Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

tuxedocomputers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 245 posts

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#191

Post by t-3 »

TylerE wrote: post #176
nextos wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I visit this comment section for the same reason I visit a zoo. Before making offensive comments, have you thought about the meaning of my statement? For example, a modern DE offers desktop notifications. I still have that by running a desktop notification daemon, dunst, despite just using X plus a window manager but no DE. Linux is very much broken into small composable components, the same way Clojure is. To take…

This feels like someone saying: I don’t need a car with a roof, why doesn’t everyone just drive a go kart around?

My car has a roof, it just wasn't chosen for me by someone at MS/Apple/Gnome/KDE. A custom hand-built car is not necessarily more primitive than a factory-standard one, or any less appealing.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#192

Post by matheusmoreira »

martin1975 wrote: post #54
slashdev wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a searing indictment of Linux. I get less than half the battery life on my Alienware AMD laptop under Linux than under Windows. I don't know what Linux is doing wrong here, but it is not energy efficient.

Why do you run Linux on Alienware hardware?

In my case at least: because it was hard to find non-gamer laptops with fast CPUs. Turned out to be a moot point anyway because the thing throttles itself to uselessness after seconds under load despite three noisy fans.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#193

Post by _carbyau_ »

nikisweeting wrote: post #109
Gordonjcp wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because NVidia works in Linux. Intel isn't really accelerated, and AMD is buggy and doesn't do GPU compute acceleration terribly well.

Also all the AI/ML/CUDA tooling is written for NVidia, AMD driver support is terrible.

This alone means my 2023 computer build will have an nVidia GPU.

I know next to nothing about ML. But even I can follow basic instructions to get Stable Diffusion or Spleeter or something to play with.

Installation, configuration and speed to get ML stuff to play with is easy for nVidia users. Sucks for AMD.

Source: current AMD GPU user who dislikes nGreedia but sees no other real option.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#194

Post by alyosha-swamy »

sudosysgen wrote: post #96
slashdev wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a searing indictment of Linux. I get less than half the battery life on my Alienware AMD laptop under Linux than under Windows. I don't know what Linux is doing wrong here, but it is not energy efficient.

I also have an Alienware and I had the same experience until I spent a lot of time tuning battery life, now I can get 7-9 hours of autonomy. If you want, I can share my setup with you to spare you the trouble.

can you share this

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#195

Post by AtlasBarfed »

taink wrote: post #23
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, look at the power outputs of bikers. 100 watts can probably get you to 15mph in flats / no headwinds. so that.... well, 400 watt-hours for 60 miles! Meanwhile, gaming rigs are coming with kilowatt power supplies now, maybe even more. Laptops try to be more efficient, yeah, but 100 watt-hours in sixteen hours is 6.25 watts sustained. Did I math that properly?

I mean you can check with this tool[1] I discovered while wondering for myself. I gave up halfway through though. [1] https://www.omnicalculator.com/sports/cycling-wattage

I'm a biker/endurance athlete to the point of completing several Iron-distance triathlons in the "happy to finish" division. So I have a general idea of 15-20mph wattage to speed.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#196

Post by system2 »

smoldesu wrote: post #72
daneel_w wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone, these days, need a discrete GPU for surfing the web? This detail, too, just like the CPU, falls short on the fact that making actual use of its power cuts battery time down to nothing. They should just market it for what it really is: a workstation laptop with 3 hours of battery life.

They also offer a version of this laptop without the discrete GPU if you need better battery life. There are still workloads that require local discrete GPU hardware though.

Offer this offer that, we are not seeing any technology improvement here. Only marketing words.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#197

Post by system2 »

stainablesteel wrote: post #113
flakiness wrote: post #111

I work for a smartphone and found that tuning for the battery is hard, labor intensive work. And you also need awareness from the app developer whose apps do use the battery. Plus you need a lot of users to justify these efforts to be get paid. It's not technical superiority but more about the economy of scale. I bet Linux is much more energy efficient in datacenters than Windows because of this reason.

you work for a smartphone?

you never work for a smartphone?!

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#199

Post by Arn_Thor »

slashdev wrote: post #25
gandalfgeek wrote: post #19

Isn't it a searing indictment of the entire Intel laptop chip lineup that a MacBook Air M1 has half the battery capacity (50Wh) while giving easily twice the battery life with as good or better performance -- and with no fans!

It's also a searing indictment of Linux. I get less than half the battery life on my Alienware AMD laptop under Linux than under Windows. I don't know what Linux is doing wrong here, but it is not energy efficient.

It's fascinating to me. Linux in so many ways feels "lighter" in use than Windows, but it just eats power like nothing else

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#200

Post by Arn_Thor »

nextos wrote: post #150
CoolCold wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that X13s looks underpowered comparing to Apple's laptops, but from my understanding of reviews - it's working machine, not a proof of concept of WoA style gimmick

Qualcomm claim they are releasing a CPU that is comparable to the M1/2 lineup next year. The X13s can run Linux fairly well right now, so it's promising. IMHO, ARM CPUs are going to eat the low and mid-end laptop market due to their energy-saving advantage.

I'll believe it when I see it. Qualcomm is woefully behind Apple in mobile chips (so far...)
Post reply on HN