That's why batteries are calibrated and the 30% your device is displaying is actually a 30% of the stored energy remaining.
You're amusing.
You're amusing.
That's why batteries are calibrated and the 30% your device is displaying is actually a 30% of the stored energy remaining.
You're amusing.
Dunno where you're from but devices with batteries come with a damn chip which does several measurements to ensure an even distribution of the stored energy. So a properly calibrated battery doesn't drain faster when it's closer to be empty.Stored energy and available energy are two different things.
Actualy the battery discharge rate is estimated by measuring
its voltage not its real charge.
FYI, everyone needs to realize that when web browsing, the CPU is unlikely to be the only thing drawing power. In a computer, you typically have a display, drive, networking, etc... all of those pull power.
So if it can brows the web for 8.5 hours on a 31 watt-hour battery, and the math says that's an average draw of 3.5W, then that means the CPU/SOC only draws some fraction of that.
FYI, I took delivery today of my own, personal T100 and am posting from it.
Benchmark requests?
It took me a little bit to find someone who would ship it for deliver today, rather than shipping it today. So far so good... of course the battery isn't fully charged yet, but IE/Chrome/Firefox/Minecraft seem to work okay. (The kids were begging .
Dunno where you're from but devices with batteries come with a damn chip which does several measurements to ensure an even distribution of the stored energy. So a properly calibrated battery doesn't drain faster when it's closer to be empty.
Allowing the last 15% of your battery to last less than the first 15% after a charge is way too dumb. What do you think battery calibration is for then?
Stop making up arguments, please.
FYI, I took delivery today of my own, personal T100 and am posting from it.
Benchmark requests?
It took me a little bit to find someone who would ship it for deliver today, rather than shipping it today. So far so good... of course the battery isn't fully charged yet, but IE/Chrome/Firefox/Minecraft seem to work okay. (The kids were begging .
Benchmark requests?
And what was the power comsumption for thoses perfs
to occur.??.
Strange that Anand made a ton of benchs but did
elude power comsumption tests wich would have showed
much bigger numbers than what was displayed at IDF ,
guess it would have been annoying to display such
oddities, hence the complete silence on the much
hyped power comsumption numbers.
Unfortunately ASUS delivered our T100 review sample less than 48 hours ago and Ive been using it non-stop since then. I think I technically broke embargo by using it at a press event but its the only way Id get enough time with the thing under my belt to feel comfortable writing about it. The bad news is that I only had enough time to provide a battery life teaser. Im still running more data but for now all Ive got is our WiFi web browsing test.
10:01AM EDT - (Side note, I'm still testing video playback battery life on the ASUS T100 during the press conference)
9 hours number is pure MSI marketing (''when reading ebooks or performing word processing'') , you cant compare this crap to retail Bay Trail-T PC numbers. ASUS also says T100 lasts up to 11 hours on a single charge, yet real life numbers are a bit lower (more like ~9 hours web browsing). Anyway, only fanboys would choose a chip with 1/3 of Z3740's MT CPU performance, thats why traditional PC OEMs chose Bay Trail-T for their x86 Windows 8.1 tablets.
Thanks for the numbers. According to MSI marketing W20's battery life is up to 6 hours when playing 1080p videos.
“If you take a look at things like transistor density and you compare, pardon the pun, apples-to-apples and you compare, say, the A7 to our Bay Trail, which is a high density 22 nanometer technology, then our transistor density is higher or more dense than the A7 is.” Krazinich said. ”It's a good product...but we do see the Moore's Law advantage from 28 to 22 nanometer as an example, when you compare dense technologies to dense technologies.”
Not a benchmark, but I'm quite curious as to whether or not the Intel Power Gadget - http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-power-gadget-20 - works on Baytrail. While I know some will question its accuracy it'd at least give a good impression of SoC power consumption if it works.
Congrats, great buy!
32GB or 64GB version? What is your impression of Bay Trail-T performance under Windows 8.1 right now?
minecrack? can you post video?!?
also for webbrowsing power draw, the bursty nature of intels design plays well with the intermittent workloads ei constructing page -> high load/turbo for a few seconds and rendering page -> low load/no-turbo for most of the time...
so ive been playing with some w8.1 stuff on my ultrabook. I didn't really realize how much smoother/responsive ie 11 was vs chrome. id read a chrome hate thread on neogaf but never really understood why until I got back into ie. this browser is such a massive stepup from IE8 its not even funny. its too bad anand using chrome for all his testing as im going to be using ie on whatever baytrail or fanless haswell I end up getting. win 8.1 is such a fantastic os, haters be damned. I can't wait to find the right tablet for me now.
It's pretty funny, Chrome started as a lightweight browser with minimal resource usage. That has changed so drastically over the past year or so, chrome is an absolute bloated pig now.
That said, it's still my favorite browser . EXCEPT on mobile devices. It's the worst android browser, for some reason, which makes no sense. But on my desktop it's chrome and nothing but. I have not tried IE11 on Win 8.1 yet, though. Haven't been a fan of IE at all, but I guess i'll give it a shot later.
I downloaded it, installed it, and it wouldn't launch. I set it as administrator, tried it with Windows 8 and Windows7 compatibility. So far no dice.
Anyway, slim, how "snappy" does the system feel overall? When opening something like chrome or IE?