Fails of 2022: the Intel P-series was a step back
There was no need to kill the battery life of every ultraportable that came out this year.
The Verge’s 2022 in review
It has been difficult to find great laptops this year.
That’s partially because 2022 has been a bit of a building year for some
companies, especially on the consumer side. It’s also because of the Intel
P-series.
I reviewed a number of laptops in 2022 across consumer,
workstation, gaming, business, Chromebook, and everywhere else. I touched all
of the major brands. But I had a particular focus on ultraportables this year —
that is, thin and light devices that people buy to use, say, on their couch at
home — because, with Apple’s MacBooks in such a dominant position, many eyes
have been on their competitors on the Windows side.
For many of these models, I found myself writing the same
review over and over and over. They were generally good. They performed well.
But their battery life was bad.
They were generally good. They performed well. But their
battery life was bad
What these laptops had in common is that they were all
powered by the Intel P-series. Without getting too into the weeds here, Intel
processors have, in the past, included H-series processors — powerful chips
that you’ll find in gaming laptops and workstations — and U-series processors
for thinner, lighter devices. (There was also a G-series, which was this whole
other thing, for a couple of years.) But the Intel 12th Generation of mobile
chips (that is, the batch of chips that Intel released this year) has a new
letter: the P-series. The P-series is supposed to sit between the power-hungry
H-series and the power-efficient U-series; the hope was that it would combine
H-series power with U-series efficiency.
And then many — a great many — of this year’s top
ultraportable laptops got the P-series: big-screeners like the LG Gram 17;
modular devices like the Framework Laptop; business notebooks like the ThinkPad
X1 Yoga Gen 7; premium ultraportables like the Acer Swift 5, the Lenovo Yoga
9i, the Samsung Galaxy Book2 Pro, and the Dell XPS 13 Plus.
The problem was that, in reality, the P-series was just a
slightly less powerful H-series chip, which Intel had slapped an
“ultraportable” label onto. It was identical to the H-series in core count and
architecture, but it was supposed to draw slightly less power.
If you look at my reviews of these devices, it’s a Tale of
Bad Battery Life. Aside from the LG Gram, the 2022 iterations of all of these
models have had worse battery life than their 2021 models did. Many of these
laptops had not undergone significant changes apart from the chip bumps, which
meant that their 2022 models amounted to basically identical but slightly worse
versions of their 2021 models.
Okay, so that’s not entirely true. In exchange for the
battery life penalty, the P-series was supposed to bring an increase in
performance — and it certainly did. Across the board, the P-series delivered
much better multicore performance than any of last year’s U-series chips did.
And if you put this year’s P-series next to this year’s U-series, the benchmark
numbers are higher. But — and I understand that I’m venturing into dangerous
territory by saying this — I basically don’t think any of these thin-and-light
laptops needed that extra power.
The Microsoft Surface Laptop 5 has a perfectly fine U-series
processor inside and gave me close to eight hours of battery life. The Acer
Swift 5 had around half of that battery lifespan. There is not a single task I
did on the Acer Swift 5 that I wouldn’t have been able to do on the Surface
Laptop 5. They both did all my emailing, spreadsheeting, social media-ing, and
photo editing just fine. While the Swift 5 may have loaded some pages or
expanded some windows ever so slightly faster, the Swift’s terrible battery
life was by far the most noticeable difference between the two experiences.
Now, that doesn’t mean everyone who uses these laptops will
have my experience. And the difference in multicore processing power could
certainly make itself known in heavier use cases, like video work, computation,
and possibly gaming. I understand what the pitch for the P-series is — these
are presented as laptops for a nebulous “mobile professional” or “modern power
user.” Perhaps, the argument continues, the P-series fits these users better.
I guess my question is: how big is that constituency,
really? Is there actually a huge critical mass of folks who are: (A) often
editing, computing, and gaming on their personal laptop while they’re out and
about, but (B) not doing that often enough that they’re sure they don’t need a
GPU, and (C) don’t just want to use a MacBook for that?
If you’re a vlogger who’s running around all day, your life
will become a never-ending search for outlets
Before you get mad in the comments, I do know that these
people exist. I know there are YouTubers who edit on the go, researchers who
are at conferences all the time, college students who code in the dining hall,
etc. They need something light and may also prefer Windows. But even if the
P-series is the perfect amount of power for these people, it’s not a
particularly great offering for them, either, because if you’re a vlogger who’s
running around all day and editing as you go, I would never recommend you
choose a computer that will only get you a few hours of work to a charge
because your life will become a never-ending search for outlets. If these folks
are choosing the P-series, it’s because its inefficiency is a lesser of two
evils, not because it’s the messianic ultraportable chip they’ve been waiting
for.
But secondly: is this group actually that large? I’ve used a
whole bunch of U-series machines this year, and I’ve been pleasantly surprised
by how much they were able to do. I know people who have assumed that, for
example, the Surface Pro 9 would be too slow for their Chrome-tab and
Excel-heavy workload, only to find that it was perfectly fine. There is some
professional work that — if you are doing that work very regularly — I wouldn’t
recommend a U-series Core i7 for, but I really think it offers the best sweet
spot of power and battery life that most everyone else could ask for.
Given all this, I am not necessarily mad that the P-series
exists. I am more unhappy that it ended up powering (and decimating the battery
life of) so many of this year’s flagship ultraportable lines. The Dell XPS 13
Plus could’ve been a really groundbreaking computer, but its disappointing
battery life was very difficult to ignore. The Framework Laptop was
groundbreaking in many ways, but its mediocre lifespan might hinder how well it
serves the DIY enthusiasts who purchase it (and yes, you can just stick with
the 11th Gen mainboard — but a big part of the Framework’s appeal was supposed
to be that you could have fun putting new chips in it).
Across the board, computers that have historically been some
of the best you can buy — the Yoga 9i, the ThinkPad X1 Yoga, the Galaxy Book —
have fallen off our Best Laptop page in favor of devices powered by AMD and
Apple. They are all just a bit worse this year than they were last year. And I
think that’s a shame.

No comments
Post a Comment