I believe it is 3 hours battery life in tablet only mode. Sorry, not sure what other performance question you mean.
Whoa. New "Surface Book" just shown
- Thread starter scauffiel
- Start date
I believe it is 3 hours battery life in tablet only mode. Sorry, not sure what other performance question you mean.
Foreverseeking
Member
Couldn't agree more, and pray that is the future of this device. The more I learn about it, the less I like. I will likely get the surface pro 4, as I really adore the kickstand on the SP3. Also, I really want one USB in the tablet so I can use USB keys.
Yes the more I think about it....I left my MacBook for a Surface for its form factor, the Book is turning it into a normal laptop again with its issues in the clamshell design in limited space area like the flipdown table on a train or plane.
But wow, just seen the cost of the i7 16GB Surface Pro 4....That is just silly money...I think I'm going to pass on it for now.
But wow, just seen the cost of the i7 16GB Surface Pro 4....That is just silly money...I think I'm going to pass on it for now.
Simple math on that... 12 hour battery life x .25 = 3 hours.
Using advanced power management when detached you might stretch it a bit longer.
That is assuming that everything is linear and simple.
All of the processing power, short of the dedicated GPU if equipped, appears to be in the tablet half, so performance should be fine. During the reveal when they claimed that it's 'twice as fast' as a MacBook Pro I thought they might have a second CPU or something in the base, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Given that, I suspect that 'twice as fast' claim is quite a stretch. I suspect they are still using 15w dual-core u-series chips here, whereas the 13" MacBook Pro is using an older generation chip, but at 28w TDP.
Id speculate the 2x speed claim is based on a particular graphics benchmark using the GPU. That doesn't make it a lie but like any marketing statement, you have to keep a shaker of salt handy and use liberally.
Performance faster than 80% of portable PCs sold. OK... Define portable PCs sold as qualified for this iPad Pro claim
I'm sure it's true IF you qualify the set of "portable PCs sold" they way Apple did for this statement. It wont be what most people think. "I suspect they are still using 15w dual-core u-series chips here" Absolutely.
Ars Technica has a video hands-on and they show the screen with the CPU info and it's a i5-6300u which is exactly as I thought - 15w dual-core.
Certainly everyone makes outrageous claims, but this one was made as a direct comparison to a specific product and I just don't see it holding up in any sense of the word.
Certainly everyone makes outrageous claims, but this one was made as a direct comparison to a specific product and I just don't see it holding up in any sense of the word.
MissionMan
Member
I saw an article this evening that said the benchmark came from a 2012 MacBook Pro. Not exactly an accurate benchmark. I hate marketing people. Why even bother putting that stuff out there. Let the product speak for itself. It's a good product, there is no need to add statements like that.
CrippsCorner
Well-Known Member
Twice as fast is of course just great marketing... something else they're trying to catch up to Apple with! Luckily they did it with the event, wow, really awesome.
