Somehow .. somehow I doubt that you're running a workload that will generate this kind of heat while you're using it on your lap.
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.
New MacBook Pro Features Smaller Heatsink Due to Supply Chain Issues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Somehow .. somehow I doubt that you're running a workload that will generate this kind of heat while you're using it on your lap.
I think this is the key here. Seems to me they are just optimizing the engineering to maximize profits. Sounds about right for a Tim Cook lead Apple to do. I’m not sure how analysts came up with supply chain issues as the main cause. However, it may have been a factor that pushed Apple to reengineer the SOC to be smaller, use half the chips, and be cheaper to produce.
Not the same speed as some around here spin bad Apple news
Last edited:
While I don’t think this will be an issue and some are overblowing the possibility, Apple has made questionable design decisions in the past that had to be rethought or redesigned or replaced, for example Butterfly Mechanism keyboard, MagSafe 2, laptop hinge, anti reflective coating on laptop screen, etc etc to name a few.
I think what Apple does is go back and forth on certain design choices only to use as a comparison on a future product. I will provide an example; M1 Pro > M2 Pro claim 20% CPU and 30% GPU performance increase with a 5nm Gen2 process, M2 Pro > M3 Pro claim a wider performance gap with longer battery life and being cooler similar to M1 Pro or even better and claim it’s due to the 3nm process when coupled with other changes for example faster memory, bandwidth, modules etc the sum adds to the additional performance increase not just the 3nm process. By designing the M2 Pro with these small changes it makes the next product far better. It’s part of marketing.
No, actually compromised performance is unacceptable.
Potentially something something is just an excuse to get outraged on the internet.
What matters is the performance, noise level and heat. It doesn't matter at all what components are used to achieve that result. Why should anyone get angry about a sensationalistic revelation about the insides of the computer? All meaningful properties of the devices can be described and measured in a normal review.
The M2 Pro die portion of the SoC ( if including whole package the RAM as bonded to) is actually LARGER than the M1. The M2 Pro package is actually 'taller' (relative to the picture, up:down ) than the M1 Pro package. The M1 Pro package is 'wider' (left:right) so it is a trade-off. 'Smaller' would have to be defined by area , not just one direction.
The M2 Pro footprint might be a bit smaller that they isn't an "upside". The die is bigger with more stuff. If you light up all of that additional stuff then you'll generate more heat. ( The fab process here largely didn't change so pragmatically have just a bigger chip with more stuff. Maximum, if take zero clock gains, can get -10% power reduction of N5P over N5. If add 12% more cores and accelerators then probably going to come out net positive. )
The other issue is that had RAM dies that had more of their area placed further away from the hotter main SoC die in the M1 more custom packages. Brining the RAM dies even closer isn't an upside thermally. It is more tighter coupling to a shared heat sink.
The M1 Pro package is more effective at distributing the heat to be collected so it can be taken away. (and the central die has a lower peak thermal point. ).
The net area producing heat here is LARGER not smaller. The main heater, the central die, got bigger!
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
That plus "inflation" to rationalize price hikes.
It's just automatic... as if simply using the words make it OK to all. I suspect it will continue for at least the next few years too with anything viewed negative through a pure consumer lens.
So 99.5% of users are paying extra for performance they'll never utilitize?🤔 They'd be smarter to buy the M1 Pro version and save themselves some moolah.😉
This move smacks of bean counter penny pinching.😤 It's a saving what? A few bucks in material?😖 And none of that savings getting passed on the consumers.😠 Let's hope it won't be Trash Can Mac Pro all over again.😑
Would this be the same team that signed off on the Butterfly Keyboard?
haha worse yet the supply chain here is literally just copper blocks. which last i check doesn't have any supply chain issues.
i love how supply chain issues always only affect consumers and not apple's profits.
You'd think after 3 years they should have found ways to resolve these supply chain issues.. but if it helps boost margins.. why the heck not!
It’s a PRO Machine for PRO Needs.
It’s not a good thing at all. It would make sense on a MacBook Air but not in a PRO Machine.
It’s not a good thing at all. It would make sense on a MacBook Air but not in a PRO Machine.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
The "inflation" excuse too. Apparently 100% of inflated costs pass through to consumers in inflationary times. Consumers feel the pinch of higher prices while the seller seems to feel no such pinch: inflation is not a problem for the seller. They report record revenue & profit each quarter.
As inflation gets under control and competitive forces drive down core costs (like NAND), does the savings pass through to the consumer? That's rhetorical. We know the answer.
given their track records in the past like butterfly keyboards? no i doubt apple engineer take account much 😂
A smaller interface block when collecting from multiple sources of different temperatures isn't really an upside. The central die is running hotter at peak loads ( more stuff added than power savings 'bought' by very smaller incremental node change of N5P ). Then drag the RAM dies closer to the bigger hotter die. At the same time shrink that interface block so the RAM dies load into the transfer process substantively closer to the hotter main die.
It is going to show higher coupling effects. Crippling coupling? No , but higher.
The interface block has to be somewhat of a heat sink so that the heat pipes that pull the heat from it and transfer to the more distance fins also has a source to pulled. The radiators are a transfer to the air. (those metal radiators over the fan outlets are not a massively larger volume than the interface blocks here. A multiple bigger, but not a crazy large multiple. They can't keep and hold heat for a long time. Their main job is to create high heat flow through the heat pipes. Not be a "hoover dam" reservoir. ). The radiators are a bigger reservoir of heat, but still need a smaller reservoir at the precursor point to the heat pipes. Trying to hold as little as possible in the chip dies themselves before collected by the heat pipes.
Technically, a M2 MacBook Pro is actually worse at warming your house. A better cooling design is more effective at transporting heat from the processor to the outside world. The processor will generate heat regardless, unless it has to throttle because of poor thermal design. Then it produces less heat, not more.Ah, so M2 MacBook Pro is better at warming my house vs M1 MacBook Pro.
Apple's got a ways to go to catching up to Intel though 🤣
Improved performance at warming my house/room?
Because 99.5% of users can get away with using an M1 Macbook Air, and not care. But the .5% who need a Macbook Pro, need a Macbook Pro for a reason.
Anything can be named Pro these days.
My BWM has a Pro slogan, must be for pro driver.
Better get used to this ongoing trend for cost-savings measures, as I doubt Apple will drop it anytime soon.
iMac with one fan only on base model, one NAND chip on base model SSDs, now this. It’s all for better margins to please investors.
iMac with one fan only on base model, one NAND chip on base model SSDs, now this. It’s all for better margins to please investors.
Right, but ultimately what matters to me is how long the machine takes to get through a given workload. Assuming the increase in heat (and potential fan noise) is within acceptable levels, if the new MBPs get through the task faster than the M1 models, I don't much care how that's getting done behind the scenes. I'm sure we'll find out how it all shakes out once we start seeing benchmarks in real use-cases.
But I thought the butterfly keyboard was Jony Ive’s fault? At least that’s what everyone here says.
People should be holding out until they go 3nm chips. Spec bumps aren’t worth it with Apple silicon.