEW 8th gen 15W quad-core Cannon Lake based i5 CPU spotted! 2.6 GHz base clock and a new 10th generation iGPU. Not a lot of details, but since it‘s an 8th gen part, the launhc shouldn‘t be too far away.

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i5-8269u-cannonlake-10nm-cpu-spotted/

Edit: Might be Coffee Lake, news sites don‘t seem to be sure.

http://www.moepc.net/?post=4380

Edit 2: According to the latter link, it‘s a 28W quad-core Coffee Lake part with GT3e iGPU! This would be perfect for the 13“ Touch Bar MacBook Pro.
 
Last edited:
Finally getting an upgrade, got a 17" Early 2011, When one part dies and I fix it another dies.

So far repaired:

Screen Hinge, Battery, Right Speaker, Right Fan, Magsafe Port, Trackpad, Disc Drive and replaced the Hardrive with an SSD.

I have never dropped it, but I suppose I have over used it lol.

Can't wait to get a new one, going to feel amazing... this machine has been amazing and still works very well despite the above faults an replacements lol!

Ready to buy now.... so hard holding out for announcement, I wouldn't regret buying now but knowing there will be a newer one is making it harder!

So excited, money is all ready for when they announce and preorders are ready!
 
  • Like
Reactions: gobikerider
So

sorry pal,but i didnt Get what you said,i have the anker powercore + 20100mah and it definitly Can give you A Few extra hours Of use even on the 15inch rmbp which consumes 87watts on full load If this thing charges at 30wats then the maximum intake would be 57 so were probably getting 1.4-1.5X of the Original battery i dont get that
And which TSA requirement would it fail?
Batteries under 27,000mah (100wh) Arent illegal to take on airplanes or what ever
Thanks in advance❤️

That is correct: TSA requires batteries less than 27,000mah. My computer uses 170W at full draw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.