T410 with Optimus Battery Life - Terrible compared to T400
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:08 am
Hi guys, I've been looking around online and can't find much info on this, so I'm hoping some fellow Thinkpad enthusiasts can help me here. I just ordered two computers... a T400 with switchable ATI graphics for my wife, and a T410 with the auto switching NVidia Optimus graphics (2518-AJU) for me. The battery life on the two is drastically different, and I'm wondering if I have a bad driver, or if the T410 really does have such bad battery life.
The T400 came factory downgraded to XP. XP apparently can't support switchable graphics, so I changed it in the BIOS to integrated. Awesome battery life, like 9:30 or so on the nine cell.
We then moved it to 7Pro (64), it's battery life is not as good, but still like 7 or so. Pretty good.
My T410 has 7Pro64 on it as well, and it gets about 4 hours with the nine cell - under the same kind of usage, some light web browsing.
My immediate suspicion was that even though I wasn't doing anything that required the discreet graphics, maybe a driver was leaving them on anyway or something, because 4 hours is about what I'd expect if using the graphics. However, I found a handy little tool here:
http://files.laptopvideo2go.com/Nautis/ ... _64bit.exe
The tool shows if the Nvidia card is active or not, and it says not. So, effectively I have a T410 on integrated graphics only getting 4 hours out of a 9 cell battery - is that even possible?
The incredible thing is, she has the P8700 and I have an i5 560m, so the processors are both even clocked about the same - are i5's really so much power hungrier? They're both similar computers, spec-wise - LED backlight, same WSXGA screen, lots of memory in both, same 320GB 7200rpm drive, etc.
Were the T400's really that much better on battery life than the T410's?
OR
How much battery life does a T410 with integrated graphics get on a 9 cell? Is it about the same four hours I'm seeing here, or more?
I wanted the T410 so I could have eSata and a little faster processor/graphics - but if it means less than half of the battery life, I'll get a switchable T400 and just buy an esata Expresscard!
Thanks for any advice!
The T400 came factory downgraded to XP. XP apparently can't support switchable graphics, so I changed it in the BIOS to integrated. Awesome battery life, like 9:30 or so on the nine cell.
We then moved it to 7Pro (64), it's battery life is not as good, but still like 7 or so. Pretty good.
My T410 has 7Pro64 on it as well, and it gets about 4 hours with the nine cell - under the same kind of usage, some light web browsing.
My immediate suspicion was that even though I wasn't doing anything that required the discreet graphics, maybe a driver was leaving them on anyway or something, because 4 hours is about what I'd expect if using the graphics. However, I found a handy little tool here:
http://files.laptopvideo2go.com/Nautis/ ... _64bit.exe
The tool shows if the Nvidia card is active or not, and it says not. So, effectively I have a T410 on integrated graphics only getting 4 hours out of a 9 cell battery - is that even possible?
The incredible thing is, she has the P8700 and I have an i5 560m, so the processors are both even clocked about the same - are i5's really so much power hungrier? They're both similar computers, spec-wise - LED backlight, same WSXGA screen, lots of memory in both, same 320GB 7200rpm drive, etc.
Were the T400's really that much better on battery life than the T410's?
OR
How much battery life does a T410 with integrated graphics get on a 9 cell? Is it about the same four hours I'm seeing here, or more?
I wanted the T410 so I could have eSata and a little faster processor/graphics - but if it means less than half of the battery life, I'll get a switchable T400 and just buy an esata Expresscard!
Thanks for any advice!