Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

M4 Max cooling and why we don’t have an M4 Ultra?

M

Mr_Time

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 5, 2020
28
23
I came across these videos testing the limits of the M4 Max performance cores and the thermal throttling he encountered…

Mac Studio M4 Max Torture Test: over 200W on the wall plug!

Mac Studio M4 Max has a Cooling Problem: Thermal Throttling at 109C!

I wonder if this may been a consideration as to why Apple opted for the M3 Ultra instead of an M4 Ultra, as an M4 Ultra, based on these tests, may have required a complete rethink of the the cooling solution. Even more improved over the M3 Ultra’s copper heatsink. It would have meant a redesign and new tooling of the current case design. Just a theory…
 
Mr_Time said:
It shares more in common with the M3 Max. The M3 Ultra Lacks the ARMv9 instruction set of the M4 for example.

Just from a marketing perspective, why would Apple want to label an M4 an M3?
Click to expand...
The difference in performance is not that much from what I read and having the m3 ultra labelled as m4 ultra may not have been justified because of this.
So m4 max and a slightly better m3 ultra for now until they have something with larger differentiation to m4 max to label m4 ultra

At least what I thought without going after what else can assure that m3 max is for sure former generation hardware
 
Palindrom said:
The difference in performance is not that much from what I read and having the m3 ultra labelled as m4 ultra may not have been justified because of this.
So m4 max and a slightly better m3 ultra for now until they have something with larger differentiation to m4 max to label m4 ultra

At least what I thought without going after what else can assure that m3 max is for sure former generation hardware
Click to expand...
Sorry, I think you are missing the point of my original post. It’s about M4 Max Mac Studio cooling challenges when pushed to the extreme, and how that may have been a potential bigger challenge when scaling two M4 Max chips to an Ultra.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brandair, cl516 and Parowdy
Mr_Time said:
Mac Studio M4 Max has a Cooling Problem: Thermal Throttling at 109C!
Click to expand...
Yes, Petar has done well with the stress testing. So many other YouTube "content creators" are just hack advertising bots. I noticed Petar a little while ago, when he started posting these tests, because, well, no one else was.

As for the M4 generating more heat than the M3 and that being the reason Apple did not do an M4 Ultra: maybe.

The M4 has been noticed by many people to run hotter than the M3. MacBook owners and Mini owners have noticed this.

This is what happens when you bump up the clock, which Apple did between the M3 and M4.

I do keep wondering what Apple is going to do for the M5, as it too seems to be on 3nm and if Apple bumps the clock again there will be more heat.

Apple runs Apple Silicon at lower clock rates than AMD and Intel do, for example, in their top processors.

This makes Apple Silicon more energy efficient, and Apple markets that (performance/Watt.)

I sort of doubt there will be another "Ultra" SoC, at least done in the way the first three have been done.

Apple is more likely to go with TSMC's "2.5D" or "3D" (as others call them) capability of stacking two die. This to me will be yet another thermal challenge and that perhaps is also why the M3 Ultra exists as even though TSMC claims to be able to do 3nm on top of 5nm die this year, Apple didn't go with it and instead went with the older CoWoS-S TSMC technique.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Parowdy, _Mitchan1999, T'hain Esh Kelch and 1 other person
Mr_Time said:
It would have meant a redesign and new tooling of the current case design.
Click to expand...
Apple could also speed up the blower.

The problem with that is the Studio will make much more noise, and one of the selling points of the Studio is how quiet it is.

I always am amazed at how many fans people who assemble their own PCs use. Three on the video card, fancy blower on the CPU, three fans on case front, three on case top, etc. And then they put glowing LEDs on them.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Lissek, AlphaCentauri, Cape Dave and 3 others
What app is the guy in the videos using to monitor CPU/GPU load, temps, fan speed, etc.?
 
ProQuiz said:
What app is the guy in the videos using to monitor CPU/GPU load, temps, fan speed, etc.?
Click to expand...
Looks like…

Mx Power Gadget by MenuBar Stats

Mx Power Gadget, MenuBar Stats, an Advanced Mac system monitor with Temperature & Fans plugins.
www.seense.com www.seense.com

and

www.tunabellysoftware.com

TG Pro

Maximize your Mac's performance with TG Pro. The ultimate solution for fan control and extensive temperature monitoring: CPU, GPU, SSD, and more.
www.tunabellysoftware.com www.tunabellysoftware.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: ProQuiz
Pro tip:

heat and power consumption for a given processor scales EXPONENTIALLY with clock speed. this isn't unique to apple, it's the same across intel, AMD, etc.

i.e., you could build an ultra in 200 watts by limiting its clock speed to almost as fast as the max, which when run in high power mode burns as much power and runs as high clock as thermal limits will allow.

YES it (either a max or ultra or pro) will "throttle" in high power mode. that's the whole point: run as fast as cooling will allow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlaskaMoose
I wonder how much of a difference the copper heatsink would make in the test scenarios in the OP?

Or maybe the question should be, if Apple knew M4 Max had the potential to run so hot, why not use the copper heatsink in all Studio configurations?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norbert Mikołajczyk, Cape Dave and Parowdy
throAU said:
Pro tip:

heat and power consumption for a given processor scales EXPONENTIALLY with clock speed. this isn't unique to apple, it's the same across intel, AMD, etc.

i.e., you could build an ultra in 200 watts by limiting its clock speed to almost as fast as the max, which when run in high power mode burns as much power and runs as high clock as thermal limits will allow.

YES it (either a max or ultra or pro) will "throttle" in high power mode. that's the whole point: run as fast as cooling will allow.
Click to expand...
It does not, though. Power consumption scales linearly with frequency. And high power mode is more like a mode allowing the fans to spin faster, the M4 Max should not be throttling in a Studio in high power mode, I think.


The M3 Ultra has a copper heatsink so I would think it could handle a M4 Ultra as well. The M3 Ultra Studio weighs 1kg (about a foot and an arm or what unit the Americans use) more than a M4 Max Studio due to the copper.

It's a bit interesting however, what will Apple do with future chips? It's seems like the majority of the performance gains from M1 to M4 comes from higher frequencies, but they will not be able to continue like that forever. I hope they have some clever things in mind, otherwise it will soon get very stale.

Also, just think about the fact that a M4 Max throttles in a Studio, what about the 14" MacBook Pro then. That is one stressed out cooling system :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: brentsg
The only thing I have to test temps/cores, etc. is Cinebench R23. Point me to a download and I'll torture my M4 Max chip hehe.
 
I believe that Apple has put itself in a corner in relation to thermal management of the Mac, primarily because of its obsession with "thinness and smallness" in the design process. Then having the air-intake ports right at the base (Mini and Studio) sitting on a desk or table makes things worst. At least the Studio's air exhaust is not at the bottom like the Mini is, but both are prone to "inhale" dust and other particles more than the 2019 iMac, and the late Mac Pro.

Put a Mini or Studio on the floor next to your desk, and you better figure a way to keep it clean. Maybe Apple's engineers have figured a different way to keep future Macs cooler than just using fans? I doubt it of course. I would think that the M4 could run cooler inside the case of a Mac Pro.

Aluminum versus copper: aluminum dissipates heat faster than copper. Copper absorbs the same heat and retains it longer. That's the reason why most of the hot-water baseboard heaters at home have a copper pipe and aluminum cooling fins.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
AlaskaMoose said:
Put a Mini or Studio on the floor next to your desk, and you better figure a way to keep it clean.
Click to expand...
Both the Mini and Studio are designed to sit on your desk. They are sold as such. I'd no more put a Studio on the floor than I would my toaster.

AlaskaMoose said:
Apple has put itself in a corner in relation to thermal management of the Mac, primarily because of its obsession with "thinness and smallness" in the design process.
Click to expand...
Apple has been, since 1976, in the personal computing business.

From 1976 through the 1990's that meant putting a computer on your desk.

Laptop computing became a big thing for personal computing in the 1990s and Apple was right there with their own laptops.

Today, personal computing means something you can carry in your pants pocket, or purse, or backpack.

And because Apple is in the business of personal computing, and not workstations or enterprise information systems, Apple works to make its products fit into people's lifestyles.

And that is why there is no new Mac Pro (yet, and maybe never). And, that's why the Mac Studio physically is the same for all three generations. The 2024 Mac Mini was a welcome change of pace, but even with all the buzz it created it's still a specialty item. Most people buying Macs will by a MacBook, a much smaller percent will buy an iMac.

And yet, Apple carved a niche for the Mac line very early, in desktop publishing, and then with the color Macs also the photographers got on board. The Mac Studio exists to continue serving that niche. The Studio is for these professionals: photo, video, and small scale publishing.


AlaskaMoose said:
aluminum dissipates heat faster than copper. Copper absorbs the same heat and retains it longer.
Click to expand...

Thermal conductivity:
Copper: Approximately 401 W/mK.
Aluminum: Approximately 237 W/mK.

Thermal conductivity works both ways. And black body radiation depends upon the temperature.

The reason Aluminum is used instead of copper is for one or more of these reasons:
1) aluminum is less expensive;
2) aluminum is less dense;
3) aluminum resists corrosion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: b17777 and Cape Dave
picpicmac said:
Both the Mini and Studio are designed to sit on your desk. They are sold as such. I'd no more put a Studio on the floor than I would my toaster.


Apple has been, since 1976, in the personal computing business.

From 1976 through the 1990's that meant putting a computer on your desk.

Laptop computing became a big thing for personal computing in the 1990s and Apple was right there with their own laptops.

Today, personal computing means something you can carry in your pants pocket, or purse, or backpack.

And because Apple is in the business of personal computing, and not workstations or enterprise information systems, Apple works to make its products fit into people's lifestyles.

And that is why there is no new Mac Pro (yet, and maybe never). And, that's why the Mac Studio physically is the same for all three generations. The 2024 Mac Mini was a welcome change of pace, but even with all the buzz it created it's still a specialty item. Most people buying Macs will by a MacBook, a much smaller percent will buy an iMac.

And yet, Apple carved a niche for the Mac line very early, in desktop publishing, and then with the color Macs also the photographers got on board. The Mac Studio exists to continue serving that niche. The Studio is for these professionals: photo, video, and small scale publishing.




Thermal conductivity:
Copper: Approximately 401 W/mK.
Aluminum: Approximately 237 W/mK.

Thermal conductivity works both ways. And black body radiation depends upon the temperature.

The reason Aluminum is used instead of copper is for one or more of these reasons:
1) aluminum is less expensive;
2) aluminum is less dense;
3) aluminum resists corrosion.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected about aluminum heatsinks versus copper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: picpicmac
Diamond: 2,000 to 2,200 W/mK
Integrate the SoC die silicon directly with the heatsink.
Infinitesimally thin…..
Where is Jonny Ive when he’s needed… 😵‍💫
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back