• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    bloatware

    Even if you remove all that crap, battery life is nowhere near the same vs the M-series chips. So while it may be a problem, it’s still not anywhere close to the reason battery life sucks.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It can be if you run linux and throttle the chips. Even my older G14 last a long time, as the AMD SoCs are great, it can run fanless throttled down, and it just has a straight up bigger battery than razor thin Macs.

      But again, it’s just not configured this way in most laptops, which sacrifice battery for everything else because, well, OEMs are idiots.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t, I just run stock. I run an E495 and get something like 3-5 hours battery life, depending on what I’m doing, and after a few years of ownership, I still get around 3 hours battery life.

      • bamboo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Current gen MacBooks have massive batteries. The MacBook Pro 14 inch is 70-73Wh, same as your G14, and the 16 inch MBP is 100Wh, the legal limit to take on an airplane. Even the 13inch air, apple’s thinnest and smallest, is still 52Wh.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          On my G14, I just uses the ROG utility to disable turbo and make some kernel tweaks. I’ve used ryzenadj before, but its been awhile. And yes I measured battery drain in the terminal (but again its been awhile).

          Also throttling often produces the opposite result in terms of extended battery life as it likely takes more time in the higher states to do the same amount of work whereas running at a faster clock speed, the work is completed faster and the CPU returns to a lower less energy using state quicker and resides there more of the time.

          “Race to sleep” is true to some extent, but after a certain point the extra voltage one needs for higher clocks dramatically outweighs the benefit of the CPU sleeping longer. Modern CPUs turbo to ridiculously inefficient frequencies by default before they thermally throttle themselves.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Isn’t the screen eating most of the power in laptops? I just have an old T490 that I don’t use very much so I might be not that well informed.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I thought so too, but if Apple is getting more than 2x the battery life vs competitors while having a more dense screen, then I suppose it’s not as significant as I had thought.