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.
Calls for Apple to Bring iPhone-Style Low Power Mode to MacBooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While I probably wouldn't use either a high power or low power mode myself there's a lot to be said for both modes being there. More and more people are buying laptops as desktop replacements (especially with the likes of the i9 processor) in the case of a high power and more and more people are wanting longer runtimes in the case of a low power mode.
Having both modes could broaden the appear of the MBPs/MBAs.
Having both modes could broaden the appear of the MBPs/MBAs.
Would be great. I like my MacBook as silent as possible and the fear of a more noisy Mac (when I only watch a YouTube video or whatever) makes me think twice buying a 16" with dedicated graphic card and more powerful processor instead of the 13" with integrated graphic chip. Maybe the more powerful 16" doesn't even get hotter because of better cooling, but I got burned with my iMac in 2014 when chosing the i7 instead of the i5 (the i7 ramps up the fans a LOT quicker and louder even only after a few seconds of more CPU work) – I don't want this again.
So you'd want a low power mode that automatically turns on once your battery charge drops below 20% like on iPhones?
Last edited:
With Marco on this, but doubtful. Apple today really despises hardware transparency and informed pro options/choices. Don't want to avoid the risks of your T2 dying, sorry you have to use it to encrypt your disk. Want one system disk rather than two, sorry you get two (but we make you think it is one ??? ). Want to optimize your mouse, trackpad, and touchbar, sorry you get our lowest common denominator solution (thank God for BTT). Are you capable of repairing your own device, sorry no parts for you, and no support for the Right to Repair, and we take every effort to ensure no used parts are available as well. This one might get through though because Apple PR/Marketing is all about the environment and this has real affect on power use. Oops check that because it would mean batteries would get fewer charge cycles and therefore last longer. I am sure there is a spreadsheet that calc's the effect this has replacement/repair revenues, so it conflicts with Apple's revenue-optimized decision to give us no option except to throw away portable devices every few years.
Sounds like a great idea. Low power mode for when you're at the office with no charger and aren't doing anything serious but need it to last all day. Pro mode when you want to render stuff as fast as possible. And normal mode for when you don't really care either way, since you have your charger and aren't pressed for time.
Turbo boost uses more energy in the chip for the work it does. But more importantly it heats the computer requiring the fans to speed up and thus immensely increase the power spent.
I’m with others, the macOS should automatically turn on and off the processor features to manage maximum battery based on usage when not connected to power. A low power mode should work similarly when battery % falls below a threshold. There should be no need to turn it on manually on any of Apple’s OSs?
That might be true if idle power would scale down to close to zero, which I don't think it does (or one would have enough computing tasks to peg the CPU cores in their lowest power state, which would apply to computers doing intensive computing tasks like rendering farms, digital coin mining, etc.). The analogy would be a car engine idling while the car is stationary. You'd rather limit the top speed if that reduces the time the car spends at idle (in the somewhat abstract scenario where the car engine's efficiency would be constant for all throttle positions and rpm).
I agree in principle, but if they're going to break the principle of "just works" with a Pro Mode, then give me a corresponding Low Power mode.
For people who say "why complain about having options?", it's that along with options it creates excuses. Everytime someone on a forum then writes and complains about their battery life being bad, or their machine running too hot, people will say enable Low Power/Pro Mode. This changes the expectation from it being a problem that Apple must fix, to a user-problem because they didn't fiddle the right setting.
That's the Windows way, and it's ****.
And though I don't know if matters much, powering the fan in itself requires extra energy.
Think of low-power mode as a way to explicitly signal your computer that battery conservation is more important than performance. How else would it know this?
I'm a nursing student who goes to a university that was built in the 1890s, with additions in the 1910s, and then again in the 50s. Power outlets are very few and far between. Nursing students are on campus for 10-12 hours a day. A low power mode for my MacBook Air would be great; something I could use while I'm in class taking notes.
I'm buying this (the pro version).
I went through two 2019 MacBook Pro (15" / i9) because the fan came on during just about everything (CPU was overcooked) using Safari, Chrome, taking a poop, idle time. Ironically MS Office was the one thing that didn't trigger the fan.
In the end, the thermal system was jacked (likely - the machine was hot) and/or heat pipe was either bent or jammed.
Apple Engineering circa 2019 is either extremely lazy or has run out of talent. Their diagnosis? VMware. Which I run on my 2011 MacBook Pro and it doesn't trigger the fan.
I went through two 2019 MacBook Pro (15" / i9) because the fan came on during just about everything (CPU was overcooked) using Safari, Chrome, taking a poop, idle time. Ironically MS Office was the one thing that didn't trigger the fan.
In the end, the thermal system was jacked (likely - the machine was hot) and/or heat pipe was either bent or jammed.
Apple Engineering circa 2019 is either extremely lazy or has run out of talent. Their diagnosis? VMware. Which I run on my 2011 MacBook Pro and it doesn't trigger the fan.
So I assume you have never ever used the low power mode on iOS either?
Never been in a situation where you realize your iPhone won't last until you can charge again and therefore hitting the low power mode button early on and thus extending the battery life while accepting some annoyances?
Well, there is a way to have a low power mode already today: Disconnect the battery (though I don't know if this is still possible with the current laptops). This switches the CPU into a lower-speed mode. This is done as under very high CPU (and GPU, etc.) load, the external power supply might not be able to supply enough (peak) power and thus the power management additionally taps into the battery. With no battery connected, the CPU speed is lowered across the board to prevent the system getting into a state where peak power demand leads to a temporary drop in voltage (I think) which could damage components or at least cause the computer to crash.
Obviously only works while plugged in and thus the only benefits are heat and noise.
Macbooks already enter low power mode and disable turbo boost when battery gets really low.
You can observe this using Intel Power gadget.
I think the person mentioned in the article would get a better experience if, rather than disabling turbo boost, they used the Instruments utility to disable cores back down to dual or quad core (from hex/octo). This will massively limit max power draw without affecting single-core compute performance.
You can observe this using Intel Power gadget.
I think the person mentioned in the article would get a better experience if, rather than disabling turbo boost, they used the Instruments utility to disable cores back down to dual or quad core (from hex/octo). This will massively limit max power draw without affecting single-core compute performance.
As discussed in the article, being able to turn off turbo-boost would be another big driver of savings.
I'm not aware of any rigorous testing that can tell you what are the battery-saving options with the most impact (I imagine stuff like lowered screen brightness, wifi, and turbo boost disabling would make the most difference, while hungry Chrome tabs, background processes, and the like are relatively less.)
Either way I can definitely see the argument for a lower power mode alongside a "turbo" mode. Sometimes I just want the fans to kick up to get my projects done faster. Sometimes I want a quiet, long-lasting experience. Assuming that Apple simplified most of the options and collapsed them down to simple on/off toggles so I don't have to think about it, that's a win for most people.
Very welcome. My MacBook Pro 13 inch (166 battery cycles, normal condition) last about 2-3 hours (from 100% to empty) on an airplane working with Affinity. That's at least 9 hours wasted on a 13 hours flight. Furthermore I have to always look for power sockets, really annoying.
Having just gotten a MBP 15 Mid 2019, I read with interest about the benefits of disabling turbo boost. Upgraded from a 2012 MBP 15. That was still going strong for 80% of what I needed to do - web browsing, emails, and some word processing. Wanted something faster for my photo editing, and my new interest of video editing. So lower temps (haven’t used the new MBP much to note fan noise) to prolong cpu and battery life makes sense.
Wonder if any one here is using the app and could post some Geekbench tests...
Wonder if any one here is using the app and could post some Geekbench tests...