The CPU is just one factor in a laptop design. GPU, screen size, hard disk, chipset, cooling, etc. etc. etc. all suck juice as well. Comparing battery life based on CPUs alone is, at best, misleading if you can't build two laptops with exactly the same components except for their CPUs, which is, of course, often not the scenario since most manufacturers don't go with just one supplier for a particular component, let alone chipset exclusivity for both CPU camps.

Sure there are probably several Intel optimisations but there is only so much you can do. You still need energy efficient chipsets, disk drive, screen etc. AMD platforms may include better 3D graphics but it comes at a cost which Intel has been careful not to blow the power budget to chase. AMD may allow the CPU to use less power at low load but they drain the battery fast under high load due to slower moves to smaller fabrication. The PR and lawers budgets should be raided to pay for more R&D. PC gone wrong, can't read what I've said. Sorry. Blank box.

Firstly, anyone arguing against a more accurate real world benchmark is crazy!

The best analogy I read thus far is measuring fuel efficiency only on a down hill in neutral gear... I wonder who wouldn't be up in arms when they go to a dealership and see 235 MPG (1 L/100 km) car but only get 2.35 MPG (100 L/100 km). Sure you can fudge the numbers a bit say 25% people hitting +/- 5% the advertised numbers but rest are within 80% range (+/- 20%) or something like that. With laptop battery life numbers... it is like virtually no one ever gets even close to advertised numbers... you'll be lucky if you get close to 80% mark!

Yeah, it is a little humiliating when you are the underdog calling for more realistic benchmarks and don't have anything, in the short term, to address the underlying reason why you are behind in the benchmarks in the first place. Still that is separate from a real need for relevant and meaningful benchmarks. Why you, as a consumer, be against having say realistic battery life for different usage scenarios like gaming/office/internet/video/audio/idle? Or some way to condense a little more? If anything, I think we should all back AMD on this, even if it also serves AMD's pocket along the way (AMD is doing this out of self-interest for sure).

Also let me remind you... Patrick Moorhead, AMD's vice president for advanced marketing??? MARKETING?!!! He is doing his job and I am not sure if he can make Bobcat / K10.5 mobile ready any sooner?

Would a "6hrs" Intel laptop with say 3hrs of DVD playback vs. "4hrs" AMD laptop with 2.5hrs DVD playback change buying patterns? It probably would...

NOTE: Just making up numbers (using Intel getting 50%, AMD getting 62.5% of advertised numbers for DVD playback).

If that is true or anything close, I think Patrick Moorhead should push even harder. I want to see Intel stepping up and improving battery life even further than totally idle state.

What a load of dingo's kidneys!

Who the f**k cares about Intel and AMD when it comes to battery life. Either one should be measured in minutes, not hours.

Everyone knows ARM kicks 'em both in the gonads.

Now if it were battery life in dildos they were arguing about...

I gotta concur with pai here.Lately I think AMD is putting way too much resource into their ATI/GPUs' strategy hence why we're seeing stumbles on the CPU end.Hey I'm a gamer too,though I don't care much about anything that can run Crysis or not but seriously you can really see the stubborn focus there.Which is still misfiring in a way when you think about it,people are still griping about drivers so there's another sticky issue.They got the mobile IGP and midrange GPU covered but as platform,power consumption to heat aspects goes..well let's just say I'm still worrying.They gotta shape up and shape up double time.

Here is a list of pending "class action" lawsuits naming Intel as a defendant:

http://www.classadvocate.com/?direct=y&category=defendant&defendant_root%5B%5D=14103

Dear AMD, although I'm your fan and have bought two laptops for myself and at least 6 for my friends that used AMD chips. But you need to be more focused on this mobile/ultraportable/netbook segment by pushing your chips (or platform, whatever) to the market. Stop this humiliating trash talks cause it won't make you gain any market shares.

Where the hell is Bobcat? Or even K10.5-based mobile chips?