 |
 |
 |
|
 |
You are not logged in.
I loaded Battery Eater on my EEE and ran it in classic mode, with everything on, nothing shutting off and no screen saver, to see how long the battery would last under the most extreme conditions...Click on the link to see the results. Also would like to see other results as well...
As you can see, the battery died after 2:29:51.
P.S. My HP 17" Notebook only made it 1:05:43.
Battery Eater EEEPC Results
Andy
Last edited by andyman58 (2008-01-10 8:38:49 pm)
Offline
That's somewhat like my estimation actually. Were you running at 900mhz with something in the SD slot?
Offline
Does that test constantly write to the SSD?
Offline
"Battery Eater Pro is an application that exists solely for the purpose of making life hell for your portable computer's battery. Rather than giving you a best case scenario prediction of the battery life in your notebook, Battery Eater Pro uses every power-hungry option to try to drain your battery as fast as possible. This is in many ways a better benchmark, since it's consistently repeatable, and lets you know what you can expect under the worst conditions. During testing the utility stresses the CPU, RAM, HDD and videocard. For optimal results (meaning the worst battery time), make sure that you turn on WiFi, BlueTooth and IR ports. Despite it's name, Battery Eater Pro is free." downloadsquad.com
Offline
Ultimate Chicken wrote:
That's somewhat like my estimation actually. Were you running at 900mhz with something in the SD slot?
Had you bothered to click the link, you'd have your answer.
Offline
Is there an option to stop it writing to the HDD, I know the SSD will last ages, but prevention is better than cure. 
Offline
It has a custom setting so you can just have it run @ idle to get your maximum battery life...But it's only a 2-3 hour test @ max stress anyway, and it's good to give a new computer a "burn in" to stress components to see if anything will fail anyway.
Offline
I'd be curious to see anyone elses test (hint...run the darn test and post!!!), as my HP had a pretty linear power graph from the battery, but the EEE dropped fast, then levelled out for the duration of the test.
Last edited by andyman58 (2008-01-11 9:04:31 am)
Offline
Wanna post my results with Battery Eater v2.70:
CPU@630MHz
Classic mode:
2h 23min
Pi calculations: 3768 Cycles
HDD read/write: 22576Mb
Frames rendered: 329102 Frames
Reader's Test:
2h 41min
Pi calculations: 645 Cycles
HDD read/write: 0Mb
Frames rendered: 0 Frames
Anyone who don't like too much SSD read/writes can use the "Reader's Test" Option.
Last edited by HKCU (2008-01-15 2:20:48 am)
Offline
Did your battery graph look similar to mine?
Last edited by andyman58 (2008-01-15 8:07:54 am)
Offline
So, does something get turned off with 10% left, or does the eee really report <10% battery for half the battery life?
Offline
The_T wrote:
So, does something get turned off with 10% left, or does the eee really report <10% battery for half the battery life?
Computer ran OK till end, wondering why I have such a unlenear pattern also...
Offline
That has to be an ACPI glitch. There's no way it would run for 75 minutes on 10%, even if Chevy made it. HKCU's looks more like what I'd expect.
What BIOS are you each using?
I sense an Eeeclock battery test coming...
Offline
I was thinking about if there was a difference between the last 2 stable bios revisions 0401 and 0703
So I tested both about 8 hours 
Here are the results which make me think that there is a difference in 0703 Power management...
0401 Bios Results
0703 Bios Results
Offline
andyman58 wrote:
I'd be curious to see anyone elses test (hint...run the darn test and post!!!), as my HP had a pretty linear power graph from the battery, but the EEE dropped fast, then levelled out for the duration of the test.
http://webpages.charter.net/andyman58/Discharge.gif
Your graph is not linear as asus battery meter sometimes jumps from 50% or 40% to 10%
.. they really should fix the acpi and meter related code
.. and that's why it never goes under 7% .. i have set mine to sleep at 8% to avoid hanging..
Offline
so here are my results:
bios: 0703
total memory: 504
CPU@630MHz
Classic mode:
Total time: 2:41:12
Pi calculations: 7524 Cycles
HDD read/write: 16403 Mb
Frames rendered: 338489 Frames
i deactivated (normal) lan and the webcam. brightness was set to the half.
has anyone an idea, why my HDD bench is much worse compared to the posted results?
Offline
georg7887 wrote:
so here are my results:
bios: 0703
total memory: 504
CPU@630MHz
Classic mode:
Total time: 2:41:12
Pi calculations: 7524 Cycles
HDD read/write: 16403 Mb
Frames rendered: 338489 Frames
i deactivated (normal) lan and the webcam. brightness was set to the half.
has anyone an idea, why my HDD bench is much worse compared to the posted results?
Maybe a software working @ background which is using resources making your ssd slower.
Offline
I don't know that that's a benchmark. Pi, HDD, and Frames are all over the place on everyone's runs. I'd also assume that time spent doing Pi and rendering can't be time spent doing HDD, and those values are somewhat higher in yours than most of the others.
Sure, the numbers indicate work across time, which is -part- of a benchmark, but they may not be properly isolated to be a solid measurement.
Offline
