There should be a bigger need to fix the problem of running out of power. For example with my cell phone I always have it charged, and sometimes if the need calls for it I have other ways of keeping it charged. I have a crank that I can spin round and round to give it some more juice. I can also use normal battery with an adapter if the need arises.

Now maybe that isn’t available for laptops but I know what is available. Why not add a battery save o/s to laptops.

OK so here it is.

I play a DVD or Blue-Ray what ever it is. Do I really need all the crap Windows/osx/Linux is playing in the background?

Why can’t the laptop just play the DVD without the OS why can’t it just boot into a Movie OS at the start by pushing f12 at boot?

It could go more into just boot into my Email with a web browser. I know that I have built a Linux kernel before that only did that. THAT’S ALL IT DID.

To me splitting up programs mps, movies, open office, email and other needed normal everyday things could save a user a ton of battery life.

Lastly I bet a program could be written very well to manage battery life. Ok why does wi-fi GPS media player eat more energy? Is it because the CPU is just being worked that hard? What if the CPU is working slower, and it takes more time to finish the task you asked it BUT saved more battery usage time.

I know for a fact if I drive to town at 55Mph vs 75Mph that I will have more gas if I would of drove 55Mhp. Why can’t AMD give a program that lets you slow down the PC so that you save a little battery life if you needed to have extra time between a charge? Why do I need a CPU/Memory/Video card working 100MPH at media player/open office/staring at my desktop with noting going on? Why can’t this be managed with a simple program that no one has yet to produce. The only thing that you get is turn this off after so much time, which is BS in my book. You should be able to slow down your machine. I know that I can by under clocking and overclocking, BUT there has to be a way for the average Joe to just be able to tell it”hey I only want to go 45Mph today not the whole 100Mhp like normal.

DaMulta

I agree there should be other measurements available to aid consumers, but I don’t agree with using 3DMark06 as a candidate to measure battery life performance. It confuses (or misinform) users more than it educates. Besides, gamers play their games plugged into the wall socket, not running off batteries.

the numbers for stand by time/ Idle time are useless to me unless your talking about my bluetooth headset…then idle time means something…

as it stands now I have a pretty good idea of my battery life when Im using my laptop, I had to find that out after

To be honest, it’s kind of sad this isn’t already being used. I’m disappointed at Intel’s reaction to this discussion. You don’t ALWAYS have to rely on traditional methods to implement change. In fact, embracing the blog would show them to be agile and adaptable. Sadly, they don’t appear to be either.

One is the accuracy of the rated battery – which requires all the major companies to adopt better standards to report more real-life usage – not the lousy JEITA battery standards most use and exploit it to their best to get the longest battery life run. This is absolutely not indicative of any real usage other than keeping the notebook mostly idle and dim – like a show piece if you will.

MobileMark 2007 used in several independent reviews is a hell lot better than any of those battery life claims made on the notebooks by the manufacturers. Have you ever seen it run in full? There’s a good balance of productivity, interactivity and wait times which is more often applicable than we realize (and it’s not just 5% of utilization). How often and how taxing do you actually use the notebook? Different notebooks are made for different user groups and perform differently on various tasks and the length of operation. There is no single standard you can ever derive, but if one were to go with the usual productivity workflow, then MobileMark’07 is actually doing a decent job at going the middle line. Yes, I’ve tried it both with the benchmarks and casual usage and they aren’t that far apart – unless otherwise you do something stressful all through like 3DMark06.

So what if you tax your notebook like 3DMark’06? Do you really thing notebook vendors are going to adopt those measly up-time numbers? Hell no… not until batteries are 3 times more powerful perhaps. Simple fact of marketing is that the consumer will keep the lower numbers in their head and that would actually throw them off in their decision making.

If you were to say Manufacturers should use MobileMark’07 test numbers, I’m probably with you because that’s anytime more real than those ’standards’ being used now.

Then comes the matter of accurate real-term reporting, which is what you’re lamenting about in the beginning and as reiterated by Stephen in his post above. Yes, this we sorely need a fix. We really need a more accurate up-time gauge based on the workload at any one point of time.

Lastly the comparisons drawn aren’t accurate. While the battery being used is similar for the Intel and AMD machines respectively, their platforms and components used, OS used and most importantly, notebook specific power-optimizations done at the hardware and BIOS level make up for the differences in performance. Oh and the reason why 3DMark06 up-time is similar across the board is due to two reasons – similar max TDP of total platform and that of the same Wh battery used. When it comes to normal productivity use, there are more chances for power saving features to kick-in and that’s when it depends on each component’s capability and that of the optimization at the vendor level for each platform. More often than not, Intel would pull through better. But if AMD’s platforms are better implemented to capitalize on its much lower idle clock speeds at low power states, then it has an upper hand. BUT here-in comes another issue – how capable are each of the platforms at low-power states (and low CPU utilization), which also equates to who gives better raw performance.

The other issue is activation of Wi-Fi, GPS or other features – they are location specific and will vary from place of usage. Even in the same location, activating any of these really depends on the signal strength, how busy the band is, etc.. it’s open to too many external concerns which can’t be controlled – and these would also undermine your battery life because these radio device consumer power corresponding to what they are doing.

I applaud the overall notion of improvement, but it should be less AMD-centric. The problem that needs to be tackled now is dumping JEITA like standards for something more down-to-earth that when consumers note the battery life rating, it’s closer to general usage numbers – not those of idle or those of extremely heavy loads. The latter is good to have, but it’s not going to adopted industry-wide and that’s quite sure.

Anyways, even when new, and doing every battery optimized setting I could perform on the laptop, I may get over an hour. Now, going on 4 years old, I’ll be lucky to get 20 mins at idle. When it was new, and just doing general web browsing with the wi-fi enabled, I might be get 40 minutes out of it. A far cry from the 2 hours reported.

Even today, most laptops of this nature, just have a “*” in that field that usually says something along the lines of, “Determined by use”. There’s not even a hint of battery life depicted anymore. Is it 30 minutes, 40 minutes? I know it’s going to be short, but how much? I’ve only ever had one notebook exceed it’s battery life expectations. That was my old 386SX 24MHz notebook. I was constantly getting close to 4 hours with a new Ni-Cad battery.

I have a UPS for my desktop and it reports it’s battery life extrememly accurately. Technically, that’s what a battery in a notebook/laptop is, so why can’t we have the same? I just open my APC PowerChute program and I get realtime battery information and accurate projected time based on load level. It might say 29 minuntes at idle and then drop to 12 minutes at a gaming load. That’s all I’m asking for in a laptop.

Not 2 hours estimate battery time and then when it flips to DC power, I see 47 minutes and then a minute later it says 22 minutes.

Glad to see AMD taking the initiative. Maybe we can see a Fusion battery program like APC’s PowerChute program end up on our AMD laptops? Or heck, jsut to get the industry to standardize on a metric would be nice. We’ve seen disparity over power use in TDP and you’ve tried to level it out with ACP, so hopefully we can see the industry move this way in power use to laptops in the same way we have standardized power metrics for servers.

I completely agree. An objective an representative way of battery-life classification, would be really useful for everyone. I hope the large manufacturers will put your initiative into practise….

Cheers,
maarten

See this article:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17912_3-10194721-72.html

If that does happen, it will change our lifestyle, for sure. And maybe John’s wish of a small charger will come true

SUSPEND BATT LIFE

It would also be meaningful to show suspend batt life. This is most important now as netbooks, notebooks and embedded devices like smart phones merge in functionality. Netbooks and notebooks can suspend and conserve energy while giving near instanton usage. Its ability to stay suspended for longer period of time can be useful until the next ac charge.

For some reason, I’ve rarely seen notebook/netbook reviews determine the suspend batt life. Knowing this can definitely be helpful.

I think that’s the point. HP, Apple, Dell and Lenovo and Acer WILL do it if becomes the norm. Cheers to AMD for opening up the discussion, even if they don’t WIN every case. But honesty is the goal.

In fact when I am using my laptop, I keep it plugged in when I’m near a plug, I run off battery when I move between rooms in the house. BUT how many times do I leave the house for the day WITHOUT my charging cable? Answer: I have done it before, but no many times.

Maybe a good answer to the battery issue is a smaller and better charger. Maybe one the size of a new Apple iPod Shuffle.

@jmacofearth

I have a 2006 Prius. And the fuel indicator has an 8 bar indicator for gas level. And I also reset my trip meter after I fill up. And here’s where I think Toyota has missed the mark. I can go upwards of 120 miles and the gas meter still shows FULL, all 8 bars are still lit.

Now I know the Prius gets good mileage, but that’s a little to Jetsons. The car actually gets around 340-370 to a ten gallon tank. I average 38 mpg combined, even when I’m driving pretty aggressively. So, at the top of the gauge the measure is useless. But as the car moves closer to that magic 340-350 range the lights practically go out at in pairs. And if you see that last LED marker flash and the “add fuel” message on the dash, DO NOT PASS ANOTHER STATION. Get gas immediately.

So the fuel gauge is useless in the Prius. I know I get near 350 miles per tank with a gallon or so to spare. And the only indicator that causes me to take action is the flashing light, and if I’ve let the fuel get THAT LOW then it is an idiot light.

My laptop battery has similar issues.

When unplugged my MBP does it’s best to calculate time remaining to standby. And the accuracy of the minutes to black is less important than the final “please plug in your laptop to avoid standby” message. Or the equivalent of the flashing “add fuel” message.

So in the real world my MPB with a 2.4 Intel Core Duo 2 gets approximately 3 – 3.5 hours on a full, overnight, charge. But the real measure, the real indicator I look for is that final “add fuel.”

Now, I am waiting with anticipation for my new 17″ MBP with Apple’s enhanced Li battery. Advertised and marketed at 8 hours battery life, I am not so concerned or worried about “exactly” how long the battery will last, but more about how much warning I will have between when the battery says, “add fuel” and when the machine powers down in the middle of my Spore victory dance.

In terms of reporting battery performance, doesn’t some of the problem originate with the battery itself? Does an ATI battery and a Sony battery and a who-knows-what-brand battery all perform the same?

And what I learned recently in doing some “battery” research is, that HEAT is a bigger issue for Li batteries than anything else. So even in standby, if your Li battery and laptop are in a hot car with the windows rolled up, the battery will drain much faster than if it were on a shaded table in a coffee shop.

I would like to see battery ratings gain more reputable metrics. Does anyone believe the 5-hour vs 12-hour battery claims? I certainly didn’t get overly excited or concerned about the new 17″ MBP exaggerated battery life or the fact that the battery was “not removable.” Oh MY!

And I would suspect, since it is taking me over 6 weeks from Apple’s shipping date to actually receive my MBP, that there are a lot of us consumers who don’t believe the stats or care to judge our next laptop by the manufacturer’s claims.

Here is what I demand:
1. I want the battery to last a long time.
2. I want the battery to not die prematurely. (1 – 1.5 years seems reasonable)
and more important to me than any spec (3DMark06 or MMO7) is
3. I’d really really really like the battery to be GREEN. Less lead, less bad stuff, less waste.

And then we should really think about how to cool the battery better, so my palms aren’t on fire atop my 140 degree Duo, and my thighs aren’t blistering red. And if we can keep it cool, while under duress (more like the 3DMark06 benchmark) guess what? It performs better and lasts longer.

Now, back to cars for a second, I understand that the Prius outside the US has been offered offered with an EV override button that forces the car to use more electric power than it does in “normal” mode. It was taken off the US models by pressure from somewhere. Not hard to imagine that lobbying pressure.

And so with my laptop I would often hit the “TURBO” switch to keep the machine running at top performance even if that meant having to keep it plugged it. But I would like a “ECO” mode as well.

The new 2010 Prius comes with three modes including “EV.”

By all means, let’s keep getting better and honest about our metrics. But let’s not obsess about a 91 3DMark06 vs a 95 3DMark06. Quite frankly, even if you tried to explain it to me, I don’t know what that 4 point 3DMark06-spread means in terms of actual battery time.

So when Apple says the new MBP I am waiting for will get 8-hours runtime (or is it 12?) I don’t really know what that means. Will my Prius really get 42 city 48 hwy? I don’t care. But when that “add fuel” message pops up on my laptop or my Prius then I will sit up and take immediate action.

I wrote a post about taking care of your Li battery here.
“Laptop Battery Maintenance and Good Habits – Scientific Studies Reveal” http://bit.ly/battery-advice

Cheers,
@jmacofearth

What I’d really love to see is a suite of benchmarking apps that emulate several different typical usage profiles. For example, Home, Work and Play. Each app would simulate a workload commensurate with the profile. The Home benchmarking app would open iTunes and play MP3s, open several video sites in a browser, read emails in a browser, open a desktop Twitter client, etc. The Work app would open Outlook and do whatever people do in Outlook, manipulate various numbers and types of documents, play Solitaire, surf eBay, etc. The Play app could run 3DMark.

The outcome would, hopefully, be a series of battery life listings that were somewhat accurate and that users could identify with. As is, I think the steps you all are taking are a major improvement over the way things have been done.

I work in the cooling tower industry, where standard testing from an independent agency, CTI.org, is required if you want to be a major player in the market. Independent verification using standardized testing procedures to test product marketing claims for capacity performance is the only way to level the playing field in a fair and equitable way, and its the only realistic way for our customers to have faith in what we are providing.

The technology industry has made strides in similar areas. 80plus.org is a great example, setting standards for power supply efficiency, frankly, I don’t know any responsible computer user, or vendor that should pack in a power supply without the 80 plus logo. Energy star is another good source of certification standards for tech products. RoHS compliance also comes to mind.

Surely, an independent organization to test battery claims can not be too far off. Its obvious the market likes to fudge the data a bit by offering numbers based on an often unrealistic user profile. The only way to get it straight is to have an independent organization, with a standardized testing methodology come in and test the claims for consumers. Does it add a little pain in getting a product launched? Sure it does, but in the end, what it says to the consumer is that you value a fair, honest and equitable market, and you want to deliver real, verifiable value for thier dollars. An independent organization to test battery claims across the tech industry is what I believe we all need for a fair level playing field.

By the way, appropriate timing because my portable phone lost its charge today after less than half its advertised standby time. I am a light duty cell user, but its annoying to me just the same.