Study compares claimed laptop battery life and reality

[HEXUS]

Which? magazine tested 67 models and some undershot their claimed stamina by hours.

Read more.

[3dcandy]

For that to be a fair represntative test the Mac should have been running windows

I can't see how this is news - nobody I know uses a laptop how they get the tests to say battery life should be. It's a strange thing as 99.9% have the brightness up far higher for starters...

[rob4001]

Just like MPG and broadband speeds they will get round their false claims by saying 'up to'

[qasdfdsaq]

Just like MPG and broadband speeds they will get round their false claims by saying 'up to'

I've always disliked these sorts of criticisms. I'm fully aware claimed numbers can usually only be achieved under specific circumstances. But I also know full well how to tweak and monitor battery consumption such that my laptops have pretty much always managed to match or exceed their claimed battery life numbers. My Dell, Samsung, HP, Acer, Fujitsu and Toshiba laptops have all managed to live up claims if you know what you're doing.

Therefore I'd rather know the true maximum it can achieve rather than some dumbed down number made for "typical" consumers. And I also hate those new rules on broadband speed claims. A claim of "Up to 16Mbps" or "Up to 24Mbps" or "Up to 40Mbps" will tell me exactly what technology it uses and I can measure my line to determine how much I'll actually get. A rating of "Up to 14Mbps" based on 10% of customers getting that average speed tells me nothing useful. Is it using ADSL1? ADS2? VDSL1/2? 16Mbps cap? 24Mbps cap? Who knows. By rating it down they get an excuse to fob off customers on a faster 24Mbps line with a fault reducing their speed to 14Mbps because well, they never claimed 24Mbps did they!

I want to know what my equipment is capable of, not some obfuscated "average" crap, especially when it's easy enough to access reviews or tests under specific conditions.

Now for the average consumer, I'd prefer at the very least, consistent and comparable battery life tests across all manufacturers. In the same way motorcycle helmets are tested by an independent third party using identical procedures for all manufacturers.

Maybe they should introduce a manufacturer-independent standard like CIPA which is used for camera battery life testing.

[bitbucket]

Honestly, I've always found my Apple devices to perform better than expected with regards to battery life. I can't say the same about my Dell XPS 13

[big_hairy_rob]

Anyone who buys something based on a claim by a company, should always expect to be disappointed.

I would suggest that these claims are tested externally, however as we know from the MPG scandal, even these can be easily rigged...

Maybe the only way to achieve any fair results would be to test things bought 'commercially' and at random, and apply standardizing methodologies; but does anyone really care?

[aniilv]

tbh looks like they have used chrome on windows and safari for mac for the test

[LSG501]

Got to love those sorts of reviews.... results without any explanation of what was done in the tests or the settings used on the laptops... something as simple as running on high performance mode versus balanced or even battery saver can make a HUGE difference, let alone the choice of software being used to do the tests (we all know chrome/firefox is worse than ie/edge on windows for battery life).

Then there's the fact it's an 'average' for a brand rather than a specific laptop in a brand which in itself can skew the results.

While I never expect to hit the max battery life I have been able to with every single laptop I've used in the last 5-10 years when I first get them and do some basic tweaks to things like display brightness.

[fewtcher]

And I also hate those new rules on broadband speed claims. A claim of "Up to 16Mbps" or "Up to 24Mbps" or "Up to 40Mbps" will tell me exactly what technology it uses and I can measure my line to determine how much I'll actually get. A rating of "Up to 14Mbps" based on 10% of customers getting that average speed tells me nothing useful. Is it using ADSL1? ADS2? VDSL1/2? 16Mbps cap? 24Mbps cap? Who knows. By rating it down they get an excuse to fob off customers on a faster 24Mbps line with a fault reducing their speed to 14Mbps because well, they never claimed 24Mbps did they!

Those ratings are not "average", they are "maximum". And the rob4001 complained because whenever they put the "up to" you can't complain even if your speed is half of what's advertised. Because they listed it as up to that speed, they never promised you'll constantly get that speed. So you are mistaken in what you understood vs what was stated.
In my contract with the ISP for example it's stated my speed is 100mbps and that I must have my connection up no less than 99% of the time (meaning it can be down for no longer than 7h30m~ per month) and that I should be getting at least 90% of the advertised speed for no less than 99% of the time or I will get the money I paid for that month back. I pay for 100mbps fiber optic connection and my usual speed is 99.XXmbps, sometimes I have drops to ~95mbps, but I don't remember the last time that I had less than 90mbps.

So you can know what technology they use - and how will that help you? They can use fiber optics but set a hard cap per user of 14mbps and designate a gigabit pool to 250 people. And in the unlikely scenario that ALL 250 people use their connection at the same time, the speed per user will be 4mbps. At night and during work hours when a lot of people are sleeping/aren't home (respectively) you'll get your 14mbps, but like in the evening when 150-200 people will be on their computers you may get about half what you pay for. So there you go, that's why "Up to" is a cancer.

[fewtcher]

I've always disliked these sorts of criticisms. I'm fully aware claimed numbers can usually only be achieved under specific circumstances.

And also this notification there should be calculated on the spot based on current settings, not show the absolute max your laptop can achieve if it's in lowest brightness mode with unstressed processor just sitting at the desktop with nothing opened etc etc.
"You have 12h left of battery time"
You turn your brightness up by 15%
"You have 11h 20m left of battery time"
I put on AAE to render a video and it will take about 2h to render, check up the remaining battery time -
"You have 1h 41m left of battery time" that is based on current settings and current CPU load serves me a much better purpose than "You have 6h 20m left of battery time" based on idle CPU and whatnot different than what I'm actually doing. I will have to check a few times and take notes how fast my battery drops and then calculate if I will have enough battery to finish the rendering or I will have to find a charger.
So your "the maximum it can achieve under specific circumstances" - as we say in my language - doesn't bring me warmth. Meaning I could care less about it.
In the laptop specifications they can state absolute maximum you can achieve. In that estimating battery icon down in the system tray - no. It should be based on current settings and load so it can be realistic.

[Skorne]

What really stands out to me is that current li-ion battery technology is not really cutting it with under a day at moderate usage.

Whatever happened to lithium-air or graphene or all the other dozens of way better battery techs that were supposed to be available by now?

[Rubarb]

How honestly gives a darn?............ desktop all the way and what is this thing they call a lapdog?

[ik9000]

Honestly, I've always found my Apple devices to perform better than expected with regards to battery life. I can't say the same about my Dell XPS 13

Yup I know what you mean. My XPS13 9350 is atrocious. I'm lucky if I get 5-6 hours just browsing the web/using office -and that's in battery saver mode. Turn that off and watch it drop to 4 hours. I used to get that much out of my Inspiron 9300 with a Geforce 6800 GPU and 17" 1080p screen.

[Dashers]

It's all marketing rubbish. Let me know what capacity the battery is, and highlight any unusual components that would significantly reduce the drain (e.g. an OLED screen). It's the components that really define the power consumption, not the builder.

I'm not surprised about the lack of detail of the Which? review. I signed up to Which? recently and have found the depths of their reviews laughably shallow. I'll cancel my sub once I've got round to wget'ing the back-catalogue.

[ik9000]

It's all marketing rubbish. Let me know what capacity the battery is, and highlight any unusual components that would significantly reduce the drain (e.g. an OLED screen). It's the components that really define the power consumption, not the builder.

Nope I disagree.


So long as Dell are sticking this much thermal paste on the CPU cooler they are definitely affecting battery life. And you're not allowed to open the back and sort it out as that would "invalidate warranty". FFS this is a high-end model not a budget cheapo. You'd think they'd employ some form of quality control...

http://www.ultrabookreview.com/10395...9550-iris-540/

[whatif]

Aren't statistics grand.
They can be swayed by what questions are asked, how they are asked, the answers wanted, and then you also have a bit of leeway by removing those who don't fit the pattern because of reasons you found afterwards.
There are some often quoted figures - example - such as manufacturers quoting battery life not just for laptops, but other devices like mobiles - that causes consternation and active discussion amongst consumers.
And as has been already mentioned, manufacturers do get it wrong, sometimes in a spectacular way, just as it has been shown with the debacle at VW.
Like nqasdfdsaq was mentioning - the only way to level the debate (or at least appease the majority) is to have a third party perform all tests to a fixed set of parameters (Standardisation). And include a way we can utilise to check up not only on the end results, but the procedures used to collect the data and the collating methods used to achieve the results.
The Devil is in the detail. :-)