Home Hardware HP Benchmarking: Battery Drain tx2051 vs tx2525

HP Benchmarking: Battery Drain tx2051 vs tx2525

I had to run these test a few time to get it right as it was my first time using Battery Meter, but I figured everything out and finally have the results.   To make the tests more accurate, I used the same battery in each test.   I ran the test in the tx2525, pulled the battery and then put it into the tx2051.   I figured that would at least take one variable out of the equation.   Below are the results of the testing, I’ll let the graphs speak for themselves.   I’ll give the short of it though – tx2051 lasted 18 ticks longer.   Initial thoughts on the matter are that the dedicated graphics card might take a little more juice as the test application is graphical in nature.

Click on each graph to see a larger image.

HP Pavilion tx2051
AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-66 – 2.3 Ghz
250 GB 5400 RPM HDD
4 gig DDR2 RAM
Nvidia GeForce Go 6150 – Shared
Vista Ultimate x64
HP Pavilion tx2525
AMD Turion 64 X2 RM-70 – 2.0 Ghz
250 GB 5400 RPM HDD
3 gig DDR2 RAM
ATI HD 3200 – 64MB Dedicated
Vista Ultimate x64
2051battery 2525battery

Some settings below as I set each one to have the same –

  • High Performance
  • Shut off at 5%
  • Screen back light on the whole time – Full Brightness
Load More In Hardware

One Comment

  1. Mario Filipe

    12/15/2008 at 7:38 pm

    Good call, using the same battery on both tests to remove the wear factor on older tx2051. Things aren’t looking too bright for the tx2525, these results are, again, the opposite of what I would expect. I was expecting that the Puma platform would be more energy efficient, particularly considering that the AMD Turion 64 X2 RM-70 has a lower nominal TDP (31 W) than the TL-66 (35 W). Just a remark, both the Nvidia GeForce Go 6150 and ATI HD 3200 are integrated graphics chips. The dedicated 64 MB on the ATI HD 3200 are used mainly as a cache to compensate the higher latency of the shared system RAM which is used as framebuffer memory. The Nvidia GeForce Go uses a similar technology called TurboCache (ATI’s called Hypermemory) although I can’t find how much dedicated memory this chip carries.
    I’m not familiar with the battery meter software you used, but it would be interesting to see how both systems fare in real-life use battery test, like playing a video file or DVD, or web surfing on Wi-Fi (maybe you Matt or some other savvy reader could come up with an autohotkey/shell/vbscript to load up web pages at a certain interval to perform this test).

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *