DuhSesame said:\ Or stick a magnet on your Type-C. Not as pretty but does the same job.
No, it doesn't. Not even close. USB-C magnet adapters are no where near as compact or powerful. If you think they are or better than magsafe, good news! You can still use them instead of magsafe!
Once again more choice is NOT less choice, no matter how much people like you seem to want to insist otherwise.
DuhSesame said: Like somehow still believes thicker really means cooler.
The macplusplus heat transfer conversation was really weird. First of all, cool that people are talking heat transfer! The crowd isn't going to hewn to an "all things being equal" rule, and everyone is talking about their own part of the heat transfer train.
Like in my other post, the 5th gen MBP (2021 models) models are not really thicker than the 4th gen models (late 2016 to early 2020 models). They only look thicker. The +0.5 mm thickness of the 2021 MBP16 won't effect the cooling performance much at all, effectively zero. So, for all intents and purposes the two generations are the same size imo, especially with respect to cooling. It's just that the industrial design of the 2021 models make them look thicker than 2016 to 2020 models. Therefore, one can not make any conclusions on cooling performance between the two machines based on their looks.
Convective heat transfer performance is driven by the difference in temperature between the heat source and ambient air, the heatsink (radiator fins) surface area, and the flow rate across the surface area. There is a heat path from the CPU & GPU that heats up the area on top of those chips, which is always the keyboard and the area by the hinge in the vast majority of laptops. The temperature of this area and the operational ceiling of the chips determines when the fans are ramped up (and the designer's choice). More mass here only increases the time for this area to heat up, but it will reach about the same equilibrium temperature as there is very little difference in the heat transfer from the keyboard area to the ambient air for virtually all laptops. The hotter the chips, the faster this area heats up and the hotter this area gets, the faster the fans have to ramp up to keep the chips and this area cool.
For more cooling performance from the fans, you can increase the flow rate across the heat sink (radiator fins), but this means either higher fan RPMs, which means more noise, or larger fans which means you need to increase the size of the device or decrease the size of the other components to make space for larger fans. You can also increase the heat sink surface area by adding more fins or having bigger fins, which means you decrease the size of other components or have a larger device. You can do a bit of both. I take it that using the device at 65 °F is not a viable consumer strategy (the server rack strategy).
So, yes, if you want more cooling, the easiest path is to have a larger device in which you can have bigger, higher RPMS fans, larger heat sinks (radiator fins). For thinner laptops, to get equivalent cooling performance, it means ever higher RPM fans as you are space limited, and that all translates to noise, and more often than not, having higher surface temperatures. It's a laptop, you have to touch it, and therefore puts a limit on how hot an OEM can let its surfaces get.
The huge win for the 2021 MBP is that the M1 Max and M1 Pro just use less power than prior the Intel + dGPU combo do, on order half to a third, and their idle power consumption also seems a lot less. If the CPU is only using 5 Watt on average, fans don't need to run. Intel on the other hand, could be at 10, 15, 20 W depending on model, on average. Double it when the dGPU is active. The fans have to run to keep the machine cool to the touch. Also, the M1 systems are more space efficient for logic boards, so Apple could put in a more performant cooling system, ie, larger heat sinks, larger fans. Bigger fans can also be quieter as they can drive the same flow rates at lower RPMs than smaller fans do. Bigger is better in basically all metrics for cooling performance.
Btw, if you look at the iFixit teardown, it looks like Apple put an insulator on the opposite side of the logic board from where the M1 Pro packages are. Was curious when of if an OEM would put an insulating layer beneath the keyboard to prevent the area from heating up. Maybe Apple is doing this with the MBP, but not sure. iFixit didn't take that part out. At some point, either Apple will have to have integrated vapor chambers or heat pipes on both sides of the package, or package+logic board. An insulator is an easy way to reduce temperatures of the keyboard. Also, wonder if being black also helps there. Not a lot, but perhaps some.
Oh, and if Apple really wants, they can extend their PCIe support as well so your ports won’t be limited to just external storage.
I’d like see what they would do there, having way much potential than self-proclaimed pros will ever do 😂
The ports aren't limited to just external storage right now - not sure what you are jabbering on about. If you were only as clever/articulate as you seem to think you are
DuhSesame said: Like somehow still believes thicker really means cooler.
The macplusplus heat transfer conversation was really weird. First of all, cool that people are talking heat transfer! The crowd isn't going to hewn to an "all things being equal" rule, and everyone is talking about their own part of the heat transfer train.
Like in my other post, the 5th gen MBP (2021 models) models are not really thicker than the 4th gen models (late 2016 to early 2020 models). They only look thicker. The +0.5 mm thickness of the 2021 MBP16 won't effect the cooling performance much at all, effectively zero. So, for all intents and purposes the two generations are the same size imo, especially with respect to cooling. It's just that the industrial design of the 2021 models make them look thicker than 2016 to 2020 models. Therefore, one can not make any conclusions on cooling performance between the two machines based on their looks.
Convective heat transfer performance is driven by the difference in temperature between the heat source and ambient air, the heatsink (radiator fins) surface area, and the flow rate across the surface area. There is a heat path from the CPU & GPU that heats up the area on top of those chips, which is always the keyboard and the area by the hinge in the vast majority of laptops. The temperature of this area and the operational ceiling of the chips determines when the fans are ramped up (and the designer's choice). More mass here only increases the time for this area to heat up, but it will reach about the same equilibrium temperature as there is very little difference in the heat transfer from the keyboard area to the ambient air for virtually all laptops. The hotter the chips, the faster this area heats up and the hotter this area gets, the faster the fans have to ramp up to keep the chips and this area cool.
For more cooling performance from the fans, you can increase the flow rate across the heat sink (radiator fins), but this means either higher fan RPMs, which means more noise, or larger fans which means you need to increase the size of the device or decrease the size of the other components to make space for larger fans. You can also increase the heat sink surface area by adding more fins or having bigger fins, which means you decrease the size of other components or have a larger device. You can do a bit of both. I take it that using the device at 65 °F is not a viable consumer strategy (the server rack strategy).
So, yes, if you want more cooling, the easiest path is to have a larger device in which you can have bigger, higher RPMS fans, larger heat sinks (radiator fins). For thinner laptops, to get equivalent cooling performance, it means ever higher RPM fans as you are space limited, and that all translates to noise, and more often than not, having higher surface temperatures. It's a laptop, you have to touch it, and therefore puts a limit on how hot an OEM can let its surfaces get.
The huge win for the 2021 MBP is that the M1 Max and M1 Pro just use less power than prior the Intel + dGPU combo do, on order half to a third, and their idle power consumption also seems a lot less. If the CPU is only using 5 Watt on average, fans don't need to run. Intel on the other hand, could be at 10, 15, 20 W depending on model, on average. Double it when the dGPU is active. The fans have to run to keep the machine cool to the touch. Also, the M1 systems are more space efficient for logic boards, so Apple could put in a more performant cooling system, ie, larger heat sinks, larger fans. Bigger fans can also be quieter as they can drive the same flow rates at lower RPMs than smaller fans do. Bigger is better in basically all metrics for cooling performance.
Btw, if you look at the iFixit teardown, it looks like Apple put an insulator on the opposite side of the logic board from where the M1 Pro packages are. Was curious when of if an OEM would put an insulating layer beneath the keyboard to prevent the area from heating up. Maybe Apple is doing this with the MBP, but not sure. iFixit didn't take that part out. At some point, either Apple will have to have integrated vapor chambers or heat pipes on both sides of the package, or package+logic board. An insulator is an easy way to reduce temperatures of the keyboard. Also, wonder if being black also helps there. Not a lot, but perhaps some.
Actually this 16” have bigger fans thanks to extra space-saving, that’ll also gives you more room for heatsinks. The overall capacity can only go bigger, not to mention with an SoC you’ll get optimal performance on both side.
The older 16” caps about 95-watt (about 65” for CPU pnly) where this one can do beyond 100, my bet will be about 120-watt. That really means they’re planning for a bigger chip to saturate all that capability. Of course, 16” only.
SMH, we’re still divided by Touch Bars despite almost all of us agrees that the new one is better.
I get why you’d want extra ports and I agree. My gripe is so many KOLs out there simply ignore what’s great about them and make the conversation one-way street. It’s so hard to talk anything when your opponent simply can’t comprehend. It does require you to have some technical knowledge.
DuhSesame said: Like somehow still believes thicker really means cooler.
The macplusplus heat transfer conversation was really weird. First of all, cool that people are talking heat transfer! The crowd isn't going to hewn to an "all things being equal" rule, and everyone is talking about their own part of the heat transfer train.
Like in my other post, the 5th gen MBP (2021 models) models are not really thicker than the 4th gen models (late 2016 to early 2020 models). They only look thicker. The +0.5 mm thickness of the 2021 MBP16 won't effect the cooling performance much at all, effectively zero. So, for all intents and purposes the two generations are the same size imo, especially with respect to cooling. It's just that the industrial design of the 2021 models make them look thicker than 2016 to 2020 models. Therefore, one can not make any conclusions on cooling performance between the two machines based on their looks.
Convective heat transfer performance is driven by the difference in temperature between the heat source and ambient air, the heatsink (radiator fins) surface area, and the flow rate across the surface area. There is a heat path from the CPU & GPU that heats up the area on top of those chips, which is always the keyboard and the area by the hinge in the vast majority of laptops. The temperature of this area and the operational ceiling of the chips determines when the fans are ramped up (and the designer's choice). More mass here only increases the time for this area to heat up, but it will reach about the same equilibrium temperature as there is very little difference in the heat transfer from the keyboard area to the ambient air for virtually all laptops. The hotter the chips, the faster this area heats up and the hotter this area gets, the faster the fans have to ramp up to keep the chips and this area cool.
For more cooling performance from the fans, you can increase the flow rate across the heat sink (radiator fins), but this means either higher fan RPMs, which means more noise, or larger fans which means you need to increase the size of the device or decrease the size of the other components to make space for larger fans. You can also increase the heat sink surface area by adding more fins or having bigger fins, which means you decrease the size of other components or have a larger device. You can do a bit of both. I take it that using the device at 65 °F is not a viable consumer strategy (the server rack strategy).
So, yes, if you want more cooling, the easiest path is to have a larger device in which you can have bigger, higher RPMS fans, larger heat sinks (radiator fins). For thinner laptops, to get equivalent cooling performance, it means ever higher RPM fans as you are space limited, and that all translates to noise, and more often than not, having higher surface temperatures. It's a laptop, you have to touch it, and therefore puts a limit on how hot an OEM can let its surfaces get.
The huge win for the 2021 MBP is that the M1 Max and M1 Pro just use less power than prior the Intel + dGPU combo do, on order half to a third, and their idle power consumption also seems a lot less. If the CPU is only using 5 Watt on average, fans don't need to run. Intel on the other hand, could be at 10, 15, 20 W depending on model, on average. Double it when the dGPU is active. The fans have to run to keep the machine cool to the touch. Also, the M1 systems are more space efficient for logic boards, so Apple could put in a more performant cooling system, ie, larger heat sinks, larger fans. Bigger fans can also be quieter as they can drive the same flow rates at lower RPMs than smaller fans do. Bigger is better in basically all metrics for cooling performance.
Btw, if you look at the iFixit teardown, it looks like Apple put an insulator on the opposite side of the logic board from where the M1 Pro packages are. Was curious when of if an OEM would put an insulating layer beneath the keyboard to prevent the area from heating up. Maybe Apple is doing this with the MBP, but not sure. iFixit didn't take that part out. At some point, either Apple will have to have integrated vapor chambers or heat pipes on both sides of the package, or package+logic board. An insulator is an easy way to reduce temperatures of the keyboard. Also, wonder if being black also helps there. Not a lot, but perhaps some.
Actually this 16” have bigger fans thanks to extra space-saving, that’ll also gives you more room for heatsinks. The overall capacity can only go bigger, not to mention with an SoC you’ll get optimal performance on both side.
The older 16” caps about 95-watt (about 65” for CPU pnly) where this one can do beyond 100, my bet will be about 120-watt. That really means they’re planning for a bigger chip to saturate all that capability. Of course, 16” only.
Apple lets the 2019 MBP16 model with the i9-9980HK run at 90 Watts, continuously.
And yup, even with the bigger fans and heatsinks on the 2021 MBP16, its smaller logic board looks less dense than the Intel logic board on the Intel MBP16. We will see if they put the Jade 2C (M1 Mac Duo?) in there. If it is linear, it's going to be about 60 W for the CPU and 120 W for the GPU. I think it will need bigger heatsinks for that level of power consumption to keep the RPMs down. But they are still very much Apple, where they only design for the 90%. A Jade 2C laptop is going to be louder and hotter, and perhaps falls afoul of their segmentation plans.
The M1 Pro can go into the iMac 24, and the wait for a Mac mini with a M1 Pro and M1 Max seems longer than it should be.
All right, I'm going to say this one last time & hopefully end this topic once for all.
Your typical laptop configuration (back in 2016 till 2020) goes with 16 lanes from the CPU (formerly Northbridge) and another 4 that amplified to 24 from the chipset (Southbridge and now aka PCH). Usually, all 16 lanes goes to your dGPU/graphics card which they're designed for, and your SSD take the last 4 from the chipset, sharing along with your I/O & modules.
Here's a catch, though, that even a high-end (1080 for the time) won't be able to use all 16 lanes, you can set your card to just 8 lanes with zero-to-minimal loss on performance. There are tons of info for that, you can easily search and see. That's your high-end, so you can expect even less for a mobile 40-watt GPU.
That's what Apple did here. You get almost no loss on performance & have more than twice the I/O capability. Remember in your typical laptops the system drive have to share with their Thunderbolt controller, and eGPU can saturate x4 easily (x4, not x8). You'll be having bandwidth issue when you tried to push, no such issue on the 16". In fact, you can get two PCIe devices running together without any loss of your system drive. These bandwidth also brings more capabilities than your tradition I/O can ever do.
(not sure why it shows x16 for the GPU, because other system info clearly shows x8)
You may ask why don't other OEM do the same, mainly because it's more complicated & they still think the extra 1-3% will worth the trade-offs? Still, this is a mobile GPU we're talking about and won't make nigh & day. Hell, even the XPS17 with four Thunderbolt port does the same.
Yes, one can still say it don't worth to go all the way in, and I still agree. Point being you can't undertook their capabilities and with the new 16" you get both.
DuhSesame said: Like somehow still believes thicker really means cooler.
The macplusplus heat transfer conversation was really weird. First of all, cool that people are talking heat transfer! The crowd isn't going to hewn to an "all things being equal" rule, and everyone is talking about their own part of the heat transfer train.
Like in my other post, the 5th gen MBP (2021 models) models are not really thicker than the 4th gen models (late 2016 to early 2020 models). They only look thicker. The +0.5 mm thickness of the 2021 MBP16 won't effect the cooling performance much at all, effectively zero. So, for all intents and purposes the two generations are the same size imo, especially with respect to cooling. It's just that the industrial design of the 2021 models make them look thicker than 2016 to 2020 models. Therefore, one can not make any conclusions on cooling performance between the two machines based on their looks.
Convective heat transfer performance is driven by the difference in temperature between the heat source and ambient air, the heatsink (radiator fins) surface area, and the flow rate across the surface area. There is a heat path from the CPU & GPU that heats up the area on top of those chips, which is always the keyboard and the area by the hinge in the vast majority of laptops. The temperature of this area and the operational ceiling of the chips determines when the fans are ramped up (and the designer's choice). More mass here only increases the time for this area to heat up, but it will reach about the same equilibrium temperature as there is very little difference in the heat transfer from the keyboard area to the ambient air for virtually all laptops. The hotter the chips, the faster this area heats up and the hotter this area gets, the faster the fans have to ramp up to keep the chips and this area cool.
For more cooling performance from the fans, you can increase the flow rate across the heat sink (radiator fins), but this means either higher fan RPMs, which means more noise, or larger fans which means you need to increase the size of the device or decrease the size of the other components to make space for larger fans. You can also increase the heat sink surface area by adding more fins or having bigger fins, which means you decrease the size of other components or have a larger device. You can do a bit of both. I take it that using the device at 65 °F is not a viable consumer strategy (the server rack strategy).
So, yes, if you want more cooling, the easiest path is to have a larger device in which you can have bigger, higher RPMS fans, larger heat sinks (radiator fins). For thinner laptops, to get equivalent cooling performance, it means ever higher RPM fans as you are space limited, and that all translates to noise, and more often than not, having higher surface temperatures. It's a laptop, you have to touch it, and therefore puts a limit on how hot an OEM can let its surfaces get.
The huge win for the 2021 MBP is that the M1 Max and M1 Pro just use less power than prior the Intel + dGPU combo do, on order half to a third, and their idle power consumption also seems a lot less. If the CPU is only using 5 Watt on average, fans don't need to run. Intel on the other hand, could be at 10, 15, 20 W depending on model, on average. Double it when the dGPU is active. The fans have to run to keep the machine cool to the touch. Also, the M1 systems are more space efficient for logic boards, so Apple could put in a more performant cooling system, ie, larger heat sinks, larger fans. Bigger fans can also be quieter as they can drive the same flow rates at lower RPMs than smaller fans do. Bigger is better in basically all metrics for cooling performance.
Btw, if you look at the iFixit teardown, it looks like Apple put an insulator on the opposite side of the logic board from where the M1 Pro packages are. Was curious when of if an OEM would put an insulating layer beneath the keyboard to prevent the area from heating up. Maybe Apple is doing this with the MBP, but not sure. iFixit didn't take that part out. At some point, either Apple will have to have integrated vapor chambers or heat pipes on both sides of the package, or package+logic board. An insulator is an easy way to reduce temperatures of the keyboard. Also, wonder if being black also helps there. Not a lot, but perhaps some.
Actually this 16” have bigger fans thanks to extra space-saving, that’ll also gives you more room for heatsinks. The overall capacity can only go bigger, not to mention with an SoC you’ll get optimal performance on both side.
The older 16” caps about 95-watt (about 65” for CPU pnly) where this one can do beyond 100, my bet will be about 120-watt. That really means they’re planning for a bigger chip to saturate all that capability. Of course, 16” only.
Apple lets the 2019 MBP16 model with the i9-9980HK run at 90 Watts, continuously.
And yup, even with the bigger fans and heatsinks on the 2021 MBP16, its smaller logic board looks less dense than the Intel logic board on the Intel MBP16. We will see if they put the Jade 2C (M1 Mac Duo?) in there. If it is linear, it's going to be about 60 W for the CPU and 120 W for the GPU. I think it will need bigger heatsinks for that level of power consumption to keep the RPMs down. But they are still very much Apple, where they only design for the 90%. A Jade 2C laptop is going to be louder and hotter, and perhaps falls afoul of their segmentation plans.
The M1 Pro can go into the iMac 24, and the wait for a Mac mini with a M1 Pro and M1 Max seems longer than it should be.
"In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W."
with GPU also close to that number.
"The GPU block itself is reported to be running at 43W"
Chip total 92W.
With that said, I believe a 16+4 is possible. It could cause some throttling when simultaneously stressing both, but one block shouldn't be an issue at all & giving the performance it can give, it's very well worth the trade-offs.
If we're going 16+4, it won't be much cooler than previously Intel's i9. CPU goes for 80~90 watts and GPU could go for ~60.
No problem to stress them individually, will have more than enough headroom to keep it down. The tricky part is running both, although you rarely have a scenario that push both at the extreme. I'd like to say, high 50 to 60 for CPU and maximum GPU because that usually indicates primarily graphics intensive tasks.
and even with slowed-down CPU you'll still get better combined performance than rest of the x86 laptops (even maxed out i9s but we'll see).
If we're going 16+4, it won't be much cooler than previously Intel's i9. CPU goes for 80~90 watts and GPU could go for ~60.
No problem to stress them individually, will have more than enough headroom to keep it down. The tricky part is running both, although you rarely have a scenario that push both at the extreme. I'd like to say, high 50 to 60 for CPU and maximum GPU because that usually indicates primarily graphics intensive tasks.
and even with slowed-down CPU you'll still get better combined performance than rest of the x86 laptops (even maxed out i9s but we'll see).
I have no doubt that the current MBP16 design can handle a Jade 2C (16+4+64) at 60 W CPU and 120 W GPU. It's not a technical issue. It's a product marketing one. Apple moved away from Intel to get away from using hot chips. No signs yet of them willing to chase the Watts and pack in as much performance into the form factor as possible. They may have no choice eventually, but they currently seem to be targeting about half the Watts as the respective Intel machines.
This has nothing to do with Jony Ive. Intel forced Apple to go minimalistic because of the generous heat it produces. Give it more oenclosure it would retain more heat. Now that Intel has gone, with Apple Silicon you can make it as large as you want because the heat is minimal.
You have it backwards. You're confusing heat with temperature. If you go minimalistic on a device that generates a lot of heat, that heat will be 'concentrated' on a smaller volume, causing temperature to be higher, and it is temperature that damages internal components. The key is to think in terms of heat dissipation not heat retention. A larger enclosed volume (all other things equal) would have better heat dissipation especially if a lot of that enclosed volume is empty space that can be used for airflow to cool the internal components.
This is the metal mass that retains heat the most not the air that flows over or in it. Besides, the air flows only from the processor to the heat sink by means of a pipe and the fan, the flow is constrained to the pipe. There is no air "moving freely" in a larger enclosure. Since the air flows only from the processor to the sink, it has no (or minimal) effect on the overall cooldown of the enclosure. To make it cool down faster, you have to make it smaller so that it retains less heat and dissipates it faster. That "cooling air in a larger enclosure" is an urban legend. There is no such thing.
I didn't spell it out explicitly but of course when I said airflow, I'm speaking about it in the context of the MacBook Pro which has fans.
In an electronic device, the internal components generate the heat, not the enclosure. You want to dissipate that heat so that the temperature of the internal components don't rise to the point that they fry. What an enclosure does is absorb the heat generated by the components and then dissipate it by radiating it off its external surface area. (Heat never ever flows from a cold body to a hot body. At least not in this universe.) So, all other things equal, the smaller your enclosure, the less mass it has to absorb the heat from the components, and the less external surface area it has to dissipate that heat it absorbed from the components. And that's not even talking about heat sinks and cooling fans.
Now let's stick heat sinks and cooling fans into the narrative. If a smaller enclosure gives you less internal space, forcing you to use smaller heat sinks, smaller fans and smaller airflow channels, then clearly going minimalistic is going to reduce, not increase, your ability to dissipate the heat generated by the components.
This is why your assertion that the generous heat produced by Intel chips caused Apple to go minimalistic is problematic. The heat generated by a chip is in fact an obstacle to going minimalistic.
That's where the vicious death cycle begins. Put bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks, they will require bigger batteries and bigger enclosures that will retain even more heat that will require even bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks that will require.... and so on.
Bigger enclosure may absorb more heat, but once it absorbs that it becomes a heat source itself. According to your mentality we can cool down a hot object faster if we put it into an enclosure instead of leaving it in the open air !..
Bigger heat pipes and heatsinks do not require bigger batteries. Fans don't really either, they aren't a significant power draw, maybe a watt for a beefy one. And bigger enclosures do not act as heat sources, they dissipate heat over a greater surface area.
You don't need bigger heat pipes, sinks or fans on a bigger enclosure with the same components, unless you're trying to give yourself more thermal headroom. The idea that adding more cooling would in some way lead to a net heat increase should be immediately and obviously absurd.
Smaller computers have more problems with thermals. The new MBP 14 will spin up its fans much earlier and faster than the MBP 16 precisely because of the density of heat generating components, even though they're the same components as the 16. You're dead wrong on this.
The 16” is built for bigger chip that haven’t been released yet.
The point really being making it thicker isn’t the only way to get better cooling, which many of the commentators simply couldn’t comprehend. Your older Unibody & Retinas only got worse thermals cause their design, not just chips.
The upper limit really resides on your pipes, sink & fans, you can always improve them despite the chassis limit.
It's easier to improve things when you have more space to work in, so a bigger enclosure helps. Plus you can dissipate over a larger surface area. The last point is pretty critical. A smaller enclosure is more constraining and packs in heat generating components into a smaller space with more constrained air flow. Of course it will be thermally limiting.
We're talking about current machines and current chips, not theoreticals.
No one said making it thicker was the only way to get better cooling. The older unibody and retinas had thermal issues, and where components were the same issues were relatively higher on smaller machines.
I don't even understand why this is a matter for debate, it is well known, established, and physics.
DuhSesame said: No other laptops (except Alienware) can do eGPU+external SSD without any interference.
Apple SOC doesn't support eGPU and I would expect it's a low priority, if it's even a goal. Another red herring.
Pfft.
we’re talking about older Intel models and you wanna switch topics to M1s.
If you don’t understand how it works, I won’t blame you. Switching conversation is too low for me. No more arguments.
No one was talking about Intel machines, this entire thread is about the new MacBook Pros. You should probably get on the same page as everyone else before throwing around accusations that other people don't understand.
Captain Obvious here. Reading these comments, it is perfectly clear—if it ever wasn’t, that you cannot please all of the people all of the time. There is no conceivable product that Apple could have produced that would make everyone happy.
Don't let the Internet get you down. Or, never let someone else's opinion determine how much you like or enjoy a product. There was a thing a while back when social media was becoming popular, where crowdsourcing (wisdom of the crowd) was the blockchain from 5 years ago, and what, "metaverse" is today. It was a term describing ascendant social media companies and why they are so powerful. Well, I think most people have now learned that there isn't any wisdom in the crowd, and, it's quite likely crowd sourced information is a net negative. The S/N is negative. Yes, it's worse than zero, social media actively makes you less informed. So, there is very very little value in any of our opinions.
Except social media is not 'the crowd'. It's mostly a vocal minority whose screams and repetition drown out all others. Or in some cases a country using it to push their agenda.
Definitions of what a crowd is aside, social media is more insidious than that. 99% of viral social media is basically fake nonsense. You have scripts and accelerator companies pushing to get as many likes and shares as much as possible, trying to get viral, trying to make it to top-viewed content lists. Essentially gaming Facebook and Twitters sharing algorithms. That's not even a vocal minority. That's a 2 to 3 person shop with a bunch of shell companies liking and and sharing its content. It's basically the tabloid aisle of a grocery, but instead of few people, it's tens of millions of people.
Every online publication is in on it. A or B headline optimization is just a mild form of it, but it will always chooses the more traumatizing headline as it produces the biggest emotional hit, and 99.9% it's just your boring and eminent sensible "Apple is ramping down orders of parts after the holiday sales ramp up" type of story. So, tantalizing tales (tabloid style) always make it to the top. A crowd of people won't be that different.
So Alex, it is incredibly important for you to consider this. Our opinions aren't even worth 2¢. In fact, there is a high probability that our opinions just make you more stupid. You have to force yourself to forget 99.99999% of the stuff you read on the Internet.
Yeh that's true.
But it is also being used by professionals to push political agendas and propaganda -- and it is having an adverse impact on our country and its democracy.
I don't think its wise to just ignore it. Otherwise, the lies appear to be true -- which makes them true in the minds of the less well informed.
This has nothing to do with Jony Ive. Intel forced Apple to go minimalistic because of the generous heat it produces. Give it more oenclosure it would retain more heat. Now that Intel has gone, with Apple Silicon you can make it as large as you want because the heat is minimal.
You have it backwards. You're confusing heat with temperature. If you go minimalistic on a device that generates a lot of heat, that heat will be 'concentrated' on a smaller volume, causing temperature to be higher, and it is temperature that damages internal components. The key is to think in terms of heat dissipation not heat retention. A larger enclosed volume (all other things equal) would have better heat dissipation especially if a lot of that enclosed volume is empty space that can be used for airflow to cool the internal components.
This is the metal mass that retains heat the most not the air that flows over or in it. Besides, the air flows only from the processor to the heat sink by means of a pipe and the fan, the flow is constrained to the pipe. There is no air "moving freely" in a larger enclosure. Since the air flows only from the processor to the sink, it has no (or minimal) effect on the overall cooldown of the enclosure. To make it cool down faster, you have to make it smaller so that it retains less heat and dissipates it faster. That "cooling air in a larger enclosure" is an urban legend. There is no such thing.
I didn't spell it out explicitly but of course when I said airflow, I'm speaking about it in the context of the MacBook Pro which has fans.
In an electronic device, the internal components generate the heat, not the enclosure. You want to dissipate that heat so that the temperature of the internal components don't rise to the point that they fry. What an enclosure does is absorb the heat generated by the components and then dissipate it by radiating it off its external surface area. (Heat never ever flows from a cold body to a hot body. At least not in this universe.) So, all other things equal, the smaller your enclosure, the less mass it has to absorb the heat from the components, and the less external surface area it has to dissipate that heat it absorbed from the components. And that's not even talking about heat sinks and cooling fans.
Now let's stick heat sinks and cooling fans into the narrative. If a smaller enclosure gives you less internal space, forcing you to use smaller heat sinks, smaller fans and smaller airflow channels, then clearly going minimalistic is going to reduce, not increase, your ability to dissipate the heat generated by the components.
This is why your assertion that the generous heat produced by Intel chips caused Apple to go minimalistic is problematic. The heat generated by a chip is in fact an obstacle to going minimalistic.
That's where the vicious death cycle begins. Put bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks, they will require bigger batteries and bigger enclosures that will retain even more heat that will require even bigger fans, bigger pipes, bigger sinks that will require.... and so on.
Bigger enclosure may absorb more heat, but once it absorbs that it becomes a heat source itself. According to your mentality we can cool down a hot object faster if we put it into an enclosure instead of leaving it in the open air !..
Bigger heat pipes and heatsinks do not require bigger batteries. Fans don't really either, they aren't a significant power draw, maybe a watt for a beefy one. And bigger enclosures do not act as heat sources, they dissipate heat over a greater surface area.
You don't need bigger heat pipes, sinks or fans on a bigger enclosure with the same components, unless you're trying to give yourself more thermal headroom. The idea that adding more cooling would in some way lead to a net heat increase should be immediately and obviously absurd.
Smaller computers have more problems with thermals. The new MBP 14 will spin up its fans much earlier and faster than the MBP 16 precisely because of the density of heat generating components, even though they're the same components as the 16. You're dead wrong on this.
The 16” is built for bigger chip that haven’t been released yet.
The point really being making it thicker isn’t the only way to get better cooling, which many of the commentators simply couldn’t comprehend. Your older Unibody & Retinas only got worse thermals cause their design, not just chips.
The upper limit really resides on your pipes, sink & fans, you can always improve them despite the chassis limit.
It's easier to improve things when you have more space to work in, so a bigger enclosure helps. Plus you can dissipate over a larger surface area. The last point is pretty critical. A smaller enclosure is more constraining and packs in heat generating components into a smaller space with more constrained air flow. Of course it will be thermally limiting.
We're talking about current machines and current chips, not theoreticals.
No one said making it thicker was the only way to get better cooling. The older unibody and retinas had thermal issues, and where components were the same issues were relatively higher on smaller machines.
I don't even understand why this is a matter for debate, it is well known, established, and physics.
In reality we have a budget to meet, eventually you'll stop somewhere, there's no unlimited resource to just go big.
All I'm saying is, once you have that point, you don't have to just to be thick to achieve it. If we're just talk about the potentiaI, we're doing nothing. I'm not interest in theoretical physics when it comes to cooling, it's about finding a point to meet people's expectation.
Which by the way, I think most of you just use the chassis to accusing Apple shrinking their cooling system, actually, that's the opposite, it actually goes up even it's getting thinner. The issue mainly due to Intel. They were inconsistent and Apple make their design for the next half-decade, it's hard to predict when they'll mess up.
You right, there's no point to even debate, I just don't like people spin little things to fill their narrative, and misguided others.
DuhSesame said: No other laptops (except Alienware) can do eGPU+external SSD without any interference.
Apple SOC doesn't support eGPU and I would expect it's a low priority, if it's even a goal. Another red herring.
Pfft.
we’re talking about older Intel models and you wanna switch topics to M1s.
If you don’t understand how it works, I won’t blame you. Switching conversation is too low for me. No more arguments.
No one was talking about Intel machines, this entire thread is about the new MacBook Pros. You should probably get on the same page as everyone else before throwing around accusations that other people don't understand.
Oh are we not? I said "Intel Macs with eGPU + SSD" but the M1 can't use eGPUs, so Thunderbolt on Intel is also pointless? We are comparing older Macs to older laptops, aren't we?
Either way, I explained on the post above, he clearly doesn't understand why and I don't want to waste my time.
If we're going 16+4, it won't be much cooler than previously Intel's i9. CPU goes for 80~90 watts and GPU could go for ~60.
No problem to stress them individually, will have more than enough headroom to keep it down. The tricky part is running both, although you rarely have a scenario that push both at the extreme. I'd like to say, high 50 to 60 for CPU and maximum GPU because that usually indicates primarily graphics intensive tasks.
and even with slowed-down CPU you'll still get better combined performance than rest of the x86 laptops (even maxed out i9s but we'll see).
I have no doubt that the current MBP16 design can handle a Jade 2C (16+4+64) at 60 W CPU and 120 W GPU. It's not a technical issue. It's a product marketing one. Apple moved away from Intel to get away from using hot chips. No signs yet of them willing to chase the Watts and pack in as much performance into the form factor as possible. They may have no choice eventually, but they currently seem to be targeting about half the Watts as the respective Intel machines.
40-watt is nowhere close to Intel's (or AMD) offering, PC laptops can go big without hesitation. They'll use their pure performance as a selling point, for sure.
I think people misunderstood what Apple Silicon is about, it isn't just about cooler & fixing Intel's problem, it's really flexing their muscles and say "I can build this kind of hardware that non other can". Plus, 100-watt isn't really that hard for laptops anymore, especially when competition goes up.
I've been waiting them to kick others in the @$$ for long 😂, die-hard x86 fanboys will tell you "consumption always equals performance" and will not change their mind unless you beat them down. Might just shake the industry for a bit.
Comments
If you think they are or better than magsafe, good news! You can still use them instead of magsafe!
Once again more choice is NOT less choice, no matter how much people like you seem to want to insist otherwise.
we’re talking about older Intel models and you wanna switch topics to M1s.
If you don’t understand how it works, I won’t blame you. Switching conversation is too low for me. No more arguments.
Your lack of clarity is somehow my issue? And then you want to act above it all? lol - these forums never cease to amuse!
Like in my other post, the 5th gen MBP (2021 models) models are not really thicker than the 4th gen models (late 2016 to early 2020 models). They only look thicker. The +0.5 mm thickness of the 2021 MBP16 won't effect the cooling performance much at all, effectively zero. So, for all intents and purposes the two generations are the same size imo, especially with respect to cooling. It's just that the industrial design of the 2021 models make them look thicker than 2016 to 2020 models. Therefore, one can not make any conclusions on cooling performance between the two machines based on their looks.
Convective heat transfer performance is driven by the difference in temperature between the heat source and ambient air, the heatsink (radiator fins) surface area, and the flow rate across the surface area. There is a heat path from the CPU & GPU that heats up the area on top of those chips, which is always the keyboard and the area by the hinge in the vast majority of laptops. The temperature of this area and the operational ceiling of the chips determines when the fans are ramped up (and the designer's choice). More mass here only increases the time for this area to heat up, but it will reach about the same equilibrium temperature as there is very little difference in the heat transfer from the keyboard area to the ambient air for virtually all laptops. The hotter the chips, the faster this area heats up and the hotter this area gets, the faster the fans have to ramp up to keep the chips and this area cool.
For more cooling performance from the fans, you can increase the flow rate across the heat sink (radiator fins), but this means either higher fan RPMs, which means more noise, or larger fans which means you need to increase the size of the device or decrease the size of the other components to make space for larger fans. You can also increase the heat sink surface area by adding more fins or having bigger fins, which means you decrease the size of other components or have a larger device. You can do a bit of both. I take it that using the device at 65 °F is not a viable consumer strategy (the server rack strategy).
So, yes, if you want more cooling, the easiest path is to have a larger device in which you can have bigger, higher RPMS fans, larger heat sinks (radiator fins). For thinner laptops, to get equivalent cooling performance, it means ever higher RPM fans as you are space limited, and that all translates to noise, and more often than not, having higher surface temperatures. It's a laptop, you have to touch it, and therefore puts a limit on how hot an OEM can let its surfaces get.
The huge win for the 2021 MBP is that the M1 Max and M1 Pro just use less power than prior the Intel + dGPU combo do, on order half to a third, and their idle power consumption also seems a lot less. If the CPU is only using 5 Watt on average, fans don't need to run. Intel on the other hand, could be at 10, 15, 20 W depending on model, on average. Double it when the dGPU is active. The fans have to run to keep the machine cool to the touch. Also, the M1 systems are more space efficient for logic boards, so Apple could put in a more performant cooling system, ie, larger heat sinks, larger fans. Bigger fans can also be quieter as they can drive the same flow rates at lower RPMs than smaller fans do. Bigger is better in basically all metrics for cooling performance.
Btw, if you look at the iFixit teardown, it looks like Apple put an insulator on the opposite side of the logic board from where the M1 Pro packages are. Was curious when of if an OEM would put an insulating layer beneath the keyboard to prevent the area from heating up. Maybe Apple is doing this with the MBP, but not sure. iFixit didn't take that part out. At some point, either Apple will have to have integrated vapor chambers or heat pipes on both sides of the package, or package+logic board. An insulator is an easy way to reduce temperatures of the keyboard. Also, wonder if being black also helps there. Not a lot, but perhaps some.
I’d like see what they would do there, having way much potential than self-proclaimed pros will ever do 😂
If you were only as clever/articulate as you seem to think you are
The older 16” caps about 95-watt (about 65” for CPU pnly) where this one can do beyond 100, my bet will be about 120-watt. That really means they’re planning for a bigger chip to saturate all that capability. Of course, 16” only.
I get why you’d want extra ports and I agree. My gripe is so many KOLs out there simply ignore what’s great about them and make the conversation one-way street. It’s so hard to talk anything when your opponent simply can’t comprehend. It does require you to have some technical knowledge.
And yup, even with the bigger fans and heatsinks on the 2021 MBP16, its smaller logic board looks less dense than the Intel logic board on the Intel MBP16. We will see if they put the Jade 2C (M1 Mac Duo?) in there. If it is linear, it's going to be about 60 W for the CPU and 120 W for the GPU. I think it will need bigger heatsinks for that level of power consumption to keep the RPMs down. But they are still very much Apple, where they only design for the 90%. A Jade 2C laptop is going to be louder and hotter, and perhaps falls afoul of their segmentation plans.
The M1 Pro can go into the iMac 24, and the wait for a Mac mini with a M1 Pro and M1 Max seems longer than it should be.
(not sure why it shows x16 for the GPU, because other system info clearly shows x8)
Yes, one can still say it don't worth to go all the way in, and I still agree. Point being you can't undertook their capabilities and with the new 16" you get both.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performance-review/3
with GPU also close to that number.
Chip total 92W.
With that said, I believe a 16+4 is possible. It could cause some throttling when simultaneously stressing both, but one block shouldn't be an issue at all & giving the performance it can give, it's very well worth the trade-offs.
No problem to stress them individually, will have more than enough headroom to keep it down. The tricky part is running both, although you rarely have a scenario that push both at the extreme. I'd like to say, high 50 to 60 for CPU and maximum GPU because that usually indicates primarily graphics intensive tasks.
and even with slowed-down CPU you'll still get better combined performance than rest of the x86 laptops (even maxed out i9s but we'll see).
We're talking about current machines and current chips, not theoreticals.
No one said making it thicker was the only way to get better cooling. The older unibody and retinas had thermal issues, and where components were the same issues were relatively higher on smaller machines.
I don't even understand why this is a matter for debate, it is well known, established, and physics.
All I'm saying is, once you have that point, you don't have to just to be thick to achieve it. If we're just talk about the potentiaI, we're doing nothing. I'm not interest in theoretical physics when it comes to cooling, it's about finding a point to meet people's expectation.
Which by the way, I think most of you just use the chassis to accusing Apple shrinking their cooling system, actually, that's the opposite, it actually goes up even it's getting thinner. The issue mainly due to Intel. They were inconsistent and Apple make their design for the next half-decade, it's hard to predict when they'll mess up.
You right, there's no point to even debate, I just don't like people spin little things to fill their narrative, and misguided others.
Either way, I explained on the post above, he clearly doesn't understand why and I don't want to waste my time.
I think people misunderstood what Apple Silicon is about, it isn't just about cooler & fixing Intel's problem, it's really flexing their muscles and say "I can build this kind of hardware that non other can". Plus, 100-watt isn't really that hard for laptops anymore, especially when competition goes up.
I've been waiting them to kick others in the @$$ for long 😂, die-hard x86 fanboys will tell you "consumption always equals performance" and will not change their mind unless you beat them down. Might just shake the industry for a bit.