Question. When you say majority, what are we talking? 51%, 99%, some arbitrary number or a weather vane guess? I know where my money is.
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.
Apple Says iPhone 15 Pro's Titanium Frame Does Not Contribute to Overheating Issue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why do things in half - make the whole internal frame and outside frame solid titanium (not plated) especially for this price point - we should be demanding more for our money for these devices.
They had to invest in a mass production process that fuses titanium and aluminum together. That’s…not exactly an easy thing to do at scale and in the extreme tolerances required from modern smartphones. There are significant engineering challenges in doing so…so I’m gonna guess there’s a reason.
You’re…just upset it’s not solid titanium? Just because?
At this point I can only assume people are being paid to go on the internet claim that Apple is going to throttle the processor. It's a talking point that comes up constantly, and since there is no evidence to speak of, and no logical reasoning that you could arrive at that conclusion with this level of zeal, I have to ask, why are you here repeating this claim and ducking any clarifying questions?
1. The problem is not that the phone is reaching a temperature that is too high
2. A software bug is causing apps or the OS to run the phone under full or at least a very high load, heating the phone up and wasting battery life - but not heating the phone up to a level higher than it would heat up to if used for benchmarks or gaming.
3. Throttling the processor in an update would do literally nothing to address this issue, because the phone already throttles itself after running at full performance for a while and heats up
Please address my points.
Edit: Oh I forgot to ask, how is the Huawei Mate 60 Pro, any opinion on it?
And why do you think CPU utilization spikes? Because the app dares to use a CPU? Are you implying that CPU is processing something it should not (what the app did not ask it to do)? That would be rather bizarre. Now, there might be a bug that causes some inefficiency, i.e. less efficient API is used or something like that but that's unlikely.
The bugs that cause performance issues in apps are a totally different animal. They slow down the app performance, they may require more CPU processing that otherwise would be needed but perfectly optimized apps can and will use as much CPU processing as is available. From the system perspective, it does not make a difference whether the app has a bug or not. The CPU should be controlled regardless.
We might be dealing with a bug in iOS where iOS is supposed to monitor the temperature of the phone (battery, CPU and other components) and tell CPU to throttle when the temperature in any area reaches the threshold level. But the bug fix in this case will require throttling.
These objective measurements you are talking about. What were they? Did they weigh the parts? How is any of this rubbish you are trying to pass, objective measurements? Provide measurements? Oh, you can't? Objectively, they did a fun experiment. You're talking nonsense without any actual facts. Provide a single fact on these objective measurements. A single one!
That does not mean the CPU is the cause. It is simply the result of it being used more than it should. An example I gave earlier was that an app is forcing the performance cores to be used instead of the efficiency cores. Could this not happen because of a coding error? You are painting one possible scenario. It doesn't mean it is the only scenario.
"The problem is not that the phone is reaching a temperature that is too high". Really? Is not that what people are complaining about? That the phones get too hot? This article title talks about the phone "overheating". And since the source of the heat is the processor, what would be a solution for reducing the processor temperature? Can the processor perform the same amount of calculations without slowing down? I guess it's possible if the bug is in the A17 microcode. But microcode bugs probably should not even be called "software bugs" as they are essentially part of the processor.
Why do you think that throttling is the only way to make processing of an app more efficient or used less? Throttling is the worst possible out of all examples. Did you not see any of the Apple Keynotes talking about efficiency cores for any of its SiC's?
Do you really expect Apple to admit any design flaws? Don't you remember battery-gate when Apple did throttle the processor. A lot of people back then also claimed that there was no flaw in the design. Well, it's been settled. Apple just paid $500M to the customers who suffered from this throttling. It took 7 years but the truth has been established.
Switching to efficiency cores from the performance cores to reduce the temperature would be a form of throttling too because this would significantly reduce the phone performance.
Really. They are not complaining that the phone is getting too hot. After all, phones get hot for legitimate reasons like gaming or benchmarks to name 2 easy example.
They're complaining that it gets hot for no reason.
But the phone isn't overheating. The phone is just getting hot as if some SoC intensive usage is happening.
As has been pointed out to you multiple times, not just by me, if a rogue app or process is utilising more of the SoC than it should, the phone will heat up. Is there something about this you're having trouble understanding?
Nope. In the scenario outlined, the app was inappropriately utilising the performance cores, and a software fix restored it to using the cores it was supposed to use. Try again.
The app does not decide which cores get used (performance vs efficiency). And if the efficiency core get used instead of the performance code, this would most likely cause performance hit (i.e. throttling). There are different strategies for utilization of performance and efficiency cores but usually efficiency cores are used when the phone performs some tasks that do not require performance. If the performance is required, then performance core should be used. This is intended to save the battery not to control the temperature.
I do not believe the app chooses which core to use. Besides, if the app is utilizing performance core and the core heats up, it means that the app is performing a lot of processing. Switching to the efficiency core will cause a performance hit, i.e. throttling.
So what was the flaw? That batteries degrade? Apples mistake was lying about throttling the phone, not that there was anything wrong with what the did (other than lie). They now include that as a switchable option in every iPhone, iPad, Mac and watch.
Switching to efficiency cores is a way to use low level computing efficiently. It is the way it's designed. You are suggesting always on display should be using high performance cores to show the time otherwise it's throttling. No it's not. It's being used efficiently because high performance cores are meant to be used when a high amount of processing is required... Not for background tasks, which seems to be the issue with the overheating and battery drain.
Plus I am not saying that this IS the cause, but just an example of what could cause the heat, as far as I know. If you know what the actual cause or solution is, maybe you should give Apple a buzz...
I don't know why I'm even going through this with you when you conveniently ducked all my other questions, but it doesn't mean the app is doing useful processing. Have you never heard of bugs that cause undue load? Never heard of memory leaks, or scenarios when an app or game can cause a system to run under full load for no reason?
No, in a scenario where an app is inappropriately, unintentionally causing the phone to run under high load, and that issue is fixed with an update, it is not throttling.
Based on the measurements conducted by Zach, there was more aluminum than titanium. That is a majority.
I don't know if that is the case or not and I will preface to say that I am just looking at some of the documents in Apples Coding documents, an App Developer can assign a QoS Class (Quality of Service Class) in order of priority in 4 different classes.
- User interactive
- User initiated
- Utility
- Background
Keeping a thread active while it tries to acquire a resource might minimize the overhead of switching thread contexts, but at great cost. When you keep a thread active but doing nothing, you prevent a CPU core from doing other work
Thus based on this, I believe the App will help determine which performance core is going to be used, not just the iOS.
You keep saying the same thing, and you keep talking about "Objective Measurements". I watched the video twice and there are no "Objective Measurements". Like I said. Fun experiment. We don't even know if the USB C port was titanium or stainless steel. He did talk about the quality of the titanium based on spectrometry, but again, no measurements on how much aluminium or titanium there actually is. Why are you confusing Objective and Subjective? What are these so called Objective Measurements you are making up?
Some people have been poisoned by social media to expect an argument over every thing. Deciding not to argue over something as inconsequential as this is not ducking anything. But you do you and rage on about glass vs titanium.
Shhh, facts about the actual amount of titanium aren’t relevant. The funny thing is, the folks arguing that the frame is entirely titanium while also arguing that titanium has no bearing on overheating are only giving fuel to that argument. Aluminum, which is the majority of the frame, dissipates heat better than titanium.
You keep saying untrue things. Zach objectively measured the thickness of the titanium using a digital thickness gauge and found there was 1 mm of titanium and more aluminum. Why are you confusing your subjective dislike of what Apple did with the objective fact that there is 1 mm of Grade 5 titanium on the frame, masterfully fused to more aluminum. Why are you pretending your subjective dislike negates objective fact?
You might be confusing me for someone else. I wasn't talking about glass. You had quite a wild claim:
But almost any phone or computer can get hot. It's within the design tolerance so how is that insufficient cooling? Please elaborate.
It sounds like you're saying that any computing device that gets subjectively hot to the touch but well within the design tolerances has insufficient cooling. Surely you're not saying that though?
Seems like this would be quite easy to clear up?
Don't call me a liar. So you don't have any facts then. All I was after was a fact about how much actual aluminium there was versus titanium which you clearly don't know. I'll take it as meaning subjective fact, when you use the term objective fact in bold as a form of sarcasm then. Then we are all good thank you, because I know that's what you really mean.
My M1 MacBook Air is too cold when I sit down with it on my lap. 😂 Love how people are just making stuff up and refuse to back any of it up with objective facts...
In the outer frame elements, it looks like the cross sectional thickness is about 1/2 titanium and 1/2 aluminum. So both are about 1mm thickness.
You have no clue what you are talking about. I work in the software field and have worked in the software field for 20+ years at multiple software companies. I can't tell you how many times a buggy build or poorly written code caused unnecessarily high CPU or memory usage (and hence caused the devices to heat up and slow down more than they should). Never once did we "throttle" the CPU usage to fix the problem. We fixed the buggy/inefficient code and the problem disappeared.