I have a lower end laptop, and I’m looking for some advice on saving some battery life while not entirely killing performance. On other Linux distros I would typically default to installing tlp and powertop, but it looks like Arch/EOS are using power-profiles-daemon and that conflicts with tlp? Also, I have no experience setting configurations for tlp there were typically pretty workable default configs already set up on the distros I’m familiar with. So which is better, power-profiles or tlp?
I’m currently using powertop in auto-tune with cpupower-gui and a profile set to Conservative.
Have a look at the article I linked. It talks about TLP and few other alternatives on what they miss out on.
Lot of the heavy lifting is done through the kernel when using power-profiles. This also comes standard on Gnome from what I recall. I use Plasma so I had to manually install it.
I personally use tlp on a Lenovo t480s. It is easy to configure, my battery thresholds are set using tlp, I occasionally conduct battery recalibration using it, and I get good & stable battery life with it. I have also tried power-profiles-daemon, but was not satisfied with the battery life on Balanced mode and performance on Power saving, so I returned to tlp, with which I am able to get a good balance between battery life and performance.
I just recently put endeavourOS (KDE plasma) on my t480s, and like you am not happy with the performance on balanced mode set by the power-profiles-daemon.
Having never used tlp before, in your opinion, is there anything specific one would need to do or are the defaults fine?
Even better if it’s possible to share the conf. Thanks!
I have also tried