Interesting reviews for those interested in thermals of the Macbook

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by Fuzzball84, Apr 30, 2016.

  1. Fuzzball84 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2015
    #1
    Two interesting links for reviews that include a section measuring the surface temperatures of the retina MacBooks (first is 2015 and second is 2016 version, both are base models). They give the rooms ambient temp underneath for each set of measurements.

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-12-Early-2015-1-1-GHz-Review.143178.0.html
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-12-Early-2016-1-1-GHz-Review.164797.0.html


    So it looks like the core m3 macbook runs slightly cooler under load than the older core M. Note that the first review was with OS X Yosemite and not El Capitan that could improve performance of the older version.
     
  2. izzyfanto macrumors regular

    izzyfanto

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
  3. asoksevil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Location:
    Taipei, Taiwan
    #3
    This is interesting:

    Verdict

    The 12-inch MacBook is and remains an impressive device. Low weight, an excellent display, and its build quality are outstanding properties. However, not much has changed compared to the model from 2015. Slightly improved graphics performance and slightly longer battery runtimes are no reason to change. Due to the lower single-core performance, the Skylake m3 is even slower than its predecessor in several benchmarks (and in everyday tasks). Nevertheless, the performance of the fanless subnotebook is sufficient for most applications. The Turbo can mostly keep the clock rate at 2 GHz if load does not persist for more than several minutes.

    It seems the 2016 M3 isn't worth to take over the 2015 M3, considering it isn't faster under everyday tasks and it costs way more than a refurbished 2015 model.
     
  4. tpr007 macrumors regular

    tpr007

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #4
    The review says the Air has a significantly better display.

    !?
     
  5. BeatCrazy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    #5
    2016 rMB graphics are improved in both real world and synthetic tests. I think you notice graphics performance vs a minor CPU difference, in real world activities.
     
  6. SSD-GUY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2012
    Location:
    London, UK
    #6
    Wow. I'm surprised the 2016 base model is slower then the 2015 base model in quite a few cpu benchmarks. Even in the GPU benchmarks, there isn't much of a difference between the two.
     
  7. helloitsme macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    #7
    [​IMG]
    It's amazing how far we've come. Even at its worst performance, the fanless m3 MacBook still manages to achieve twice the Cinebench R15 score as my 5 year old MacBook Pro.
     
  8. Fuzzball84 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2015
    #8
    I agree with you on that. Its amazing how powerful the macbook is (all versions plus 2015 versions) considering its size and passive cooling.

    After reading all of the reviews I'm thinking 99% that I'm just going to buy apple care in the last month warranty for my 2015 base model as for me the new base model is just slightly better on battery and more so on GPU. But I don't really push my system at all CPU and GPU wise and don't use it for games, so the benefits would only be a half or hour more battery runtime if I upgrade... and to be honest battery runtime hasn't been an issue at all for any macbook Ive had in the past two years (had a MBA and MBP before the rMB).

    Overall I think for new casual users the 2016 base model is a great buy as it is similar or improves on last years version in a number of metrics. But 2015 refurbs from apple are real awesome just now if anyone wants to save $300 or more. Those who bought during Best Buys recent sale of 2015 MacBooks also got a real good deal.
     

Share This Page