Why? so he can have something else to b*tch and whine about?
Since you keep whining and b*tching about useless and meaningless stuff I would be safe in concluding that you do not.
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
Laptop Cooler For 2011 13" MBP
- Thread starter gregpod9
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Why? so he can have something else to b*tch and whine about?
Since you keep whining and b*tching about useless and meaningless stuff I would be safe in concluding that you do not.
It's meaningless because it doesn't apply to the OP's question. It's meaningless to this thread. And you're not safe in concluding (assuming) anything. It takes more than some experience as an electrician or some knowledge of high school science facts to fully understand heat-related issues in something as complex as a notebook computer.
Why? so he can have something else to b*tch and whine about?
No.
You have no point to argue unless you provide real world results. Go do some benchmarks and come back.
"I have encountered neither high temperatures nor computer instability since adjusting voltages lower with CoolBook. "
http://onscreen-scientist.com/?tag=overheating
And that's exactly what they trying to accomplish with coolbook by lowering voltages. The instability is not from the higher voltages its actually lessened by lowering the voltages which drops temperatures. Its you who misunderstood the thread.
No one increases or lowers voltage levels to increase instability. its complete nonsense to assume one would. This is a very old over clocking trick that has been used for years to increase stability by decreasing waste heat, something you obviously know nothing about.
I know exactly what they were trying to accomplish with coolbook. I know what is being discussed in that thread. Its you who does not. Self proclaimed computer expert and you do not even know the basic fundamentals of voltage tweaking to increase system stability.
GGJstudios, dude, at least get a clue before you go off spewing a bunch of nonsense about stuff you obviously know nothing about.
I had a meaningful premises and conclusion in my argument. Therefore, my argument was proven.
John89, at least learn what an argument is before you make claims about people's arguments not being proven.
All the guy wanted was a recommendation for a cooler.
Last edited by a moderator:
Where? Mate you have no results to prove your point. Seriously, go do some benchmarks and prove us wrong.
You've been arguing your point with everyone here.
All the guy wanted was a recommendation for a cooler.
True. I feel sorry for him really, you've really made a bad impression.
OP, to be honest I wouldn't bother. The 13" does tend to run a bit hotter than people expect, but it's perfectly normal.
Post your temps...maybe they are a bit high!
All the guy wanted was a recommendation for a cooler.
And the answer is ... he does not need a cooler for his MBP ... buying one is a complete waste of money
Cooler? A bit bulky but very effective.
jasin, you are failing to apply logic, science and common sense.
No one is arguing the laws of physics, but the application of those laws in this scenario need observation to see if there is a meaningful difference. Within the operating temperature range, I would guess any gains in efficiency would be insignificant. My guess is as good as yours.
jasin, you are failing to apply logic, science and common sense.
No one is arguing the laws of physics, but the application of those laws in this scenario need observation to see if there is a meaningful difference. Within the operating temperature range, I would guess any gains in efficiency would be insignificant. My guess is as good as yours.
Sigh... OP asked a simple question. The question unfortunately relates to an issue that is perceived quite differently by different people. You all are acting like 10 year old kids trying to win the last word.
OP: You should research to find some good software that displays the computers current temperature. If this temperature is within the normal range as defined on Apple website (should be I guess) then you are fine. If not, you should try to go to the store.
To answer your question: if you are using your laptop on your lap alot and you feel that the heat is an issue for you then try this product as you may find it useful.
OP: You should research to find some good software that displays the computers current temperature. If this temperature is within the normal range as defined on Apple website (should be I guess) then you are fine. If not, you should try to go to the store.
To answer your question: if you are using your laptop on your lap alot and you feel that the heat is an issue for you then try this product as you may find it useful.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Even if there is no added performance to the machine there are other benefits of running a system cooler such as longer life of the components.
There is no measurable difference in the life of a MBP with a laptop cooler, compared to the life of one without. The MBP would likely be obsolete and discarded/sold/given away long before the user would ever see the effects of using a cooler, if ever. If someone wants to use one because it gives them warm (or cool) fuzzy feelings, it's certainly up to them, but it is simply unnecessary.
MBp 13" i7 2.7Ghz Mbp 13" got lower speedmark scores than the Mbp 15" with a i7 2.2Ghz.
The 15" has 500mhz Slower processor but got higher benchmark scores. I would conclude that's because of the better heat dispensation as the video card, ram, and hard drive are all the same.
http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html
Well, benchmarking proves you wrong. See the benchmarking scores for the 13" and 15" above.
The 15" has 500mhz Slower processor but got higher benchmark scores. I would conclude that's because of the better heat dispensation as the video card, ram, and hard drive are all the same.
http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html
Well, benchmarking proves you wrong. See the benchmarking scores for the 13" and 15" above.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you talking about the 13" dual core and the 15" quad core?
Of course the 15" is going to be faster, it has twice as many cores!!
Also the 15" has a dedicated graphics card.
Last edited:
You can't add performance to a machine without adding a faster processor, more ram, or a better hard drive. The only thing you can do with better cooling, to a good extent, is prevent some performance degradation. That's still significant though as it makes the machine more efficient.
According to the apple website they have identical graphics. They both have the intel graphics 3000. Unless, of course, you do the customizing.
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/compare/notebooks.html
Last edited by a moderator:
They have the same integrated graphics, yes. But the 15" also comes with a dedicated graphics card for GPU intensive tasks.
EDIT: you can't change the graphics card.
Attachments
Jasin one little suggestion, don't waste your time. People who do understand what you are talking about, understood your since the 2nd or 3rd post. People who don't have an idea, won't believe you even if you were an Intel engineer.
Quad cores only make a difference if your software is optimized for it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/254391-28-what-makes-dual-core-quad-core-gaming
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?t=77911
Multi-core performance gains are actually subject to "memory bandwidth limitations (competition for access to memory by multiple cores), synchronization (“handshake”) overhead, and the programming skill of the application developer—threaded code is not easy to write well or correctly." anyways.
http://macperformanceguide.com/Optimizing-Cores.html
This is the last I'll say on this, since you appear desperate to manufacture any evidence to support your opinion, even if it doesn't have anything to do with the discussion at hand, or you simply want to argue to build your post count, which appears to be the case, since you repeatedly make consecutive posts, instead of using the multi-quote feature as moderators have asked you to do.
This isn't the only time you have selectively quoted me, trying to twist my statements to support your argument. My statement that you partially quoted was "There is no measurable difference in the life of a MBP with a laptop cooler, compared to the life of one without." The benchmarks you referred to do not address that statement in any way. They don't demonstrate anything having to do with the life of the models tested.
Also, they also do not compare running a MBP with a laptop cooler compared to the same MBP with the same workload running without one, which is the only benchmark test that would be relative to this thread's topic. They also compare two different configurations (dual vs quad core) and your inference that heat plays a role in the difference in benchmarks of those models indicates that you don't know how to accurately interpret benchmark tests, and you're completely unaware of the impact that various configurations can have on performance, aside from thermal issues.
Finally, nothing you have posted in this entire thread shows any factual proof that using a laptop cooler on a 2011 MBP makes that computer any more efficient, as you claimed it does.
Last edited:
Its called mac user logic. Its like apple dumbs down its users. Not saying anyone is stupid or anything, but paying $800-$1000 more to have what you can get for free is pretty stupid.
Rather then use a logical argument(s) and/or counter evidence you just claim its made up. *rolls eyes*
Last edited by a moderator:
So you're trying to tell me that Speedmark, a very well known & trusted benchmarking program, isn't optimised for quad core cpus?
Anyways...you're going to have to find someone else to argue your theory to.
Unsubscribed.
Not by customizing. You are correct about that. I was mistaken in my comment about that. I meant different versions. Nevertheless, there are two listed for the Mbp 15". As for the benchmarking, you are only assuming the Mbp 15" with the better graphics resulted in the higher benchmarking scores you have not proven it.
Last edited:
I never said It wasn't. I was only speaking generally. In reference to everyday computing, which is real world.
As for the quad core processing. In the real world all our applications and programs are not optimized for optimal processing power as this benchmarking software may be.
Ultimately its not the specs that matter in the end anyways -- its how one uses the computer. In reality no one needs a quad core processor if all they are doing is word processing and surfing the web. Its nice to have, yes, but its far from required or needed.
This aspect of Mbp cpu i5 vs. i7 and so on, has been addressed a lot in the buyers section and elsewhere. If you want more information on this then I suggest you go there.
That site must be outdated because it specifically states, "Apple ditched Intel's crummy integrated graphics and chipset". Yet, the intel graphics is listed on the apple website.
http://store.apple.com/us-hed/brows...W-MACBOOKPRO-INDEX&cp=BUYNOW-MACBOOKPRO-INDEX
It also states, "the integrated 9400M and a separate, beefier GeForce 9600M GT. " Yet, that's not the graphics listed for 15" mbp on the apple website.
http://store.apple.com/us-hed/brows...W-MACBOOKPRO-INDEX&cp=BUYNOW-MACBOOKPRO-INDEX
The site you provided 1. Has outdated information. 2. Is not discussing any of the models that were being benchmarked.
John89, nice try, but you still did not prove anything.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi OP. Still around? I don't think you need a cooler for the MBP 13", unless your temperatures are abnormally high.
What's abnormal? I don't know. Apple doesn't say. I suppose you could ask at the Apple store. You'll see lots of opinions in this thread. I figure that if the fan isn't even being triggered, then I am well within normal operating parameters. I usually range somewhere between 50 and 80 in regular use. At the moment, with lots of programs and tabs open, and Adobe Acrobat Pro doing OCR on a file, I am not even at 80. My fan hasn't turned on (it idles around 2000 rpm). See picture below.
You could do your work inside an industrial cooler and wear special clothing to keep your hot hands from heating up the computer in the hope of gaining a few hours or days of extra life out of your computer (who knows?), or you could decide not to worry about it. Personally, it seems kind of a waste to spend money to cool down your computer unnecessarily...
Attachments
- Status