Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning - while you were reading a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by DavidC1

- Today at 00:48:18

Quote from: bert5656 on Yesterday at 02:24:06
Quote from: TheWerewolf on March 22, 2026, 22:30:0124 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.
Its because this Dell XPS 16 has a 1080p display which lowers idle watts, not only that its a LTPO display meanning it goes down to 1Hz. Apple's laptop displays are much higher res than 1080p.

Look at the review for the XPS 16. It doesn't have LTPO 1Hz enabled. With it the battery life likely goes from 26.6 hours to Dell's claimed 31 hours.

There's also XPS 14 with the high res 2880 x 1800 display and that gets 16 hours, comparable to Macbook Pro. Remember the Macbook Pros also have 99.9WHr battery. Pantherlake light load/bursty load battery is in line with Macbooks.

Posted by Childlike wonder

- Yesterday at 22:24:28

I would still like to see how the efficiency is under mixed loads when stressing the 3d graphics driver stack to it's limits with capped tdp (15w, 17w, 20w, 25w, 28w, 35w, 45w, etc).

Stuff like running modern 3d emulators such as shadps4, rpcs3, xemu, etc @ capped framerates (30/60).

How it compares vs other SoCs / APUs (halo, etc). I think what you'll find is PTL still has the advantage but it's no as large anymore.

It'd also be nice if when running games more optimized settings were used. I'm seeing often a PTL chip when being benchmarked using 50w (25w going towards igpu), like c'mon, you do not need 25w for the cpu alone, you could probably cap cpu wattage to 15w or even 12w-13w and it would still perform 95% as well in most games. (Besides like super heavy cpu ones like bf6) That would give significantly better battery life and less noise / heat output..

C'mon NBC Team. Ive faith in you. :')

Posted by JBOY

- Yesterday at 16:47:13

Quote from: banmacOS on Yesterday at 05:16:39
Quote from: bert5656 on Yesterday at 02:24:06
Quote from: TheWerewolf on March 22, 2026, 22:30:0124 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.
Its because this Dell XPS 16 has a 1080p display which lowers idle watts, not only that its a LTPO display meanning it goes down to 1Hz. Apple's laptop displays are much higher res than 1080p.
that is a blatant lie. their displays are absolutely not "much higher res". it's only a <15% difference and with the Neo is actually WORSE.

You don't math very well. The MacBook Pro 16" resolution is 3546x2234, or 7.7M+ pixels. The Dell XPS 16 (supposedly competitive with the MacBook Pro by price and positioning) has a result of 2560x1600. This is just over 4M pixels. It's also a much poorer quality and dimmer display. Now you switch over to comparing Dell's "pro" class machine to a $599 MacBook Neo -- really? I think the lie accusation is missplaced.

Posted by banmacOS

- Yesterday at 05:16:39

Quote from: bert5656 on Yesterday at 02:24:06
Quote from: TheWerewolf on March 22, 2026, 22:30:0124 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.
Its because this Dell XPS 16 has a 1080p display which lowers idle watts, not only that its a LTPO display meanning it goes down to 1Hz. Apple's laptop displays are much higher res than 1080p.

that is a blatant lie. their displays are absolutely not "much higher res". it's only a <15% difference and with the Neo is actually WORSE.

Posted by bert5656

- Yesterday at 02:24:06

Quote from: TheWerewolf on March 22, 2026, 22:30:0124 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.

Its because this Dell XPS 16 has a 1080p display which lowers idle watts, not only that its a LTPO display meanning it goes down to 1Hz. Apple's laptop displays are much higher res than 1080p.

Posted by Gallo123

- March 22, 2026, 23:29:25

Quote from: TheWerewolf on March 22, 2026, 22:30:0124 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.

Very true but unfortunately positive Apple articles get so much more clicks and attention farming. Partly the reason why simple things get praised so much, because Google SEO just prefers it.

Posted by TheWerewolf

- March 22, 2026, 22:30:01

24 hours of real world battery life on a standard Intel PC. And all we get is mild applause.
If this had been a MacBook, we're be reading about how it CRUSHES the competition and is a game changer.
Usual double standard.

Posted by Redaktion

- March 22, 2026, 21:44:05

The 16-inch laptop just barely cracks 1 W when idling to be much more efficient than most competitors. Real-world battery life tests show the system lasting for more than 24 hours of constant web browsing.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Panther-Lake-XPS-16-is-so-efficient-it-draws-just-1-5-W-when-idling-for-insanely-long-battery-life.1255734.0.html