Hey guys, this one's gonna be directed towards people who are more up to date with new(ish) graphics/processor technology than I am. I've managed to arrange to get ahold of a Dell XPS 17 laptop for next year with the following specs:

Intel i7-2630QM 2.0Ghz
GeForce GT 550m 1GB GDDR3 with Optimus
8GB DDR3 1333mhz RAM
17.3" 1920 x 1080 HD display with 3D (not that I'd ever use it)

I currently have a Dell Studio XPS 16 laptop with the following specs:

Intel i7-720QM 1.6Ghz
Radeon HD 5730 1GB DDR3 graphics
8GB DDR3 1333mhz RAM
15.6" 1920 x 1080 HD display

Now I have two main questions for you:
1) How much does Nvidia Optimus actually improve battery life?
I understand how Nvidia works in theory and that it SHOULD improve battery life, but in practice what's the real increase?

2) Which laptop do you think will have the better battery life?
My laptop can get max four hours with the keyboard backlight off, screen at lowest brightness, power save mode, and some other tweaking I did. The Dell XPS 17 laptop has a processor that should run cooler and draw less power, and Optimus (see above question), but also has a very big screen. Putting aside the design of the case and how that affects heat and cooling issues like the fans running, which laptop should have the better battery life?

This one's a job for the boys of ECE.

Edit: The Studio XPS 16 has an 85-WHr battery, while the XPS 17 has a 90-WHr battery. Both 9-cell lithium ion.

I will never go ATi/Radeon/AMD-crap ever again. It has failed on me too many times for me to recommend it, my old nVidia didnt give me any issues.

are you saying you wont use your screen? im confused...

EDIT* didnt see the 3D part :p

also you can find all the information you need to know using google.

I doubt there's any noticeable difference.

i'm not sure how big of an issue the screen size plays on the battery life, but the 2xxx series i7 uses less power than the 1st gen one. Optimus is Nvidia's name for switchable graphics. When you're doing basic stuff like browsing the internet, your laptop will run on the integrated graphics (less power hungry). When you're playing demanding games, the laptop will "switch" into the discrete gpu. 17" is really huge, good luck carrying it around =\

17" is not for mobility, I have a 17" laptop, I can't carry it around everywhere.

Originally Posted by blackdragon

I will never go ATi/Radeon/AMD-crap ever again. It has failed on me too many times for me to recommend it, my old nVidia didnt give me any issues.

confirmation bias

strange i have only ever had good ati cards and nvidia has always broke on me. I still buy nvidia because in general they have more bang for buck.


Both laptops are comparable. The difference in battery life i'd imagine is small.

Okay, but how about the first question. I understand how Optimus works, but from trying to research it via Google, in practice I can't find any comparable data between the battery lives of a laptop running Optimus and a similar one that isn't using it.

Maybe I'm just bad at searching this stuff up.

Originally Posted by Theashe

Okay, but how about the first question. I understand how Optimus works, but from trying to research it via Google, in practice I can't find any comparable data between the battery lives of a laptop running Optimus and a similar one that isn't using it.

Maybe I'm just bad at searching this stuff up.

There are lots of comparisons online, but Optimus seems to give you about 30%-70% more battery life when doing light computing vs not having optimus and there is no real difference when gaming/watching a movie.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Mobile/...ttery-Life-and

BTW
A 17" gaming laptop is a very bad idea for University

Originally Posted by Tailsnake

There are lots of comparisons online, but Optimus seems to give you about 30%-70% more battery life when doing light computing vs not having optimus and there is no real difference when gaming/watching a movie.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Mobile/...ttery-Life-and

BTW
A 17" gaming laptop is a very bad idea for University

I'm aware of that, but my current laptop is being replaced by Dell because I took it in for service for numerous problems during my first year at Mac and they shipped it back with lesser parts than what I paid for when I bought it. Since I needed it badly during the year I waited till now to send it back, and they don't make my laptop anymore. That's the only model they will replace mine with. I'm not really happy about it, but I don't want a laptop with parts worse than what I paid for.

Pretty sure the CPU is faster, just looking at the base frequency. Plus it's using the newer Sandy Bridge architecture, which is definitely faster than the older Arrandale series. According to http://www.notebookcheck.net /Compa...rds.130.0.html the 550m is faster than the 5730 by a decent amount (both listed under Class 2).

If it were me, I get that laptop and install unix on it.

Well, for anyone interested, I got the laptop and tested the battery life. Mind you, this is the first time I've worn the battery down. Specs can be found in the original post.

I left the laptop unplugged with Power Saver plan on, screen at minimum brightness (the same as how I use it at school). I transferred over 50GB of files to the laptop from my old one (school stuff, songs, movies, etc.). I also installed a couple programs like iTunes, Firefox, and Microsoft Office 2010.

The computer projected a battery life of 11 HOURS when I first unplugged it. Since my last one only lasted about 3 hours on a charge and it was only 15 inches, I figured that it miscalculated.

But it didn't.

I've been running the computer doing basic tasks since 1pm yesterday (turned off for the night around 10), and it still has two more hours of battery life. It actually is lasting about 11 hours. That's unreal.