Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
16-Inch M3 MacBook Pro Can Fast Charge Over USB-C With 240W Cable
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A lot of the cheap no-name e-bikes fail to conform to any safety standard. And some people build their own e-bikes batteries without the skills to properly protect the cells. Fire is an obvious consequence.
I always stick to well-known brands that conform to safety standards, but my dad is an electrical worker and my neighbor was nearly killed in a house fire.
Some people just take it on faith that a mystery cable or charger or battery pack is very unlikely fail in a catastrophic manner.
Last edited:
Let you Google this for me (.com): can Thunderbolt charge faster? Fastest charging always seems limited to MagSafe, probably for good reason.
Edit: your results return too slow. Thunderbolt is also 100W.
I notice with a 100 watt charger and a 100 watt cable, my 14" only charges at a maximum of 65W. Honestly that's probably best but I was under the impression it would charge at a maximum of 96W. Or is that only the 16"? Or only over MagSafe? This is all a bit confusing.
Frankly I don't care that much anymore, it's all fast enough and nothing overheats.
They use thicker wires for the power and remove some of the data wires to keep the total cost and thickness down. A USB C cable can have between 4 and 16 conductors depending on the use.
Incorrect. The link provided does indeed say USB 2 speeds on the Product Information page.
Attachments
This is very confusing because even Apple's own product page about the Thunderbolt cable specifically says it's limited to 100W. The fact that USB-C can charge at more than twice that is news to me.
This seems to be entirely dependent on the cable, and the cable listed in the article seems to be the only one that can do it. Didn't know this was part of the spec now. As if it weren't confusing enough already.
The Thunderbolt cable has its own specs that are different than the MacBook’s specs.
The Thunderbolt 4 cable from Apple is 100 watts limited and always has been. But the port on the MBP 16 M3 now supports 140 watts. If you wanted to use Thunderbolt with 140 watt charging you need the Satechi TB4 cable which has up to 240 watts, plus whatever supplies 140 watts over Thunderbolt if it’s a data device, I think the posted Dell 6k monitor is currently the only one (Everything else is just a charger, not data device).
If you’re looking for a Thunderbolt dock with 140 watt charging probably you’ll have to wait for CES for new product announcements.
It's not a thunderbolt cable, USB C can be confusing.
Incorrect. That's the speed of the cable, not the MBP's ports which is what I was talking about.
Last edited:
20%-80% range is what in try to keep my old laptop at. Same with my EV actually.
Al Dente app I recently purchased does this automatically.
It would be great to see Apple bake this option into macOS, just like they have done with the iPhone 15 series.
Optional toggle on/off of course.
Well of course. But the thread title and comment I quoted was specifically trying to differentiate standard M3 (referenced as "it") vs. M3 Pro/Max.FixedPro/Max in previous gens supports TB4.
Crikey. Seems not worth it unless you are constantly running from place to place compiling Xcode and rendering 3d scenes and just absolutely cannot ever get enough battery charge.
Starting to realize that now. Not used to usb-c being ahead of Thunderbolt.
From what I’ve heard, the difference between 100 and 140 watts is negligible. The MacBook mostly uses 140 watts for the fast charging feature, if you plug in 100 it’s capable of doing all the same things with the CPU/GPU/storage, it just won’t fast charge while doing it. It will still charge, too, just take an extra hour or 2 to do it.
Newer Android phones show how it's done they can charge with 60W and even 100W
They just put in more charging circuits basically, and split the battery into multiple batteries, each then charging with 25W... for example
You could take a MacBook Pro battery - which is massive anyway - and split it in 4, and get 4x the charging speed.
I know this is oversimplified and I am sure there's complex engineering problems to solve along the way, but they have been solved in phones so the basic idea is solid.
The question I have though, is why the 16-inch M1 MacBook Pro had an M1, when the one this year has an M3?!?
How come? Even without optimized charging, I fail to see a problem. I'm sure Apple's thought of a bypass where at max battery, USB-C power is used and the battery is left alone.
Amazing. We're entering a new era of unified connector but confusing USB-C cables... at least some colour standard or symbols could be used in the connector. Good luck finding one when we have a bunch of cables to connect your SSD external drive...
You're not losing a port with MagSafe though because MagSafe does not take up any bandwidth on the bus and SOC. You can add as many charge-only ports as you want without affecting other ports.
But it seems on MacRumors rather than critically thinking people would rather **** on features other people love and wish for them to be removed just because they don't use them, even if they aren't negatively affected by them
