14" M1 Max - 100C on Cinebench R23, within seconds. YT reviewers get 51C.

[UBS28]

Apple let their machines always run hot. They are stupid as hell. Most people are happy that the fans are quiet but it is bad for the internal components.

I guess I will have to buy that piece of software to override Apple their horrible temperature management when my 16” M1 Max arrives.

 

[mi7chy]

That's why we need peer review and not rely on Apple supported influencers and one brand fanboys.

 

[leman]

What you mean what it has to do with CPU temperatures? Everything lol.
I just showed that by using simple custom fan settings I was able to lover temps by approx 18 degrees C in 100% usage multicore stress test. That's almost 20% drop. Deliding CPUs doesn't even bring that kind of gains.
Without it, default fan settings allow the temperature to reach very high numbers.. Do you know what happens to objects that are left to deal with temperatures like this for prolonged periods of time? And it's not just the die. Everything around it as well.

Sorry, but why would you care? As long as there is no performance issues, why would I worry which temperature my CPU runs at? All your more aggressive fan profile does is generate more noise and draw more battery power.

I don't know M1 PRO's throttle limit but i DO KNOW that thx to my solution I'm never going to reach it thus have access to full CPU power whenever I need it. This right here is everything I need to know.

The machine is more than able to take care of that on itself. It does not need you micro-managing stuff. Can you demonstrate that your tweaks result in better performance? I am sure Apple calibrated it more precisely than you can.

Every computer can do mundane tasks within 50C. My Intel 16" did and my 3700X with 3080 is under 45 so what's the point you are trying to make?

The point I am making is that a mobile Intel i9 draws 60W when opening a text file. Apple Silicon machine will draw 1/6 of at at most.

And this "trivial observation" is the key to understanding how chip + energy + fans + temperature affect each other.
If you can manage to keep it in check at 100% output, you win.

That's how Apple designs its cooling systems. All of these variables are meticulously adjusted to provide maximal performance with minimal fan noise. Cooling the hardware prematurely is a waste of energy.

 

[leman]

Apple let their machines always run hot. They are stupid as hell. Most people are happy that the fans are quiet but it is bad for the internal components.

I guess I will have to buy that piece of software to override Apple their horrible temperature management when my 16” M1 Max arrives.

Please stop spreading FUD. There is no empirical data to corroborate the myth of "high internal temperature is bad for internal components". As you say, Apple always let's their hardware run hot — because it's the efficient thing to do. If it would damage hardware in any way they wouldn't have earned reputation of being one of the most reliable laptop brands in the industry.

 

[white7561]

Please stop spreading FUD. There is no empirical data to corroborate the myth of "high internal temperature is bad for internal components". As you say, Apple always let's their hardware run hot — because it's the efficient thing to do. If it would damage hardware in any way they wouldn't have earned reputation of being one of the most reliable laptop brands in the industry.

Tbh my MacBook air 2014 11inch. Which is so inefficient with CPU temp always going to 90++C on everything I do with. Is still running just fine. It's been used every single day and it's working just as fine.

Yeah heat can be bad for electronics but I think for a cpu, i think it's usually fine since the tjunction temp is usually much higher.

That's just my opinion though..

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Do you know what happens to objects that are exposed to temperatures like this for prolonged periods of time?

Well, I guess everyone knows...
https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/sprabx4
https://www.amazon.com/Reliable-Computer-Systems-Design-Evaluation/dp/0367447649

I would much more worry about running temperature up and down all the time to the extreme ends. Won't be an issue with the silicon, but with the solder used to connect it to the PCB.

 

[Grohowiak]

Sorry, but why would you care? As long as there is no performance issues, why would I worry which temperature my CPU runs at? All your more aggressive fan profile does is generate more noise and draw more battery power.

I care because it is crucial for uninterrupted performance. This makes me money. I need it whenever I need it.
Heat kills. The fact that you blindly believe apple even after all the **** people like myself went through with 16" intel's tells me your either a fabnoi or you really have no idea what you are talking about.

The machine is more than able to take care of that on itself. It does not need you micro-managing stuff. Can you demonstrate that your tweaks result in better performance? I am sure Apple calibrated it more precisely than you can.

According to apple the 16" intels did too. Have apple higher tier specialist tell me that even though I proved throttling beyond belief by using apple's own diagnostic tools.
That's not ok. That's **** design.

The point I am making is that a mobile Intel i9 draws 60W when opening a text file. Apple Silicon machine will draw 1/6 of at at most.

Means nothing if the temps still go nuts. Hence the hint to learn about the laws of thermo-dynamics. They're here for a reason and apple didn't reinvent physics lmao.
Your belief though is what makes them money. Not everybody buys apple care, and repair costs are juicy.

That's how Apple designs its cooling systems. All of these variables are meticulously adjusted to provide maximal performance with minimal fan noise. Cooling the hardware prematurely is a waste of energy.

Again, your obsession with fan noise is same as Ive's with making things thinner yet here we are, new models are chunkier. Huh. Who would have though of this blasphemy!
You can't cheat physics.

 

[Grohowiak]

Well, I guess everyone knows...
https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/sprabx4
https://www.amazon.com/Reliable-Computer-Systems-Design-Evaluation/dp/0367447649

I would much more worry about running temperature up and down all the time to the extreme ends. Won't be an issue with the silicon, but with the solder used to connect it to the PCB.

That was my point. Maybe the chip can sustain this heat for longer but there's lot of parts in that machine that will not and the longer you warm them up the sooner they will fail.
Those are facts.

 

[happyhippo1337]

Please stop spreading FUD. There is no empirical data to corroborate the myth of "high internal temperature is bad for internal components". As you say, Apple always let's their hardware run hot — because it's the efficient thing to do. If it would damage hardware in any way they wouldn't have earned reputation of being one of the most reliable laptop brands in the industry.

That's so absurd I have to ask: are you on some kind of medication? High temperatures causing issues and less longevity is a myth? Holy ....

 

[leman]

I care because it is crucial for uninterrupted performance. This makes me money. I need it whenever I need it.

Here is the thing: do you know for sure that your tweaks give you uninterrupted performance or do you merely believe that?

Heat kills.

Again, stop spreading FUD. @GrumpyCoder posted some empirical research data that shows that there is no detectable effect on hardware longevity below the 105C mark. Why do you think TJunktion of modern CPUs is exactly 105C?

That was my point. Maybe the chip can sustain this heat for longer but there's lot of parts in that machine that will not and the longer you warm them up the sooner they will fail.
Those are facts.

Just because you say something does not make it fact. Show us some empirical data. Right now it's your word vs. industry semiconductor giants.

The fact that you blindly believe apple even after all the **** people like myself went through with 16" intels tells me your either a fabnoi or you really have no idea what are you talking about.

The Intel 16" can sustain 60W of power which is more than sufficient to run an i9 above the rated spec for pretty much an indefinite period of time.

 

[Grohowiak]

Here is the thing: do you know for sure that your tweaks give you uninterrupted performance or do you merely believe that?

Ok, so you have no idea what you're talking about.

Again, stop spreading FUD. @GrumpyCoder posted some empirical research data that shows that there is no detectable effect on hardware longevity below the 105C mark. Why do you think TJunktion of modern CPUs is exactly 105C?

You are talking about CPU like it's the only thing inside that case.
Again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Just because you say something does not make it fact. Show us some empirical data. Right now it's your word vs. industry semiconductor giants.

Liquid cooling wasn't invented to look cool.
Lol are you for real?

The Intel 16" can sustain 60W of power which is more than sufficient to run an i9 above the rated spec for pretty much an indefinite period of time.

Yeah and Intel chip is the only thing inside that case.
I say apple share holder or employee.

 

[leman]

That's so absurd I have to ask: are you on some kind of medication? High temperatures causing issues and less longevity is a myth? Holy ....

Yes, it's myth. Check @GrumpyCoder's post above. He posted a technical report that illustrates that heat has zero practical impact on semiconductor longevity under temperatures these systems are usually exposed to (100C or below). And there are other papers. And of course, there is the indirect evidence of Apple laptops not failing in droves even though they regularly reach temperatures of 100C. Like the fact that my research group regularly runs heavy-duty stat simulations on their laptops over night. I run the stats for my PhD yers ago, took my laptop about two weeks of more or less continuous 90-100C. Number of CPU failures in the group after 12 years I've been there? I can remember only one. Among hundreds and hundreds of machines.

The origin of the myth likely stems from the old overclocker community who would experience CPU hardware failures when attempting heavy overclocks without sufficient cooling. But the main issue there is voltage, which accelerates the detrimental effects. You don't have to worry about this stuff with consumer laptops, if they are well made.

 

[Grohowiak]

Yes, it's myth. Check @GrumpyCoder's post above. He posted a technical report that illustrates that heat has zero practical impact on semiconductor longevity under temperatures these systems are usually exposed to (100C or below). And there are other papers. And of course, there is the indirect evidence of Apple laptops not failing in droves even though they regularly reach temperatures of 100C. Like the fact that my research group regularly runs heavy-duty stat simulations on their laptops over night. I run the stats for my PhD yers ago, took my laptop about two weeks of more or less continuous 90-100C. Number of CPU failures in the group after 12 years I've been there? I can remember only one. Among hundreds and hundreds of machines.

The origin of the myth likely stems from the old overclocker community who would experience CPU hardware failures when attempting heavy overclocks without sufficient cooling. But the main issue there is voltage, which accelerates the detrimental effects. You don't have to worry about this stuff with consumer laptops, if they are well made.

My 27" failed twice. First it was burn marks on the screen. Took them 16 days to replace it.
Second time logicboard was replaced. Stopped working during Maya render at 100% cpu.

My 16" throttled so bad my wife's acer from 2017 would challenge it's performance.
I used apples diagnostic software to make my case. They still said it's normal. Sure it's within the design but crippled performance and efficiency is not what I paid for.
Why you think they throttle if heat is ok in your opinion?

 

[leman]

Ok, so you have no idea what you're talking about.

I definitely don't. I am not a therapist to judge someone's fanciful imagination. That's why I am asking whether you actually have anything solid in your hand or whether it's all just hot air (pun).

Liquid cooling wasn't invented to look cool.
Lol are you for real?

Your Mac has liquid cooling? Wild stuff...

 

[Grohowiak]

I definitely don't. I am not a therapist to judge someone's fanciful imagination. That's why I am asking whether you actually have anything solid in your hand or whether it's all just hot air (pun).




Your Mac has liquid cooling? Wild stuff...

I thought we are talking about limits of electronic components in general not macs?
As for the rest maybe you should start using your imagination a bit more and stop blindly believing in marketing material.

 

[leman]

My 27" failed twice. First it was burn marks on the screen. Took them 16 days to replace it.
Second time logicboard was replaced. Stopped working during Maya render at 100% cpu.

My 16" throttled so bad my wife's acer from 2017 would challenge it's performance.

Seeing that all these highly strange cases are limited to you household I would look into your particular environment. Does not sound like normal experience.

Why you think they throttle if heat is ok in your opinion?

Of course heat is not ok at some points. That's why there are safety limits. But all the available empirical data points to the conclusion that 100C is ok for semiconductor tech as well as supporting circuits. Hotter than that is not ok.

 

[mi7chy]

High temperatures causing issues and less longevity is a myth? Holy ....

Most consumers go through frequent upgrade cycles and don't keep their devices long enough to see the impact on high temperature. Ask any vintage computer collector or repair shop and they will tell you that heat is a killer of not only the component itself but also for surrounding components like capacitors that degrade and fail often causing a short.

 

[Grohowiak]

Seeing that all these highly strange cases are limited to you household I would look into your particular environment. Does not sound like normal experience.



Of course heat is not ok at some points. That's why there are safety limits. But all the available empirical data points to the conclusion that 100C is ok for semiconductor tech as well as supporting circuits. Hotter than that is not ok.

yah... limited to my household... lol

(2019) 16" is HOT & NOISY with an external monitor! :(

Because it's their own sillicon and Apple can't blame AMD or Intel anymore and also for the fact that it would be embarrassing for Apple to have AS Macs with thermal issues. They treat it more carefully than Intel Macs. Look at the Intel 2020 MBA. It was trash and overheats doing simple things...

forums.macrumors.com

This is just one example.
I'm going to stop now cause you're clearly advocating for a brand here without understating that your experience doesn't equal everybody else's.

Most consumers go through frequent upgrade cycles and don't keep their devices long enough to see the impact on high temperature. Ask any vintage computer collector or repair shop and they will tell you that heat is a killer of not only the component itself but also for surrounding components like capacitors that degrade and fail often causing a short.

I've rebuild two amiga boards a while ago as I'm a big fan of the 600s and 1200's and capacitor replacement is pretty much the first thing you are told to do / recommended / advised to get them up and running.

 

[leman]

Most consumers go through frequent upgrade cycles and don't keep their devices long enough to see the impact on high temperature. Ask any vintage computer collector or repair shop and they will tell you that heat is a killer of not only the component itself but also for surrounding components like capacitors that degrade and fail often causing a short.

How vintage are we talking about? And yes you are right, capacitors are a problem and a common reason why older machines fail. But it can be offset somewhat by using higher quality parts. Which is probably why Apple machines have the reputation of living longer — Apple generally does not cheap out on power components unlike the average laptop manufacturer.

 

[Hoo Doo Dude]

Get back to me when you have hard data showing a correlation between failures/problems at specific temps. But, sure, Apple probably spent years designing their SOC's to deliberately run them at harmful high temps so as to cause premature failure. Yeah, that's absolutely gotta be true.

Can be go back to obsessing about excessive disk writes? That was a lot more fun.

 

[JimmyjamesEU]

That's why we need peer review and not rely on Apple supported influencers and one brand fanboys.

Absolutley. We need a reviewer where a pc is allowed to use gpu acceleration and the Mac isn’t. That and hashcat.

 

[Grohowiak]

Get back to me when you have hard data showing a correlation between failures/problems at specific temps. But, sure, Apple probably spent years designing their SOC's to deliberately run them at harmful high temps so as to cause premature failure. Yeah, that's absolutely gotta be true.

Can be go back to obsessing about excessive disk writes? That was a lot more fun.

Chip throttling is a problem to anybody that needs performance at all times even though the function was designed to specifically work this way. Imagine buying a lambo only to find out that at after driving 150km/h for a while your power is restricted by a computer and you can't go faster till the components cool down.

So while "it works as intended" is factual, also " performance went to ****" is true and both can be used in same sentence describing the effect of CPU reaching it's thermal limit. Just cause the chip didn't die doesn't mean that it's working at 100%. Apple saved your electronic component by slowing the system to a crawl. Wooheee as the render time just went stratospheric.

Does any of you even use those computers for anything else than post on forums? Something that can actually challenge the marketing noise you are fed?

But to put it in layman's term: It is a problem even though we are told it isn't.

FYI this is the reason I also use a liquid cooled PC. I can push it much further.
Current software optimization on apples part my change my mind down the road but I know they didn't just change the laws of physics.

 

[leman]

Chip throttling is a problem to anybody that needs performance at all times even though the function was designed to specifically work this way. Imagine buying a lambo only to find out that at after driving 150km/h for a while your power is restricted by a computer and you can't go faster till the components cool down.

So while "it works as intended" is factual, also " performance went to ****" is true and both can be used in same sentence describing the effect of CPU reaching it's thermal limit. Just cause the chip didn't die doesn't mean that it's working at 100%. Apple saved your electronic component by slowing the system to a crawl. Wooheee as the render time just went stratospheric.

Does any of you even use those computers for anything else than post on forums? Something that can actually challenge the marketing noise you are fed?

But to put it in layman's term: It is a problem even though we are told it isn't.

I am confused. So ok, we are not talking about "heat kills". Now we are talking about "performance went to ***". Do you have any evidence that performance of these M1 Pro/Max machines "goes to ***" without your fan tweaks? I've looked at some sustained performance benchmarks of these machines and so far their performance seems to be "the ***" instead of "going to ***"...

 

[Grohowiak]

I am confused. So ok, we are not talking about "heat kills". Now we are talking about "performance went to ***". Do you have any evidence that performance of these M1 Pro/Max machines "goes to ***" without your fan tweaks? I've looked at some sustained performance benchmarks of these machines and so far their performance seems to be "the ***" instead of "going to ***"...

As you can see I'm replying to a post that mentions failures/problems at specific temps.
If you don't find performance drop as a problem then I guess you never ever used the computer hard enough to know what is it that's I am talking about. Time = money. That's for reading comprehension.

As for new silicon performance throttling I'll wait till I can get my hands on apple's diagnostic tool again but till that happens I'll apply same logic and behavior I do to keep all my systems running healthy. We're talking about making money here so 18 degrees C temp drop at WORST will only make the computer feel cooler to the touch and at best save it's longevity while providing 100% of power whenever I need it. From my perspective it is a win win no matter how you look at it.

 

[Hoo Doo Dude]

Chip throttling is a problem to anybody that needs performance at all times even though the function was designed to specifically work this way. Imagine buying a lambo only to find out that at after driving 150km/h for a while your power is restricted by a computer and you can't go faster till the components cool down.

So while "it works as intended" is factual, also " performance went to ****" is true and both can be used in same sentence describing the effect of CPU reaching it's thermal limit. Just cause the chip didn't die doesn't mean that it's working at 100%. Apple saved your electronic component by slowing the system to a crawl. Wooheee as the render time just went stratospheric.

Does any of you even use those computers for anything else than post on forums? Something that can actually challenge the marketing noise you are fed?

But to put it in layman's term: It is a problem even though we are told it isn't.

FYI this is the reason I also use a liquid cooled PC. I can push it much further.
Current software optimization on apples part my change my mind down the road but I know they didn't just change the laws of physics.

Not a layman, so no need to simplify for my sake. You seem to ignore the huge number of Apple machines of all sorts in heavy use by hard hitters. Lots of creative professionals having been using previous generations of Macs for years and getting great performance and product life. Apple machines tend to stay in service for extremely long times.

Theorize away, I'll stick with actual performance in use.