x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • First Intel Medfield battery tests are out: battery hog myth busted

First Intel Medfield battery tests are out: battery hog myth busted

Posted: , by Victor H.

Tags:

First Intel Medfield battery tests are out: battery hog myth busted
The first x86-based Intel Medfield phone is finally out and while we’ve seen it performs on par with current dual-core Cortex A9 setups, the myth of Intel architectures failing when it comes to battery life persisted. All the way until now - the first battery tests for the Lava Xolo X900, the first Medfield phone, are out and they bust the myth of poor power efficiency on x86.

AnandTech got the Xolo X900 for a spin in its battery labs, and the results confirm Intel’s claims of good power management. First, though, it has to be noted that the Xolo X900 comes with a small battery when compared to the competition - with capacity of only 5.4Whr, the battery is below the average 6Whr on most other handsets.

So how does it perform? Intel’s claims of 5 hours of continuous 3G browsing and 8 hours of talk time proved legitimate as actual testing resulted in the phone lasting 4.6 hours on 3G and 8.5 hours for talk. AnandTech tests the screen at 200 nits and by loading a few dozen pages endlessly over WCDMA or WiFi. Its other, WiFi hotspot tethering test attaches a single device and streams 128 kbps MP3 audio and loads four tabs of the previous browser test over WCDMA with the screen off. 

So while the X900 falls below the average on the tests, if the results get normalized for the smaller battery, it turns out that the battery life is right in the middle of current chips, performing almost as well as TI’s OMAP 4 phones.

We’d say that this is a good start for Intel’s Medfield-based phones and it alleviates all fears that the platform will be a battery hog. It’s not, and it performs reasonably well beating the TI OMAP 4460-based Galaxy Nexus easily on some tests. Check out the full benchmark results at the source below, and let us know if now you’re convinced that Intel on phones is a viable idea.

source: AnandTech

19 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 25 Apr 2012, 06:44 1

1. shy2papa (Posts: 209; Member since: 23 Jan 2010)


This test are kind off funny form other test i have see the Motorola Droid razr maxx beats everything on every category

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 19:02 1

16. cepcamba (Posts: 717; Member since: 27 Feb 2012)


There's a 4000mAH Mugen battery for the Xperia Arc S and that could beat the RAZR MAXX!! It's not stock though :p

And by the way, it makes the Xperia Arc S look like a whale :p

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:49

17. Cwebb (Posts: 501; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)


Damn, a massive battery on top of a not quite petite phone.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 06:45 3

2. kshell1 (Posts: 1143; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)


When one comes out with ICS, and better app compatibility ill give it a try. Otherwise looks like a very promising device.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 06:46 3

3. jroc74 (Posts: 4974; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Would be nice to know the actual mAh size of the battery tho....

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 09:55 1

11. iCandy (Posts: 46; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)


True. The processor seems to offer good performance (even without the consideration that it is a single core) and reasonable battery life versus the competition. But I have to comment the critical question here is what is the cost difference in comparison to the current single core/dual core/quad core ARM based processors? Does any one know?

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 06:47 6

4. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


So why didn't they just put in a big batter to get rid of all the Android battery issues?

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 07:06 1

5. Glim12808 (Posts: 393; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)


Good question! But probably to enable the carrier to sell the device at a lower and competitive price point. In any case, with it's present battery, the performance is very promising!

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:41

15. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


It 'tis indeed.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 08:32 7

6. Bluesky02 (Posts: 1439; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)


This is indeed an encouraging news. Intel is catching up pretty fast. By next year, they'll have ready made smartphone chip.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 08:56

7. quryous (banned) (Posts: 106; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)


Sorry, guys, but that is about 1/10th the battery staying power that users want and need. Back to the starting line. Not even close.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 09:12 6

8. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


You know

With all the itrolls trying to tout battery life, ITS funny to see how low on the list the iPhone is

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 11:22

12. eaxvac (Posts: 328; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)


Lol fandroid

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 12:03 1

13. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1005; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Did you actually check the images of the article? The iPhone is only short in battery capacity, but in "battery life for browsing" is the fist one. Probably for a good mixture of OS optimization and size of screen, but still, they can tout.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 09:21 2

9. PackMan (Posts: 277; Member since: 09 Mar 2012)


Seems like a good start for intel. When these chips start to tick-tock and intel moves into smaller processes and better architechture it will blow those snapdragon, omaps and exynos away ha ha. The likes of tsmc and other companies are already having trouble manufacturing 28nm chips, i wonder what they will do when things get even smaller.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 09:21 2

10. PackMan (Posts: 277; Member since: 09 Mar 2012)


Seems like a good start for intel. When these chips start to tick-tock and intel moves into smaller processes and better architechture it will blow those snapdragon, omaps and exynos away ha ha. The likes of tsmc and other companies are already having trouble manufacturing 28nm chips, i wonder what they will do when things get even smaller.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 14:55 1

14. torr310 (Posts: 398; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)


Good to have one more choice... especially from the chip giant.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 22:11 1

18. BattleBrat (Posts: 1102; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)


I'm calling BS on the iPhone 4s stats, it had one, it wouldn't IDLE for 12 hours, let alone surf the net for 9

posted on 26 Apr 2012, 00:53

19. xfire99 (Posts: 542; Member since: 14 Mar 2012)


Where is iphone 4S hotspot battery test? It show really bad results and Apple paid Anandtech not to post it?

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories