Battery Life

So far, we've talked a lot about performance, but one of the major reasons for getting a laptop is mobility. It's difficult to be truly mobile if you find your battery is constantly going dead, requiring you to find a power outlet so you can plug in and recharge. Thus, battery life becomes an important performance metric for any laptop review. It's also worth mentioning that the smaller size of the MSI notebook is going to appeal to some people that are after a truly thin and light notebook, while others will prefer to have a slightly larger display and keyboard at the cost of a bit more weight. Larger displays also draw more power, and of course the various other components play a role in battery life.

All this is a way of saying that we're comparing battery life and power between two very different laptops, with the only similarity being the amount of memory and processor clock speed. A smaller Core 2 Duo notebook with integrated graphics would almost certainly come with longer battery life. Still, given that both these laptops have the same 4800 mAHr battery size, we can at least see how the two systems compare.

MobileMark 2005 - Office Productivity 2002SE

MobileMark 2005 - DVD Playback

MobileMark 2005 - Office Productivity 2002SE

MobileMark 2005 - Reader 2002

With the exception of office productivity performance, the smaller, slower MSI laptop comes out at the top of our mobility benchmarks. The ASUS notebook may be 37% faster in productivity tasks, but the MSI offers 15% more battery life. When the system is basically idle, which is represented by the Reader benchmark, the MSI system continues to have 15% more battery life. Once we get to DVD playback, things become more interesting, as the MSI offers over 30% more battery life, with just over 2 hours and 40 minutes of playback time. That should be enough to get you through all but the longest DVDs, as well as most continental US flights. Given that the displays are active throughout testing in all of the battery benchmarks, we're not exactly sure why the DVD playback shows such a large discrepancy. It could be that the optical drive on the MSI notebook is simply better at conserving power, or else the MSI system is more efficient when it comes to handling MPEG-2 decoding and video output. Most likely, DVD playback is causing the GeForce Go 7700 GPU in the ASUS system to increase its power use.

If you want longer battery life, you basically end up with a few options. The first option is to simply get a larger battery, which may or may not be possible depending on what notebook you have. Both of these laptops include 4800 mAHr batteries, whereas larger laptops can often be configured with 8000 mAHr or larger batteries, so the second option is to look into getting a larger laptop that comes with a larger battery. The Dell E1705 with X1400 graphics is a good example of this option, and you can see the battery life we measured in our review. Of course, larger batteries also mean more weight to carry around, not to mention the weight of the larger laptops. Depending on the laptop model, versions that use IGP instead of discrete graphics will often have longer battery life (as seen in this comparison with the ASUS). A final option is to simply purchase a spare battery (or batteries) so that you can swap batteries when one runs low. This also adds to the weight you carry around, but other than the periodic delay to swap batteries, your total battery life is only limited by how much you're willing to spend and how much you want to carry.

Multimedia and 3D Rendering Power and Heat
Comments Locked

31 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    First, the "closed system" as such is not something we would recommend. Dual core with only 512MB of RAM? I already covered that. Second, the system *is* available as a barebones (MSI MS-1058), as I mentioned in the review. Memory compatibility aside, this isn't a great laptop. It's okay.

    The memory issues are something worth mentioning, even if we got them worked out. Even if everything had worked without issue, the laptop would have still only been okay - there are quite a few competing notebooks in the same price range, and this one fails to stand out from the crowd in any meaningful way.
  • Furen - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    Sounds like you had huge memory compatibility problems, though. Personally, I always buy Crucial because when I used to buy other RAM (Kingston, etc), more often than not, I had some sort of memory compatibility problems (probably because I mixed brands but I've never had ANY problems at all with Crucial stuff).
  • DrMrLordX - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    I know the Core Duo is now an old product that is being replaced by the Core 2 Duo in the mobile sector, but it would have been nice to see the Turion X2 benchmarked against a Core Duo laptop as well. Surely a similarly-configured Core Duo machine exists out there somewhere.
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    One thing is the Core 2 Duo laptop has 7200RPM HDD while the Turion X2 has 5400RPM. It shouldn't impact is greatly but it'll make a difference.
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    quote:

    This leads us to an interesting conclusion in regards to battery life and power requirements. As best we can tell, it appears that the Core 2 Duo processor actually requires less power than the equivalent Turion X2 processor when both are placed under full load.


    Uhh. No. Clearly no. Explanation?? Turion X2 system uses integrated graphics, while Core 2 Duo system uses a powerful video card. Do you guys really think idle power of video card+chipset is equal to chipset alone??
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafik...">http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hard...hnitt_le...

    Integrated graphics power is clearly lower than even super low-end discrete. Now on this AT review we are talking about a mid-range part.

    Sorry for triple post, but I must get my point across.

    Two laptops, each possessed by one of my friends, both a Dell:
    Pentium M 765 2.0GHz/533MHz FSB
    1GB DDR2-533
    120GB 5400RPM HDD
    Geforce Go 7800GTX 128MB
    15.4 inch wide-screen
    70WHr battery
    2.5 hour battery life with internet surfing, usage

    2. Pentium M 1.6GHz/400MHz FSB/Dothan
    512MB DDR2-533
    Intel GMA900
    60GB 4200RPM HDD
    14 inch screen
    45WHr battery
    3.5 hour battery life with internet surfing, light usage

    Is there a reason some high-end laptops are featured with integrated/discrete graphics card option?? You can turn one off?? Cause video cards in laptops suck huge amounts of power.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    There are multiple issues involved with testing comparable laptops. Short of going out and purchasing a laptop, it's very difficult to pull off. At this point, there's not much reason to get a Core Duo notebook instead of a Core 2 Duo notebook, other than price. So we're doing our best to compare laptops that are similar, and we wanted to get this review out the door before it got any older. Obviously, we're still not recommending the MSI S271 over other laptops.

    In regards to Inteluser2000, he makes several comments. I have now reworded the page on power consumption to clarify a few points. However, not all of his points are entirely valid either. For example:
    quote:

    No. Clearly no. Explanation?? Turion X2 system uses integrated graphics, while Core 2 Duo system uses a powerful video card. Do you guys really think idle power of video card+chipset is equal to chipset alone??


    I don't think he was reading clearly, because I had just explained that at maximum CPU load MSI Turion X2 is consuming MORE power than ASUS Core 2 Duo. In other words, even with integrated graphics versus discrete graphics and with all of the other variables involved (7200 RPM hard drive versus 5400 RPM Drive, 14 inch LCD versus 12.1 inch LCD, etc.), without putting a load on the GPU one would expect the ASUS system to draw more power than the MSI system, and it doesn't. At idle, all of the variables can explain why the ASUS consumes more power, but when I put 100% load on just the CPU Turion X2 clearly requires more power.

    I have no idea what he is trying to say with his comment about Dell laptops. Comparing a high-end system with a GeForce Go 7800 GTX to one that uses IGP is far worse than comparing something that uses GeForce Go 7700 to IGP. Different battery sizes, different display sizes, different processors, different hard drives, memory, etc. -- of course they're going to have different results. However, in this case are not drawing any final conclusions about idle power, other than to point out some interesting trends. What I am concluding is that if we were able to isolate just the CPU power use, a Turion X2 TL-60 at 100% load would require a lot more power than a Core 2 Duo T7200 at 100% load.

    The ASUS system is there more as a frame of reference, particularly on the power requirements page. I really can't say for certain whether Turion X2 uses more power or less power at idle, but I am positive that it requires more power when it's placed under 100% load. Hope that explains things.
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    quote:

    I don't think he was reading clearly, because I had just explained that at maximum CPU load MSI Turion X2 is consuming MORE power than ASUS Core 2 Duo. In other words, even with integrated graphics versus discrete graphics and with all of the other variables involved (7200 RPM hard drive versus 5400 RPM Drive, 14 inch LCD versus 12.1 inch LCD, etc.), without putting a load on the GPU one would expect the ASUS system to draw more power than the MSI system, and it doesn't.


    Nonono. I don't care about the load power, I care about your conclusions regarding idle. Even if you don't put load on the GPU, it consumes power. In laptop standards, lots of power. Its not a coincidence some laptop manufacturers put dual video card solutions(integrated/discrete), because they realize discrete cards affect battery life in idle, not just load. What I don't like is the explanation that its the CPU and chipset that contributes to idle power consumption and less battery life at DVD playback, Mobilemark, etc.

    Check this out: http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=50...">http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=50...
    (Dual GPU machine)

    DVD playback
    IGP: 164 minutes
    Nvidia Geforce Go 6600: 112 minutes

    MobileMark 2005 general battery life test
    IGP:128 minutes
    Geforce Go 6600: 92 minutes

    30-40% battery life difference. Looks like video card is quite a big drain on battery life. I bet significant battery life difference between my friend's two system lies in the video card.

    This is really a laptop review rather than a CPU review. Of course, due to laptops peculiarity of outperforming one with what looks like similar specifications, the idea of a CPU comparison on a laptop is far-fetched.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    I did reword the rest of the page in regards to power use. I have used an ASUS W5F and found that it used about the same amount of power as the S271 (at idle). It was slightly more, so the remaining conclusions (i.e. Turion X2 in low power mode uses a bit less power) seem to be consistent. Tough to say 100% without nearly identical laptops - and you still have chipset and mobo components that can have an impact.
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link

    quote:

    I did reword the rest of the page in regards to power use. I have used an ASUS W5F and found that it used about the same amount of power as the S271 (at idle). It was slightly more, so the remaining conclusions (i.e. Turion X2 in low power mode uses a bit less power) seem to be consistent. Tough to say 100% without nearly identical laptops - and you still have chipset and mobo components that can have an impact.


    You can find otherwise similar looking laptops that have different power consumption. How did you test out the W5F?? Just dropped in a Core 2 Duo in replacement of Core Duo?

    Otherwise nice test.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now