Intel Teases 9.5-Hour Battery Life From Haswell-Based Core i7

[brandonjclark]

I'm not THAT impressed.

 

[clifftam]

This seems too good to be true. Can't wait to see review on this setup.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I'm not THAT impressed.

9.5 hours on a full computer system is pretty impressive. Most phones get about 9 hours of average use. My Droid Bionic is normally at 10% by the time I get home with light to moderate use.

If this can be thrown into a tablet like the Asus Transformer with a secondary dock or Surface then it will be pretty awesome to have that long of a useful life.

 

[danwat1234]

Intel Haswell is pretty crazy. Have you seen the Anandtech and maximumpc reviews of the Intel Iris HD 5200 Graphics? It's nuts. Puts my 2008 gaming laptop to shame. About 13,000 in 3Dmark06.
The CPU gets a nice bump in performance too, but I wish the single core performance was better.
Hoping for higher clocks at 14nm Broadwell.

 

[saintjimmy]

I want to see the battery life of an i7 laptop with decent discrete graphics (8770M, GT 650M or of the like) and with a large battery like the 100 W/h, 8550 mAh in my HP. I bet 10+ hours would be possible just surfing the internet on Intel graphics, and 2-3 hours intense gaming.

 

[cats_Paw]

There are batteries right now with a capacity of 30-35 hours on laptops, but they are not avalabie to the conumers. In theory we have the technology for over a month of battery worth, but simply put, its not worth putting that in a laptop due to pricing.
Sorry but 3 hours or 9 hours is not a huge difference to me, especially when i have to plug my gaming laptop to a socket if i want to play cus the GPUs cant work at their 100% from the battery alone.

 

[SteelCity1981]

this puts my core i7 820QM to shame I get 2 hours tops on my 6 cell battery of course have a 9 cell or 12 cell would double that to at least another hour or 2, but considering I can't upgrade to a 9 cell or 12 cell battery i'm pretty much stuck with a 6 cell. then again having no gpu on the cpu and relying on my radeon 5730 all the time for video doesn't help matters either.

 

[icemunk]

Since Intel isn't working on speed anymore, and their focus is power-effiency and the mobile market.. it would be funny to see AMD go in the other direction.. SuperPileDriver 16-Core 6GHZ liquicool only 400W processor: AMD, screw efficiency, we want pure power.

 

[mcd023]

That is freaking incredible! A core i7 lasting as long as an ARM counterpart. I'm sure the battery is bigger, but so is the screen and workload. That's insane! And here my old ASUS G51VX with its 1080p screen and Core2Duo 2.8GHz (both upgraded by me) lasts about 1 hour on its 4 year old battery. lolz

 

[sundragon]

I want to see the battery life of an i7 laptop with decent discrete graphics (8770M, GT 650M or of the like) and with a large battery like the 100 W/h, 8550 mAh in my HP. I bet 10+ hours would be possible just surfing the internet on Intel graphics, and 2-3 hours intense gaming.

No offense but I'd like to win $350Million in the lotto - The latptop you want is a few years away - Battery technology and CPU/GPU technology aren't there yet.

Usually to increase battery life, one has to reduce performance.

Kudos to Intel for raising the bar for much better battery life under load and a slight increase in performance.

 

[Wisecracker]

Anything would look good compared to the W510 and the Clover Trail Fail.

On the bright side, the retail price on the low-end models is dropping like a rock (with no dock, though), but the higher end with all the goodies (and a dock) ain't budging much

 

[cbrunnem]

I want to see the battery life of an i7 laptop with decent discrete graphics (8770M, GT 650M or of the like) and with a large battery like the 100 W/h, 8550 mAh in my HP. I bet 10+ hours would be possible just surfing the internet on Intel graphics, and 2-3 hours intense gaming.

it doesnt matter if it has discrete graphics or not. if you are watching a movie the laptop would never use the discrete option over integrated. too much power wasted.

There are batteries right now with a capacity of 30-35 hours on laptops, but they are not avalabie to the conumers. In theory we have the technology for over a month of battery worth, but simply put, its not worth putting that in a laptop due to pricing.
Sorry but 3 hours or 9 hours is not a huge difference to me, especially when i have to plug my gaming laptop to a socket if i want to play cus the GPUs cant work at their 100% from the battery alone.

30-35 hours??? i think you are a little on the low side. silicon nanotube lithium ion batteries are right around the corner and have the potential to last longer then graphite lithium ion batteries but have 10 times the power density. so that 9.5 hour battery life just became 90+. other then that idk where you get this month long power source.(must be sorcery)

 

[Guest]

"Unfortunately, a lot of that unraveled when Alan started experiencing hardware and support issues that Acer just wasn’t able to address as smoothly as competing vendors (namely, Apple)"

Chris, it's not that it wasn't able to address 'issues' as smoothly as Apple, it's simply that it had an issue period. This on going disease, and I'm going to call it a disease because that's what it is, of comparing everything to apple, when they have MORE issues despite a high price tag, needs to stop. The reason I say that is that it's not like as soon as Apple has an issue everyone jumps on it and takes notice. But when a non-Apple device has an issue, everyone then makes an issue of it in order to protect mother-ship apple. Apple's antenna-gate issue was far more serious than this, and talked about, but only minimally. "You're holding it wrong". Got to love when apple gets desperate to make a good impression.

Another example is everyone assumes everything is copied from apple and they have a tizzy if something appears to be so.. But the double standard is that if it's reversed, no one cares. THAT is because people have been brainwashed to watch for that. Like for example, what would happen if all Windows PC's decided to copy the notion of using the power PC processor back in the day and they ditched all x86 and Intel etc. They would have been crucified for it, made fun of etc. But notice how when apple simply recompiled their OS to use the x86 platform, something Windows has used all along, no one noticed. THAT, again, demonstrates the influence of apple's hypnosis and deceptive advertising on the unsuspecting... Please stop comparing everything to apple... Unless you are also willing to come down hard on them for every screw up they have, and there have been a lot. A company that dares to make fun as if the other guy gets the cold, but then turns around to have 1/2 million macs catch mac defender, when the user base is 1/10th that of windows install base, looks foolish. And as it went down, that other malware that targeted java on both platforms. Guess who got infected? It wasn't windows as they had their patch up and ready.

 

[Greenhal]

30-35 hours??? i think you are a little on the low side. silicon nanotube lithium ion batteries are right around the corner and have the potential to last longer then graphite lithium ion batteries but have 10 times the power density. so that 9.5 hour battery life just became 90+. other then that idk where you get this month long power source.(must be sorcery)

The nano Si anodes that academia reports on is sorcery too. The best you will see is Si alloys slowly incorporated into graphite negatives to help the industry achieve its steady 4% increase in volumetric energy density.

 

[cbrunnem]

30-35 hours??? i think you are a little on the low side. silicon nanotube lithium ion batteries are right around the corner and have the potential to last longer then graphite lithium ion batteries but have 10 times the power density. so that 9.5 hour battery life just became 90+. other then that idk where you get this month long power source.(must be sorcery)

The nano Si anodes that academia reports on is sorcery too. The best you will see is Si alloys slowly incorporated into graphite negatives to help the industry achieve its steady 4% increase in volumetric energy density.

im sorry but im trusting Stanford over you. nothing personal