Battery Life GSM vs 3G

greenlikeapples wrote:First off, the "E51 Battery Life thread" comments are very good
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/forum//forum/thread/71243/&highlight=battery+life

But I am wondering, while you can turn off dual mode, where the phone searches for both GSM and 3G modes, and this definately seems to save power, does anyone know if switching it to only 3G, rather than only GSM, is going to also use more power? The problem is of course that when you go to use the web, you have to go into those settings and adjust it to get normal speeds....

Anyone know?
Anyone wanna write a magic prog to just switch on 3G when browsing?

I was at Japan for a week and I have used 3G DoCoMo for my network as there is no other choice. I tell you one thing, 3G used way more LESS battery while doing normal things like voice calls, occasional browsing and idling.

Normally I am stuck to GSM here since Turkcell rivals stopped it from rolling out 3G but I tell you, if 3G enabled in Turkey one day, I will switch to 3G immediately.

I think 3G uses more battery comes from the extensive web browsing, video calls etc. which aren't used too much on 2.5G (GPRS) network. People browse 24/7, keep IM turned on, do video calls and say "it uses more battery". 3G uses less power in normal usage since protocols and specs are much more modern.

Another 3G claim comes from Mr. Steve Jobs (Apple) cult like followers. As they were too cheap to implement 3G to their $600 phone, they made propaganda as it uses too much power. People believe that guy.

Thanks for that IIgaz thats interesting.

I am in fact replying to my own thread/question, but nothing new there I guess.

I did a bit of research and it is unlikely your story is true - see quotes and links below (perhaps you were using your phone less as you were away from home?)

"The biggest impact of all is, surprisingly enough, talk time; with 3G enabled, the Blackjack's talk time is cut in half, with absolutely no benefit realized from the higher bandwidth standard."
from
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3036&p=7
also see the page before
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3036&p=6

PERHAPS this is an old article though. Another one states

"...The reason this doesn't work for 3G is because 3G uses a completely different radio transmission method (W-CDMA.) It's a long story but it uses a more power. The benfit is a much more efficient use of radio spectrum. Eventually WCDMA processors may become more efficient with power."
http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1057573-1.html

If people want to turn to 3G only anyway (still saving battery by sticking to one network not tow, just that the network is not as efficient battery wise it SEEMS by that article), this is how:

Menu>Tools>Settings>Phone>Network, then just select the first option and switch to UMTS

I do think (as an apple user) that Jobs and apple are getting a little too perky for my liking but it would be pretty bare-faced for jobs to lie to that degree....

Summary: Probably uses 25% more battery on 3G only, unless protocols/other esoteric details have been tweaked. But still will save you more battery than searching for both, AND will still enable a fast, and parallel-to-talking web connection.

Bababam

Yea, Ilgaz isn't accurate with his comments.

3G chips DO use more battery than GSM chips.

3G chips also are very bad battery wise when they have a low 3G signal or none at all, as hunting for a 3G signal is very battery intensive.

(he may have had a full signal out there all the time, perhaps this is half why he was under the illusion of 3G chips being ok battery wise)

lawl n1 i accept and go in ur way :tongue::icon14: