Laptop reviews, please show performance with battery power

[LeGlennden]

Hi, 

 

I find it weird that ltt dont show performance/benchmarks on laptops running on battery power. 
 

A laptop should be portable, and therefore you should show performance on battery also. 

The last video (How fast will laptops be in 2022) you say the latest Intel cpu is the fastest, but that is only when the tests are done with a wallpower. 

 

In the video you also say that its the biggest performance jump for many years. Have you guys all ready forgot about the M1? 

[emosun]

A: nobody expects anything to somehow be superior running off a battery than infinite wall power

 

B: nobody cares about the m1 if power per watt is how you have to measure performance to seem good. Big whoop

[Lurick]

What power plan and who's power plan? The ones by the laptop maker that can vary between models and brands or the windows ones which can also vary between laptops with P and E cores vs older laptops without? How far back should they go to normalize test results? Do you want play time duration per watt too? Should they say how long each game can be played to go from 100% to 0% or some other arbitrary percentage? What software? Stock or some sort of normalization of software? How do you normalize that between different laptop brands? Do you also leave on laptop settings or software that improve performance at the cost of battery life?

[LeGlennden]

13 minutes ago, emosun said:

A: nobody expects anything to somehow be superior running off a battery than infinite wall power

 

B: nobody cares about the m1 if power per watt is how you have to measure performance to seem good. Big whoop

A: No, but the M1 has the same performance on battery and wallpower. It is more powerful then any intel cpu, running on battery. 
 

B: Being a laptop I would say that batterytime is critical, so performance per watt is a good measure of a laptops performance. 

 

[WereCat]

6 minutes ago, LeGlennden said:

 

B: Being a laptop I would say that batterytime is critical, so performance per watt is a good measure of a laptops performance. 

 

Perf per watt is skewed a ton by other factors like type of display, its brightness, etc... You can get wildly different numbers with the same HW used. 

[RONOTHAN##]

22 minutes ago, emosun said:

A: nobody expects anything to somehow be superior running off a battery than infinite wall power

 

To be fair, I do actually own a laptop that is, for some reason, faster on battery power than it is connected to the wall. It doesn't turbo as high when connected to wall power, and everything I've done to troubleshoot it hasn't worked. Pretty sure it's just an issue with this particular laptop, but it can happen. 

 

32 minutes ago, LeGlennden said:

A laptop should be portable, and therefore you should show performance on battery also. 

Most people I know who need mobile power carry a charger with them anyway. The only time they use the battery is when they're between outlets or can't find an outlet around, both not super common scenarios. If you need mobile power and do renders on the go, it's just something you're used to doing, since otherwise your laptop will just die before the end of the day anyway, even with pretty efficient laptops.

[LeGlennden]

1 hour ago, Lurick said:

What power plan and who's power plan? The ones by the laptop maker that can vary between models and brands or the windows ones which can also vary between laptops with P and E cores vs older laptops without? How far back should they go to normalize test results? Do you want play time duration per watt too? Should they say how long each game can be played to go from 100% to 0% or some other arbitrary percentage? What software? Stock or some sort of normalization of software? How do you normalize that between different laptop brands? Do you also leave on laptop settings or software that improve performance at the cost of battery life?

Unplug the charger and show the best performance the laptop can do.
I don't see the engineering or leap in tecnology by giving the laptop more and more watt, the true innovation is showing improved performance for less watts. 

 

1 hour ago, WereCat said:

Perf per watt is skewed a ton by other factors like type of display, its brightness, etc... You can get wildly different numbers with the same HW used. 

Maybe your right since there is so many different laptops, but showing a performance/benchmark with only battery power would show more innovation, I think

 

1 hour ago, RONOTHAN## said:

To be fair, I do actually own a laptop that is, for some reason, faster on battery power than it is connected to the wall. It doesn't turbo as high when connected to wall power, and everything I've done to troubleshoot it hasn't worked. Pretty sure it's just an issue with this particular laptop, but it can happen. 

 

Most people I know who need mobile power carry a charger with them anyway. The only time they use the battery is when they're between outlets or can't find an outlet around, both not super common scenarios. If you need mobile power and do renders on the go, it's just something you're used to doing, since otherwise your laptop will just die before the end of the day anyway, even with pretty efficient laptops.

I can understand the use case you are talking about, but I think the true innovation is more performance for less power used. Apple will launch a new desktop this year with new apple silicon, and if they let it draw as much power as it wants, I think it will beat every other cpu out there, since its performance is so good just on battery power, 

[emosun]

43 minutes ago, LeGlennden said:

A: No, but the M1 has the same performance on battery and wallpower. It is more powerful then any intel cpu, running on battery. 

See you probably shouldnt speak in absolutes as an 8 socketed blade server on a car battery will be 8 times faster than an m1 

 

Not to mention apples overpriced gimmicky products are not interchangeable to the majority of buyers which is a major reason why 90% of people do not consider buying them regardless of their skewd marketing.

 

If you like the m1 then go buy it , but dont get upset that the majority of people dislike apple products and dont want one despite their cpus only being power efficient.

[RONOTHAN##]

4 minutes ago, LeGlennden said:

I can understand the use case you are talking about, but I think the true innovation is more performance for less power used. Apple will launch a new desktop this year with new apple silicon, and if they let it draw as much power as it wants, I think it will beat every other cpu out there, since its performance is so good just on battery power, 

Problem is performance doesn't scale linearly with power draw. If you want proof, just look at the 12700k vs the 12900k in benchmarks. The 12900k draws 50% more power but only gets ~10% more performance at best. The performance per watt curve is different for every processor, so unless you're talking about a very specific wattage target, it isn't really that useful of a metric.

[emosun]

6 minutes ago, LeGlennden said:

but I think the true innovation is more performance for less power used

Then what youre looking for would be cellphone grade hardware reviews and not laptops

[Mark Kaine]

i agree, why wouldn't they have tests on battery, although iirc they have, but not necessarily performance… which again, why wouldn't they… that it depends on settings etc, is kinda the point, to compare different laptops , just use default  settings, if.a laptop has poor defaults it loses, that's the point. and if they dont test it, its not a proper review leaving out important stuff like that.