Yeah, Intel’s Turbo Boost versioning is confusing.
Here’s why you’re still boosting:
And from WikiChip:
1 Like
Thanks for the replies. Some interesting behaviour during some testing. With the additional 2 settings turned off (speedstep and speedshift) the cores are essentially parked at 1.7ghz P cores, 1.2ghz E Cores, over my short period of testing:
Max CPU Package Power: 6W
Avg CPU Package Power: 1.612
It is also possible with WiFi and Bluetooth switched off to achieve total system power draw as measured by draw from the battery to -2.5W = 20.83 hrs of battery.
My average with the laptop in this state just typing out this comment and during general usage with this laptop was -5.5W (Wifi + Bluetooth now on) = 10 hrs of usage.
Core clocks seem very low, but the machine is not noticeably slow in anyway for general usage. Probably not the best solution for everyone, but it does significantly improve the battery life.
Interestingly, in this state in a multi-core performance test, with the CPU using between 13-15W maximum the Cinebench R23 Multi score is 5798, which is faster than an i7-1165G7 with no power limits @ 4904.
1 Like
Yep, boost/turbo/speedstep whatever is mostly marketing and benchmark fodder. That and a life of noisy fans.
Switch if all off. Only takes seconds to turn it back on if you ever need it.
Maybe FW could add a single Turbo Boost on/off option so its a one tick thing.
1 Like
Out of curiosity what do you guys set your brightness levels to? I generally set to 50% but seems that really pulls the battery life down.
I use it at zero VERY often, anything above is way to harsh on my eyes especially past sundown. Maybe light sensitivity is different for different people…
5 Likes
I have the brightness set pretty low, and I have the Night Light turning on in the evenings
1 Like
Not sure this is the best place to put this, but this was my first port of call after having performance issues with my 1280p in a printed mainboard case.
I made the assumption that any old Usb C power adapter with a 20v 65w and up would work, and they do, but I need this machine to operate at full performance, rather than full efficiency as many users seem to prefer. I tested the machine with cinebench R23, expecting the 11000 score advertised in Frameworks blog, however the most it would do it 9500.
After much testing and messing around, plus advice from support, Ive established a high performance power plan in windows, and settled on a 140w Apple charger with Apples original USB C cable. Nothing else will give me that score.
For anyone looking to do the same, rather than going through individual power settings, if you have a fresh install of Windows which doesnt reveal the standard High Performance power settings, I used these commands in Terminal (Admin):
REG ADD HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\19cbb8fa-5279-450e-9fac-8a3d5fedd0c1\12bbebe6-58d6-4636-95bb-3217ef867c1a /v Attributes /t REG_DWORD /d 2 /f
and
reg add HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power /v PlatformAoAcOverride /t REG_DWORD /d 0
Im sure there are other ways, but that has been my experience…
2 Likes
It very possibly might just be the sillicon lottery!
Applying better thermal paste should give your CPU more performance though 
1 Like
Found one large culprit for 5 hr batt life on the Laptop 13 Intel 13th gen - The Intel Graphics Command Center. Yes, it does have batt life affecting settings (good), but on this 13th gen, it also has a background process that runs constantly at 5-10% of processor after the program is installed. Turn that off in Start Up tab of the Task Manager, and got another 3 hours of battery life! That same program doesn’t affect another laptop that I have, so maybe the problem is related to that 13th gen processor?? Anyway - this is good and an easy fix for anyone else that sees that process to be constantly at the top of their Task / Processes list.
Other findings still welcome! Am hoping not to have to run Windows Battery Saver mode constantly on this new laptop.
1 Like