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.
Has it been confirmed that the new MBP runs hotter than the new MB?
- Thread starter MontrealMonger
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Must be, since the mb uses the cold 9400m gt and the mbp came with the "oven" 9600m gt.
but im not sure who runs warm if both are compared using the same gpu(mbp running in "9400m gt mode").
but im not sure who runs warm if both are compared using the same gpu(mbp running in "9400m gt mode").
cpu's and graphics heat
I really want to know and am surprised that no one has posted heat comparisons tween the macbooks etc old and new.
In fact is there a heat difference in CPU's tween the higher and lower models?
The 2.53 unit may be an overclocked cpu hence more heat,
can anyone put me onthe right directions to get the info?
I really want to know and am surprised that no one has posted heat comparisons tween the macbooks etc old and new.
In fact is there a heat difference in CPU's tween the higher and lower models?
The 2.53 unit may be an overclocked cpu hence more heat,
can anyone put me onthe right directions to get the info?
"Overclocked" isn't really the right term. It's a different part, and would've been higher-binned. 2.53Ghz is it's stock setting. That said, it probably does run a bit hotter, that's just the way these things work.
Some average temps from my own machine (never spent any real time with the new MB or the old MBP, so can't offer anything up there)
Idle, 9400M
CPU 40-45C (a little cooler if it's on a table in a cool room)
GPU 40-45C
Northbridge 38C
Enclosure Base 26C*
Idle 9600M GT
CPU ~50C
GPU Diode** ~57C
Northbridge ~50C
Minor Load (iTunes encoding), 9400M
CPU 58C
GPU 50C
Northbridge ~48C
Heavy Load(Cinebench Multi-CPU render), 9400M
CPU 70C
GPU 50C
Northbridge 55C
Heavy Load (Cinebench Multi-CPU render), 9600M GT
CPU - 80C
GPU Diode - 77C
Northbridge - 68C
*There are 3 sensors labled "Enclosure Base", all of which read within 1 degree of each other all the time, usually showing a temp around ~25-30C. Interestingly, they don't change much, even during the "Burn-in" Cinebench test with the 9600M GT. This leads me to believe they aren't actually reading the base, but more likely the underside of hte Logic board, as kind of an "Ambient temp" sensor, reading the temp of the air the cooler is "breathing in"
**There are 2 GPU core sensors. One, labeled "GPU" appears all the time, and I think it is the on-die sensor from the 9400M. The other, labeled "GPU Diode" only appears when the 9600M GT is switched on, and is apparently its on-die sensor. It seems the 9400M cannot be disabled due to being part of the Northbridge.
One last note: During all of this, the fans stayed at 2000RPM. A little shocking at first, but remember the max temp for these chips is over 100C, and the machine was not uncomfortable hot on the bottom, meaning there is little reason to slash battery life and silence by ramping up the fans, so I think this may be intentional, although if anyone else has gotten their fans to ramp automatically, I'd love to know what the temp was and what you were doing at the time. Also, repeating the final test (Cinebench w/9600) with the fans manually set to 3800rpm (~60%) drops temps across the board by about 10C. Haven't tried it with the fans at full.
Interesting. Was the MBP running the 9400 or was it running the powerhouse discrete GPU? I`m very curious to know how the MBP fares heat-wise running the same 9400 as the MB.
Haha yeah the bottom of my MBP is running pretty hot. Like the temp I like to take showers... Meh earlier the cpu was reading kind of high. Now it has settled down to around 49 C.
This computer just makes me nervous.
This computer just makes me nervous.
That is quite remarkable!
I think it is due to the CPU's lower TDP of 25 Watts, compared to the previous generation which had chips with a TDP of 35 Watts in it.
At first I was using the dedicated gpu and boy did it get hot. The bottom was pretty hot and the cpu was reading something pretty high. I think it was around 60 or something. When I switched the gpu to the 9400 it cooled down.
Cool. I'm thinking I'll probably keep it on the 9400 unless heavy duty graphics handling is in order (if I get one).
Nope, it's because MBPs are too stupid to kick up the fan speed to keep the temp at a reasonable level, hence why everyone downloads smc fan control so you can use it on your lap without burning yourself. Without SMC, my 2.2SR would routinely go to 160-170F when doing any kind of multimedia and the fan would just be sitting there at 2000 rpm.
Any significant changes on MacBook Pros in Jan. 2009?
I am thinking of buying a Macbook Pro but have heard rumors that major changes are in the works for first quarter of 2009. Any word on this or should I buy now.?
Also I have heard there are problems with video flickering on the new releases of MBP and won't be addressed until release of 10.5.3.
I am thinking of buying a Macbook Pro but have heard rumors that major changes are in the works for first quarter of 2009. Any word on this or should I buy now.?
Also I have heard there are problems with video flickering on the new releases of MBP and won't be addressed until release of 10.5.3.
Well while I was at the Apple store I ran istat pro on a few machines some were basically cool to the touch and some you could fry eggs on them. I found out that under the power management settings you can switch between the performance and batter saving modes. One turns on the 9600 GPU and those were the hot machines when I checked. So Istat pro reported an alarming 69 degree GPU temp on the 9600 running. On the 9400 it was a mer 31 degree GPU temp. I was like wow.
No flickering video here and I doubt any major changes will occur for some time. I would not look for any significant changes until Nehalem is released which Intel is targeting for Q3-Q4 '09. Until then Intel plans a speed bump at the first of the year. That's it for processors. As far as chassis design changes that isn't happening for a very long time. Look how long the previous rev MBPs lasted.
What about larger solid state non-moving hard drives in 1st quarter '09? 250 or 320G
What about larger solid state non-moving hard drives for '09? say 250GB or 320GB
What about larger solid state non-moving hard drives for '09? say 250GB or 320GB
