MacBook heats up very much

[Queen6]

I don't have a thermometer, but based on simple observation I can tell you unequivocally that as a baseline the 15" rMBP runs hotter than either machine.

Which is why comparing a 2011 (17 or 15) and making assumptions about "what are acceptable temps" on an 2012 15' rMBP is an apples by oranges comparison by default.

Different design, different chipsets = different temps.

I don't think there's been a satisfactory response or collection of data on the 15 rMBP for anyone to conclude that "anything stable above 95 is unacceptable" as was previously stated.

Which is why I think GGJstudios by default is being the most logical about this whole discussion, at least from the standpoint of the 15 rMBP:

• Intel's specs state the IB TJ max temperature is 105C
• 1 year in there have been little to no heat-related failures of the 15 rMBP reported, at least between MacRumors and ASC.
• A fair conclusion to draw is that, while those high temps may or may not have an effect on the longevity of your machine, Apple's fan-cooling policy /design has been doing an acceptable job at preventing heat-related failures

I do agree that the paste/heatsink job can be much much better, though. Maybe we wouldn't get as many of these "OMFG my rMBP sucks so bad it gets so hot" threads.

BTW I've repasted my rMBP and have generally been seeing lower temps (idle at 40 where it would be 45 before, under load stable at low 80s whereas before I would hit mid-high 80s). But I can certainly still get my rMBP to hit 100C+ consistently. All I need to do is play Candy Crush Saga on FB (yes I will admit to that, I'm on level 325 )

I have a Mid 2012 15" Retina and it performed much the same, just read the thread presently idling at 40C with an ambient of 25C. I also have a ThinkPad T430u which runs extremely cool, has better ventilation, greater internal air space in the chassis and it too idles in the upper 30`s, low 40`s

Personally I am not at all sure what people really expect from the Quad Core MBP`s they have desktop levelling performance, yet some expect these thin, light, aluminium clad systems to run at the same temperatures a Pro based PC notebook that are nearly twice as thick, having cooling systems with far greater capacity.

Your Retina hits 100C+ due to design, not inefficiency this has always been Apple`s path with their portables quietness over temperature. Swapping out the thermal paste can only effect the efficiency of thermal transfer not the TDP. In your case you have reduced temp, equally the system still hits 100C+ there is no getting around this, thats how the MBPr was designed.

 

[Doward]

I have a Mid 2012 15" Retina and it performed much the same, just read the thread presently idling at 40C with an ambient of 25C. I also have a ThinkPad T430u which runs extremely cool, has better ventilation, greater internal air space in the chassis and it too idles in the upper 30`s, low 40`s

Personally I am not at all sure what people really expect from the Quad Core MBP`s they have desktop levelling performance, yet some expect these thin, light, aluminium clad systems to run at the same temperatures a Pro based PC notebook that are nearly twice as thick, having cooling systems with far greater capacity.

Your Retina hits 100C+ due to design, not inefficiency this has always been Apple`s path with their portables quietness over temperature. Swapping out the thermal paste can only effect the efficiency of thermal transfer not the TDP. In your case you have reduced temp, equally the system still hits 100C+ there is no getting around this, thats how the MBPr was designed.

I disagree that the rMBP is designed to consistently run 100C+.

Your own observations should support that conclusion - when doing that 1080p code the other day (where we were checking on external case temperature) - what was your CPU temp?

As a comparision (lapped + arctic silver 5):

Doing 1080p encoding, my CPU temps had stabilized to ~190F (~88C), running full bore for a solid hour.

I humbly suggest that if your system stabilizes to temperatures over 95C, that you have a thermal issue.

 

[Queen6]

I disagree that the rMBP is designed to consistently run 100C+.

I humbly suggest that if your system stabilizes to temperatures over 95C, that you have a thermal issue.

Well why don't you take that to Apple as you are clearly far more knowledgeable than the engineers who designed the Retina. Do you seriously believe that Apple designed it one way and Foxconn simply simply decided to build it their own way?

FWIW my Mid 2012 Retina stabilises at 92C (Core temp) during 1080p encoding, equally different systems, different video files, differing conditions. Nor does SB have the same temp sensors as IVB with CPU proximity on the Retina only registering 64C. On SB the primary temp sensor for the CPU is "CPU Diode" this in general runs significantly cooler than actual CPU Core temperature, on IVB temp is generally derived from CPU Core Temp a higher value, as ever all is not equal....

What can be unified is that under the similar load of coding 1080p my 15" unmodified systems physically get no hotter than your larger 17" that has been modified, as I have always maintained your system had a defect, and likely there are more, equally the vast majority perform as expected, by Apple, Foxconn, and the users...

Or did we really go to the moon in 69

 

[swerve147]

MacBook heats up very much

Just to clarify Doward. A proper thermal paste/lapping job will not necessarily prevent temperatures rising to 100C+...however any stabilized full load where you're settling at temps above 95 is something to be concerned about.

Is that accurate?

(In my previous example of CCS I will certainly hit 100C+ but it will ultimate stabilize to the low 90s after stabilized load.)

 

[Queen6]

Try this launch Terminal, and Activity Monitor so you can easily observe the CPU load and system resources.

To stress test your Mac, type the following command into Terminal:

yes > /dev/null &

This sends one instance of ‘yes’ into the background, to fully load the CPU you need to repeat the process by hitting up arrow and return to run another several instances, or throw a group onto a single line like so:

yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &

When finished, in the same terminal window type “killall yes” into the command line to kill all instances of the yes command, you will see the following:

$ killall yes
[1] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[2] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[3] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[4] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[5] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[6] Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[7]- Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null
[8]+ Terminated: 15 yes > /dev/null

All instances of “yes” will drop from the process list in Activity Monitor. This will max out the systems CPU, if you want to really want to push the system, have something graphically intensive running in the background triggering the discrete GPU. Just be warned by doing this system core temp`s will be close to or exceed 100C/212F.

My Mid 2012 2.3 Quad Core Retina wont pass 90C (149F), runs without any indication of throttling at 3.1GHz, CPU consuming less than 40W. Add on the discrete Nivida GPU playing back a 1080P video (13Gb file) the system wont push past 94C (201F) with an ambient of 25C (77F) the system also has a host of background apps running. This is 100% CPU load with the Nivida GPU running, no throttling.

Anyone think this is a problem given the computing power and dimensions of the MBPr?

 

[Queen6]

Is that accurate?

No; Only Apple knows the exact operating specification for each component, if you are concerned take the machine to Apple they can test the system for abnormality in the cooling system. Bear in mind this is CPU Core temp, likely the rest of the system is less than mid sixties centigrade.

In general Mac`s run hotter than comparable PC`s, in general Mac`s do not suffer from poor longevity.

 

[dastinger]

Haven't done that test forever. Mine sits at 102ºC running the 8 processes, a 1080p movie in VLC at the same time, Chrome opened with 9 tabs and Transmission. And all the other small apps (Dropbox, Fantastical, SabNZBd, Boom, BetterTouchTool, gfxCardStatus, Scroll Reverser, Little Snitch).

Am I concerned? Nope

 

[Darkaholic]

Very helpful stuff everyone. Greatly appreciated
I did hear this is quite common. Also, my mac mostly heats up big time when rendering.
I was told not to worry by the genius bar.

 

[Doward]

Just to clarify Doward. A proper thermal paste/lapping job will not necessarily prevent temperatures rising to 100C+...however any stabilized full load where you're settling at temps above 95 is something to be concerned about.

Is that accurate?

(In my previous example of CCS I will certainly hit 100C+ but it will ultimate stabilize to the low 90s after stabilized load.)

Open Intel's Power Gadget and see what your CPU speed is as the temperature stabilizes. I wouldn't be surprised to see slight throttling to keep your temp under control.

----------

My Mid 2012 2.3 Quad Core Retina wont pass 90C (149F), runs without any indication of throttling at 3.1GHz, CPU consuming less than 40W. Add on the discrete Nivida GPU playing back a 1080P video (13Gb file) the system wont push past 94C (201F) with an ambient of 25C (77F) the system also has a host of background apps running. This is 100% CPU load with the Nivida GPU running, no throttling.

Anyone think this is a problem given the computing power and dimensions of the MBPr?

Absolutely not - your system is clearly performing 100%! My suggestion is that your system is the baseline of what users should expect from the rMBP. If they are deviating from what you see, then yes, they have sub-optimal thermal systems.

Your data also shows that you get up to 92C CPU temps vs 90C from piping 'yes' to null - that shows that encoding has a higher load on the system than just piping yes.

A 10C (92C vs 102C when encoding) difference is a significant deviation from 'baseline' - and your data supports my theory that Apple's design parameters are a maximum of 90C stabilized.

It also supports my statement that anything over 95C stabilized is cause for concern.

On a more personal side note - I don't get you at times, Queen6. Look at the data for yourself - how can you clearly see that your system maxes out at 92C, then tell someone that their system running a full 10C higher is somehow 'ok'?

Also, what's with the 'take it to Apple, since you know so much more than Apple' (paraphrased, obviously) comment? Are you suggest that Apple's engineers are somehow infallible? This is how things are improved - by submitting data to the community for review.

If you leave the emotion out of it, the cold, hard data clearly supports my theory and position.

 

[Queen6]

On a more personal side note - I don't get you at times, Queen6. Look at the data for yourself - how can you clearly see that your system maxes out at 92C, then tell someone that their system running a full 10C higher is somehow 'ok'?

Also, what's with the 'take it to Apple, since you know so much more than Apple' (paraphrased, obviously) comment? Are you suggest that Apple's engineers are somehow infallible? This is how things are improved - by submitting data to the community for review.

If you leave the emotion out of it, the cold, hard data clearly supports my theory and position.

Doward we are not really odds, just have different perspectives:

I dont care for generalisations, every system is different, simply due to the owners choice of software, this also extends to physical location and ambient temperature. So with this in mind how can we state a one fix for all, opening up the machine is the last in a line of many solutions?

Apples engineers are far from infallible, equally they have a better understanding than most. As for maximum operating the CPU/GPU are the least likely to fail, supporting components are far more vulnerable to high temperature: right now I can see on my Late 2011 15" MBP core temps of over 80C, yet the Logic Board temp is 40C with an ambient of 25C. Big numbers send "shockwaves" equally the system as a whole is relatively cool, a point worth thinking about.

As with all mass produced items there is a production variance, retuning systems that run overly hot to Apple is the solution, this way they will build metrics and in turn look for issue and or improvement. DIY or posting here wont have the same effect. People need to hold their ground and insist on a fix, not be blown off by an Apple Genius/Idiot.

Could the situation be better? Yes of course it can be Mac portables can run cooler, equally lets keep things in perspective. If Apple had set an optimal upper value of 90C for their portables, they would be engineered to throttle beyond this or any other prescribed integer. The MBPr does not throttle even at 104C from my observations, equally this is a "digital" value from Core Temperature not a dedicated temperature diode as per the SB CPU`s so the point of measurement is very different on the MBPr. Look at your Sandy Bridge system you will see the same with the right application; right now my Late 2011 15" MBP has a CPU temperature of 66C, however the digital Core Temperature has an average of 75C, nor are these values linear in general the hotter the CPU the greater the difference up to the point of thermal saturation.

As for emotion I don't have a lot for Apple these days as for me they are solely looking at the consumer sector, and resultantly slowly but surely leaving me "high and dry" for my computing needs...