Battery life is based on playing a 720p video file so most of the expended power will be in the video decoder and screen not the actual CPU. It's also dependent on the battery size in the laptop being tested so pretty much impossible to compare on any like for like basis.
Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
21–30 of 80 posts
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, Apple's M3 and even Qualcomm's X Elite are significantly ahead of the new Intel chip in raw performance and especially perf/watt. Cinebench R24 ST[0]: * M3: 12.7 points/watt, 141 score * X Elite: 9.3 points/watt, 123 score * Intel Ultra 7 258V (new): 5.36 points/watt, 120 score * AMD HX 370: 3.74 points/watt, 116 score * AMD 8845HS: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score * Intel 155H: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score Cineben…
Am I interpreting this correctly- the M3 still uses only roughly half the power of this new Intel cpu discussed here?
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#23The Acer Swift Go 14 has a battery with 53 WHrs and for e.g. the Asus Zenbook S 14 has a 72 WHrs battery. Would this mean the Ryzen Laptop could have lasted ~1.35 times longer than it currently did i.e. 21:15 hours instead of 15:40?
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#24Battery life is based on playing a 720p video file so most of the expended power will be in the video decoder and screen not the actual CPU. It's also dependent on the battery size in the laptop being tested so pretty much impossible to compare on any like for like basis.
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#25Where are all those people who for years (or since M1) were claiming that x86 is dead because ARM ISA (magically) offers significantly better energy-efficiency than x86 ISA. Of course they ignored things like node advantage, but who cares? ;) Meanwhile industry veterans were claiming something different and turns out they were right https://chipsandcheese.com/2021/07/13/arm-or-x86-isa-doesnt-... Asking which - x86 or…
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#26Where are all those people who for years (or since M1) were claiming that x86 is dead because ARM ISA (magically) offers significantly better energy-efficiency than x86 ISA. Of course they ignored things like node advantage, but who cares? ;) Meanwhile industry veterans were claiming something different and turns out they were right https://chipsandcheese.com/2021/07/13/arm-or-x86-isa-doesnt-... Asking which - x86 or…
Language syntax does affect the speed of the parser
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#27Where are all those people who for years (or since M1) were claiming that x86 is dead because ARM ISA (magically) offers significantly better energy-efficiency than x86 ISA. Of course they ignored things like node advantage, but who cares? ;) Meanwhile industry veterans were claiming something different and turns out they were right https://chipsandcheese.com/2021/07/13/arm-or-x86-isa-doesnt-... Asking which - x86 or…
The bigger deal about the M-series performance and efficiency is SoC, not the ISA. This is something that could take off in the x86 world though it stifles upgradeability
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#28Where are all those people who for years (or since M1) were claiming that x86 is dead because ARM ISA (magically) offers significantly better energy-efficiency than x86 ISA. Of course they ignored things like node advantage, but who cares? ;) Meanwhile industry veterans were claiming something different and turns out they were right https://chipsandcheese.com/2021/07/13/arm-or-x86-isa-doesnt-... Asking which - x86 or…
x86 is certainly not dead, and I don't think it will anytime soon, but they are still behind Apple M3 in terms of performance per watt. And M4 is about to arrive. I'm a bit disappointed because I really want more competition for Apple, but they're just not there yet, nor x86 nor Qualcomm.
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I interpreting this correctly- the M3 still uses only roughly half the power of this new Intel cpu discussed here?
It doesn't necessarily use half the power. But it does have greater than 2x in perf/watt and it has noticeably faster ST performance.
Re: Intel's Core Ultra 2 Chip Posts Nearly 24-Hour Battery Life in Lunar Lake
#30... and Microsoft (probably Linux too) will throw it all away with some tiny coding mistake.
Probably not, Intel does a pretty decent job regulating power consumption as long as you don't modify the power profiles or fuck with ACPI. Distributions or third-party nagware might ruin the battery, but that goes for any laptop that's required to install Teams or McAfee. Loading up powertop on my i7 6600u reports an idle draw of 5.5w with my browser open playing music. I think that's pretty damn good, for an old-is…
That assumes the motherboard vendor implemented ACPI properly, and most don't, you're often lucky to have something that is able to keep Windows alive enough to pass certifications. Linux, xBSD or macOS compatibility? Forget it unless you're talking servers with support contracts making it actually worth the effort for manufacturers.