isn't bluetooth supposed to be low-power wireless connection?
won't the increased range and throughput going to up the power usage?
I'd say it's more likely to do with radio handling and dynamic scaling to save power. Use more power instantaneously, but finish the transmission in half the time, thus saving power and giving a better top speed at the same time. Distance is a little harder, but better antenna configuration and design (or just more of them in general) could lend to better beamforming or reception.
If power draw was reduced (or even the same) I'd expect them to mention it as a bullet point in their press release.
"More range and speed with the same power usage!!"
The omission of any power draw info points to it using more. I'm hoping it behaves dynamically, but again, i would have thought they'd mention it if could scale nicely.
I'd be happy enough if devices that didnt need the extra bandwidth/range defaulted to bluetooth 4 to save battery life.
For the last 3 or 4 years I've read spec sheets about improved options for BT but then in other articles I've read that most dev's are still only using the most basic security encryptions for the handshakes. These same articles have then pointed at BT as a significant wireless security risk greater than 802.11 protocols.
On the other hand I'm happier for more speed and distance but not at the cost of another back door to manage.