3 ms·

Is the battery life that big of a deal? It's something like 9 hours to 12 hours (or something close) for MBP vs MBA. I just don't see that as a major difference

Is the battery life that big of a deal? It's something like 9 hours to 12 hours (or something close) for MBP vs MBA. I just don't see that as a major difference - it's not like a 1.7g vs 2.8g CPU.

rayiner 13y ago
Battery life is a way bigger deal than a 1.7g versus 2.8g CPU. My 2010 MBA with its circa-2008 CPU (Apple hung on to the Core 2 Duo for a long time) is plenty fast for me, even for development work. At this point, I'd much rather have a machine that I only had to charge once a week.
- ScottWhigham 13y ago
  I think you sort of missed what I'm saying - we're talking about a MBP that has better battery life already than your 2010 MBA. The 2013 MBP has a 9-hour battery life compared to the 12-hour 2013 MBA battery life. That's a "difference" but is that extra three hours of battery life worth trading for a 60% faster processor? I don't see that as a good trade off.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Sorry, I read out the word "the". I thought you were saying "battery life is good enough." I would rather have the 3 extra hours than the 60% faster processor (though I would rather have the retina display than the 3 extra hours). My aging MBA compiles LLVM, the biggest thing I ever build these days, in 10-12 minutes. Do I care if that number is 7-8 instead? Not really. On the other hand, three extra hours can mean leaving the charger at home.
jrk 13y ago
The rated CPU speed is nearly meaningless for machine responsiveness or even bursts of heavy usage (Photoshop edits; compiling changed files) given the dynamic voltage and frequency scaling ("Turbo"). Both the "1.7 GHz" 4650U in the Air and the "2.8 GHz" turbo to the same peak of 3.3 GHz, have the same sized cache, same memory interface, same base GPU clock, nearly the same peak turbo GPU clock, and cost the exact same number of dollars. They are the "same" CPU, with different tuning for sustained thermal allowances.
gte910h 13y ago
9 to 12 hours in year one, vs 6.5 to 9.5 in year 3

Is the battery life that big of a deal? It's something like 9 hours to 12 hours (or something close) for MBP vs MBA. I just don't see that as a major difference - it's not like a 1.7g vs 2.8g CPU.

rayiner 13y ago

Battery life is a way bigger deal than a 1.7g versus 2.8g CPU. My 2010 MBA with its circa-2008 CPU (Apple hung on to the Core 2 Duo for a long time) is plenty fast for me, even for development work. At this point, I'd much rather have a machine that I only had to charge once a week.

ScottWhigham 13y ago
I think you sort of missed what I'm saying - we're talking about a MBP that has better battery life already than your 2010 MBA. The 2013 MBP has a 9-hour battery life compared to the 12-hour 2013 MBA battery life. That's a "difference" but is that extra three hours of battery life worth trading for a 60% faster processor? I don't see that as a good trade off.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Sorry, I read out the word "the". I thought you were saying "battery life is good enough." I would rather have the 3 extra hours than the 60% faster processor (though I would rather have the retina display than the 3 extra hours). My aging MBA compiles LLVM, the biggest thing I ever build these days, in 10-12 minutes. Do I care if that number is 7-8 instead? Not really. On the other hand, three extra hours can mean leaving the charger at home.

jrk 13y ago

The rated CPU speed is nearly meaningless for machine responsiveness or even bursts of heavy usage (Photoshop edits; compiling changed files) given the dynamic voltage and frequency scaling ("Turbo"). Both the "1.7 GHz" 4650U in the Air and the "2.8 GHz" turbo to the same peak of 3.3 GHz, have the same sized cache, same memory interface, same base GPU clock, nearly the same peak turbo GPU clock, and cost the exact same number of dollars. They are the "same" CPU, with different tuning for sustained thermal allowances.

gte910h 13y ago

9 to 12 hours in year one, vs 6.5 to 9.5 in year 3