On the notebook battery life testing standards

It was in June 2009 will be Intel sue on the courtroom that his own platform on the use of notebook battery life, the life of the existence of false propaganda and advertising is suspect. Disclosure of this information who is none other than Intel’s rival AMD, which can not help bring people’s attention again back on these two chips factory “notebook battery life” in a war of words up, this problem stems from the recent AMD Intel has publicly stated his notebook in promoting the technology, the user intentionally provided false information on a notebook battery life, adding that Intel used for propaganda Mobilemark test data is not a good indication of battery performance under actual use conditions . Is that really the case? AMD has what is called the color in which to play it?

In this issue find out first before we take a look at the event in the protagonist “Mobilemark” is the story behind this software in the end! It is the BAPCO introduced battery test software, test projects including office, multi-media production performance, DVD playback, pure read and wireless Internet access and many other applications. Here we mentioned BAPCO is a Intel, AMD, Dell, Hewlett-Packard co-founded several companies and other non-profit organization, in the process of making this software we can see that AMD has also led to participation because it is also the organization member companies. Thus was born a strange question, and since AMD and Intel, are the participants in the software development process, why one should question the other party does?

The focus of this test project is a key link in the “Show performance testing,” in fact this test software is not without this test link, but that this part of AMD’s missing some test items, leading to its notebook platform, the outstanding advantage is not reflected in the test, thereby affecting the overall score. This critical test item is related to the areas of computing 3D graphics tests, our there a list (this list is quoted Mobilemark in 2005 and 2007 in the test items of the details than the right), through which we did discover that besides the plane design, 3D video acceleration, as well as some of the computing needs of small office tests, none of them related to the display on the 3D system testing.

   To bypass this problem the two sides intensified escalation of the controversy, but both sides argue their respective positions clear. AMD To be truly objective view of the life-time data needs to be established on a comprehensive review of notebook performance, it is therefore missing link in the test does not fairly reflect the actual scores for all products, adding that if the adoption of other AMD notebook platform, test software scores of products 1691P , 1K500 , 1X793 will work with Mobilemark there is a big difference in the score under, and with the use of Intel notebook chips will make the gap between products no longer exist. This Intel also has its own view that Mobilemark for the laptop battery test results can be very accurately reflect the actual majority of people use laptops, and to deny the existence of false propaganda element.

   The key to AMD’s case, the focal point for controversy “Mobilemark” it is that a participant at the same time questioning who was involved in the end of its original purpose, or upset? I am afraid that this problem is only in its own clear, and even find out its own no. As the industry’s leading chip maker, AMD and Intel’s long-standing disputes, from 64 to native dual-core virtually all areas of both sides had any “collision”, and this is a rather awkward situation of AMD, in addition to our above-mentioned involved in the development of its own software design there is doubt, the deep-rooted problems result from the subtle relationship between the competitors. In any case, this thing Daoshi people gave birth to Intel’s concerns and the concerns of this test software.

In people are most concerned about an issue that is on the notebook platform for energy efficiency, Intel no doubt a better understanding about this dispute. Mobilemark tested items are often involved in the mass users to the application environment, office, entertainment, as well as graphic design, Inspiron B130 battery  AMD for the Intel platform in these tests has the advantage of the fact that key fact in this controversy is to be recognized The. It is questioned note on the equivalent of “If you set aside 3D computing performance, such as display, Intel enjoy advantages in the fact that AMD is not fair,” then even if the other test software in the display performance by adding more tests AMD platform with Intel Platforms there is no difference, the latter a universal user application environment also still has an energy-saving advantage.

       Other hand, AMD platforms, if you put aside shows the energy efficiency of its operations with the advantages of an equal footing with the Intel platform, will cease to exist! This kind of upset he did not do any good in the end is why? I fear that this AMD itself did not think clearly. In addition, “Who is using what software as a promotional focus on” also is not the key to mislead others, testing the application of software testing project is open to all, no one has done in the above changes, not to mention the software is in a AMD participation of the developed under the not out, while those who “Intel is the BAPCO behind the black hands” were more a matter of point of view that funny, unless AMD in the development process with other partners, there is a controversy, but until I press time have not heard AMD out of BAPCO news.

The notebook is a whole, chipset, platform is only part of the

     Editorial: But in the end on the test software can objectively reflect the fact that ThinkPad T60 battery life, we still difficult to prove, it is also explained from a perspective of these tests is only sent for a jointly developed a “benchmark” People come to comparison. And we really want to understand the notebook’s battery life but also from a practical point of view, the figures on the screen only can serve as a reference, “Practice is the only way to test the truth,” This sentence tells us that among firms saliva can only represent the heat of competition in the market and can not truly represent the notebook’s “heat.” If you really care about notebook FRU 92P1141 battery  life, the best way is to find the use of such products, users, and now the Internet is very developed, the exchange of information than a simple look at a single more effective. For companies, regardless of participation in, or upset have to make their own to solve the resulting embarrassment bar.