PCPro.co.uk review of core i7 for laptops

[PlasmaBomb]

First review

Cliffs -

i7-820QM - 45nm Clarksfield chip
Test rig was a 16in laptop
Stock speed 1.73 GHz
Turbos to a maximum of 3.06 GHz
Idles - 37 C
Full load - 77 C
Idle battery life ~ 210 minutes(4,800mAh battery)
Full load battery life ~46 minutes

Vista Power saver mode full load - 75 minutes (disables turbo and locks cores at 1.2 GHz ).

 

[deputc26]

4,800 mAh is meaningless unless that number comes with a voltage but even then the number is deceiving as voltage decreases over the length of the discharge. Batteries should be rated in Whrs not mAh. For the record that battery is most likely 11.1v and about 50Whrs giving it an efficiency of about 4.2 minutes per Wh when idle and .92minutes per Whr when under full load. Compare that to the numbers here. As expected, battery life is better at idle and worse under load (though it is still more efficient under load).

edit: removed double period.

 

[Arkaign]

Sounds like a great solution for a desktop replacement setup, where one just plugs it in most of the time anyway, but terrible for someone needing great battery life.

Stupidly, Mac notebooks seem to be the only ones to 'get' the desire for ultra-long unplugged uptime. There's no credible reason someone couldn't make an equivalent PC notebook, but possibly the added cost would sink the idea.

 

[Idontcare]

77C -> I don't want this on my lap when fully loaded.

Really expected better battery life when fully loaded, even if it meant reducing the clockspeed for all four cores at fully loaded conditions.

3GHz for single-thread is fine, maybe should be 1GHz for all four cores fully loaded?

 

[Arkaign]

Yeah, the extreme heat + poor battery life means to me that this is really only a practical solution for those wanting a portable plug-in desktop replacement. As a notebook to use unplugged, it's horrendously impractical unless you are satisfied with blindingly poor battery life or hobbled performance. To add insult to injury, I haven't checked, but bet notebook DDR3 memory is both slow and hella pricey.

Ah well, it's the first of a new gen for the notebook world, I imagine things will get worlds better when 32nm and mass-market DDR3 price drops hit. Check back late '10, I bet we see mobile i5/i7 notebooks that are much cooler, much cheaper, and with much better battery life.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
77C -> I don't want this on my lap when fully loaded.

Really expected better battery life when fully loaded, even if it meant reducing the clockspeed for all four cores at fully loaded conditions.

3GHz for single-thread is fine, maybe should be 1GHz for all four cores fully loaded?

Desktop replacement. It would probably do bit better in a 17" chassis.

Underclocking/undervolting may buy you some more time/less heat, but we will have to wait and see.

Sorry deputc they don't give the voltages otherwise I would have converted to Wh. PCPro seem to do their reviews in mAh .

 

[IntelUser2000]

Don't seem bad as some of you suggest. It's no worse than the mobile Core 2 Quad QX9300(actually much better). Biggest problem with battery life is always the GPU. Even the lowly versions of GPUs consume massive amounts of power.

Even the Core 2 Duo manages 70 mins of battery life with same benchmark.