Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
TRENDING TODAY
Home > News > Technology and Gadgets > CPU

May 21st, 2012, 22:11 GMT · By

AMD’s Trinity Offers 46% Better Battery Life Than Ivy Bridge

SHARE:

Adjust text size:

AMD's Logo
Enlarge picture
Every battery test done on Trinity compared AMD’s reference test systems with retail shipping Ivy Bridge notebooks from different manufacturers.

To stick to the correct principles of benchmarking, when comparing two devices inside a system, the main system should be exactly the same.

Only the performance difference between the compared components should be recorded and considered of use.

When measuring two HDDs, two SSDs or two video cards, the base test system can surely be the same, but what happens when we try to compare two CPUs?

The platforms are different, so the chipsets and mainboards are different.

When analyzing desktop CPUs only the end result is of interest, and power consumption is usually not that important as in the mobile world.

However, since the green/eco conscience has been awaken back in 2006, together with the launch of Intel’s Core 2 Duo CPUs, the power consumption and performance per watt ratios have also been of interest.

And still, there’s a considerable difference between a system that consumes more power and a laptop that stops working because the battery is empty.

Therefore, battery life is very important in the mobile world and it’s logical to be so.

When measuring the battery life of a laptop, the size of the display and the brightness setting are very important factors, as far as power consumption is concerned.

As two laptops don’t have the same displays with the same characteristics, benchmark experts from TechReport.com have decided to compare the battery life while setting the brightness to result in the same measured screen luminosity for all three laptops.

The test compared AMD’s Trinity presentation laptop with ASUS’ N56VM and N53S laptops.

Trinity battery benchmark
Enlarge picture
The experts from TechReport.com used a colorimeter to set the luminosity at the same 100 cm/m2 for all three displays.

This resulted in a 40% brightness setting for the Trinity laptop, an even smaller (and advantageous) brightness of 25% for the ASUS N56Vm and a 45% level for the N53S.

Practically, AMD’s laptop has a smaller battery and was set at medium brightness.

Set up like this, AMD’s Trinity yielded a 46% better battery life than ASUS’ N56VM and almost 70% more battery life than the ASUS N53S.

This is quite a significant achievement for AMD’s Trinity, as it clearly shows that its battery life is 46% better than Ivy Bridge’s and a whooping 70% better than Sandy Bridge's.

These settings will most likely occur in the real world anyway as, if the screen is brighter, the user will likely turn the brightness down for less eye strain.

Turning the brightness down should result in better battery life, so practically the 25% brightness level of the ASUS N56VM laptop is an advantage over AMD’s 40% brightness that consumes more power.

It’s great to see that AMD is able to bring some real competition in the mobile field, and we wish they do the same for the desktop world.


4,101 hits · 5 comments
Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


300 GHz Chips Are Now Possible: Samsung Shows the Graphene Barristor

Intel’s Third Embarrassment of the Last Decade - Chapter I

Hard Hit by the Fake HDD Crisis, WD Buys TOSHIBA’s HDD Plant in Thailand

AMD Trinity Trounces Ivy Bridge in Diablo III

Intel Has No Competitor for AMD’s Trinity

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: TheFuzz on 21 May 2012, 23:24 UTC reply to this comment

This is highly misleading information. I encourage all reading to check out reputable websites such as Anandtech/Tomshardware for AMD Trinity reviews. The battery life is NOT 46% longer for "Trinity" than "Ivy Bridge". You are also stating it was 70% longer than "Sandy Bridge" when Ivy Bridge is WORSE than Sandy Bridge in battery life. Please people. Read reputable websites and don't make a purchase decision off this one article.

Comment #1.1 by: Constantin Murariu on 22 May 2012, 12:55 GMT

So you're basically saying the info is simply "not true" because AnandTech and TomsHardware are reputable websites. That's a non-argument and I, while I consider AnandTech and TomsHardware very reputable websites, I also respect the great work TechReport.com has been doing for the last decade and a half.

Technical arguments pertaining to the testing method should be the ones to be stated not general common talk like "I know Ivy is better than Sandy."

If you can share more technical info on the matter I'll gladly include it in a future update.


Comment #2 by: adi on 22 May 2012, 17:22 UTC reply to this comment

Why not simply remove the display variable from the ecuation by connecting an external display via Hdmi(or whatever) and letting the laptops run?That would decrease the margin of error for the test considerably.

Comment #2.1 by: Constantin Murariu on 23 May 2012, 09:10 GMT

I think this is a good idea and it should be added as a battery test method.


Comment #3 by: ashinms on 22 May 2012, 22:50 UTC reply to this comment

It looks like resonate clock mesh kicks FINFET's * .

Copyright © 2001-2013 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM