Acer notebook only achieves a fraction of the promised runtime

How much can the battery life advertised by the manufacturer deviate from the actual battery life that can be achieved with a notebook during normal use? Very strong at Acer, as a current example shows.

Acer notebook: 5 hours instead of 17 hours

How would you react if your brand new notebook with an 11th generation Intel processor, stylish design and good price-performance ratio instead of the advertised 17.5 hours suddenly after just 5 hours of normal Office use would go limp? You would probably be disappointed, just like the user Meykota Florage, who is surprised by exactly this fact. If the runtime were maybe 12 hours, the usual tolerance would be accepted, after all, many notebook manufacturers cheat a bit with the runtime. Acer goes loud here Golem but just too far.

Start the photo gallery(16 pictures)

The discrepancy of 12 hours compared to what Acer advertises for the Swift 3X and what the notebook actually achieves with a little office work and browser use is simply not acceptable. Now, of course, the question arises as to how Acer tested the runtime. The following can be read on the website:

Battery life varies depending on the product configuration, performance settings and usage, among other things.

Makes sense, after all, everyone uses their notebook differently. But how exactly did Acer determine this value of 17.5 hours? That was then sent as a response on Twitter. The Acer Swift 3X only achieved 17.5 hours in idle mode. You have to imagine this. The notebook only achieves 17.5 hours when it is absolutely not used. For whom does this information make sense? And the runtime is massively advertised on the product page and in the video below as one of the killer features. If you only get 4 to 5 hours then the disappointment is understandable.

Other manufacturers are setting a good example

Of course, you can advertise better with a battery life of 17.5 hours. In the end, however, you disappoint every buyer who bought the notebook precisely because of the long runtime, if this is not even rudimentarily achieved with the simplest tasks. Other manufacturers such as Apple, Lenovo, Dell and Co. do this much better. The running times are not massively exaggerated there and are given with specific purposes. If Acer had written that the notebook lasted 17.5 hours if you weren’t using it, and 5 hours if you did a little office work with it, that would be fair, it just wouldn’t sell so well. This is exactly why we always test the runtime of notebooks under real conditions in everyday life.