Thanks for sharing @Mario_Limonciello, that’s quite a drastic power reduction. I can’t help but wonder if it changes for productivity tasks like text editing though given the differences in pixel change frequency. If that’s part of a recorded presentation, I would be interested in watching it.
There seems to be a lot of negativity around this feature, and I wanted to share my perspective. I would argue that there most definitely is a use case for 0.5W of savings. Especially if that can be increased to 1.45W if applied more aggressively. A vast majority of the time I’m spending on my laptop, I do not need the full level of fidelity the display can offer and have gone to great lengths in order to minimize my power draw. An additional 0.5-1.45W savings translates up to an additional 1.5 to 5.5 hours of battery life… which is as long as some laptops last in total.
I understand that the image quality trade-off for power savings may not be worth it for many of you, but for people like me it definitely is.
Back before the Framework came out I created a graph of potential battery life estimates. As you can see, as total power usage decreases the battery life in hours increases non-linearly. Meaning if you’ve got your laptop already running pretty efficient, a whole 0.5-1.45W of savings can make quite a large difference. Unless someone has specifically attempted to improve their battery life, I would guess they’re sitting around 10-15W of draw, whereas mine regularly sits between 6 and 7, which has a visible benefit to those power savings.
All of that said, I do think regular users could benefit from greater visibility on the trade-offs being made with this technology.