MacBook 12 Core M 1.1 (2015) vs. MacBook Air 11.6 i5 1.6 (2015) power efficiency?

[virtuality]

I am not a processor, battery or power efficiency guru (I hope, some of you are, esp. in Apple matters; since Anand became an Apple employee). I hopefully posted it in the right part of the forum as well!

This got me confused:

It says the New MacBook, (even with a 'power efficient & fanless' processor, which is reportedly as fast as a 2011 i5 has a slightly bigger battery and is capable just as many hours of wireless browsing an iTunes playback (by Apple's own measurements) as the much more powerful, fan-cooled i5 in the MacBook Air (with more ports; reports said the MacBook 12 has only one port to save on battery as well). What am I missing here?

 

[coercitiv]

What am I missing here?

IPS 2304x1440 versus TN 1366x768

This impacts both idle and load power consumption (considering load = browsing).

 

[Valantar]

IPS 2304x1440 versus TN 1366x768

This impacts both idle and load power consumption (considering load = browsing).

Yep. As stated in the AT review of the new MB, the display is, if not the biggest power draw in the machine, then a very close second.

 

[Qwertilot]

Well, yes, but also the processors really aren't very different in terms of actual efficiency. Some tweaks to CoreM but fundamentally its the same processor/process.

The 4.5-6 vs 15 for headline power draw really isn't very useful in many ways

Power draw at idle for CoreM vs the MBA CPU? Probably slightly lower for CoreM, but very small numbers for both chips. Ditto when 'nearly' idea too. They sorted that with Haswell.

Power draw when actually running fully flat out? Actually quite similar too.

The difference comes from the fact that CoreM can't run flat out for very long at all - it throttles back to slow mode to restrain its heat output - while the MBA processor can seemingly sustain full speed forever.

So power consumption when doing something bursty like web browsing? Really quite a small difference. Ditto video playback I guess.

If they measured battery life while running a benchmark that really used the MBA's processors (considerable) ability to sustain its extra speed for much longer, it'd drain its battery much faster too

The thing that CoreM gives them is the ability to make it fanless/super thin. Whether that is really a sane trade off for the lost performance vs Intel's other mobile chips is probably rather arguable but I guess some will think it one. Battery life it doesn't really help with.

Have a look at the rather excellent article on the main site which explains/examines it in some detail.

 

[virtuality]

IPS 2304x1440 versus TN 1366x768

This impacts both idle and load power consumption (considering load = browsing).

Good point. then I wonder, why is the rush for 4k displays in even 5.5" phablets? That must be insane (no practical use vs. much bigger drain on the battery).

 

[virtuality]

Have a look at the rather excellent article on the main site which explains/examines it in some detail.

Thanks so much for the rundown on the CPUs. Do you mean, this article?

 

[witeken]

Bigger screen, more pixels.

E.g.

 

[Techhog]

Just looking at more confirmation that the new MacBook is one of the worst laptops ever made.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Good point. then I wonder, why is the rush for 4k displays in even 5.5" phablets? That must be insane (no practical use vs. much bigger drain on the battery).

Yes, I totally agree. It just seems absurd in such small devices. 1080p would seem more than enough. Even in a 15 in laptop, the 1080p screen on my work Dell looks very nice. Not to mention these high res displays require more gpu grunt which also adds to power usage.

 

[Qwertilot]

This is the article which really goes into CoreM, and includes an MBA style processor as a comparison:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9117/analyzing-intel-core-m-performance

Very instructive

The MacBook looks nice to me in several ways. Why its default setting is to have twice the storage of the cheapest Retina mac book pro - and costing slightly more - I'm rather more confused by.

Apple know what'll sell!

 

[sxr7171]

Having used a Core M in a Yoga 3 Pro to me it was noticeably sluggish. Maybe it was that particular thermal implementation. Then again Mac OS may feel more responsive with it than Windows. Somehow I doubt it because I don't find Mac OS to be more responsive than Windows on similar machines.

If I got one I'd hold on to the receipt.