Actually, no. I remember the cracked molding of the G4 cubes, but can't recall any rampant overheating issues.
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 MBAs can't be fanless
- Thread starter motrek
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, no. I remember the cracked molding of the G4 cubes, but can't recall any rampant overheating issues.
http://www.geek.com/apple/apples-shameful-mistake-the-g4-cube-finds-a-new-ironic-purpose-1360025/
Also a lot of people were upset with the first MacBook Air because cooling was inadequate and it would frequently get into a thermal-throttled state.
The low-end Broadwell chips are designed to be operated fanless. This is not an Apple-only endeavour. Other companies will also design fanless machines.
The only thing I am curious about is how powerful these computers will be. Since Broadwell is basically just a shrunken version of Haswell I expect similar performance to the current line-up, maybe even slightly better.
If this thing runs FCPX smoothly I'm all in for a Space Grey 12" MBA
The only thing I am curious about is how powerful these computers will be. Since Broadwell is basically just a shrunken version of Haswell I expect similar performance to the current line-up, maybe even slightly better.
If this thing runs FCPX smoothly I'm all in for a Space Grey 12" MBA
Found some more info on that "15W" state. Its only for a few microseconds, so it can hit the Top-Speed faster.
there's more interesting stuff, the full article can be found here:
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/co...or-the-surface-4-pro-1265761?src=rss&attr=all
i'll be very surprised if apple is not going to use this in at least one new product.
The low-end Broadwell chips are designed to be operated fanless. This is not an Apple-only endeavour. Other companies will also design fanless machines.
The only thing I am curious about is how powerful these computers will be. Since Broadwell is basically just a shrunken version of Haswell I expect similar performance to the current line-up, maybe even slightly better.
If this thing runs FCPX smoothly I'm all in for a Space Grey 12" MBA
It depends on how Intel decides to limit the "overclocking."
They could just keep doing what they do now, which is overclock as long as there's thermal headroom. So a hypothetical fanless MacBook would run just as fast as a current MacBook for about 30 seconds, and then it would run half as fast (or less), until it cooled down (which might take a long time with no fan).
Or, they could limit the overclocking to X milliseconds per second to even out performance and prevent the scenario described above where you have to wait a few minutes for your computer to cool down before it performs well again. In that case, performance will be roughly the same as current MacBooks for any software that requires quick bursts of compute power (e.g., web browser, office software, etc.) but can only perform maybe 2/3 as well as current chips otherwise.
If they're really going to get the same performance with a 4.5W TDP part that they've been getting with 15W, then that's great.
These kinds of descriptions seem to be at odds though with other statements and presentations they've given saying that Broadwell reduces power consumption vs. Haswell by 30%.
15W - 30% = 10.5W, not 4.5W.
Intel has been known to get a little "creative" with their TDPs and performance measurement (e.g., a few botched attempts to show that Atom uses less power than similar ARM products) so it wouldn't surprise me if Intel is saying they're getting the same performance on tasks that only require short bursts of high-performance computing and otherwise involve enough idle time to let the CPU cool down before the next burst.
Of course Apple doesn't publish numbers about the TDP of its A-series chips but it seems like general consensus is that they're around 1.5 to 2.5W. And as another poster said earlier, that seems to be enough to warm up an iPad Air such that it's not super comfortable to hold. So imagine where doubling that heat output would land you. (Admittedly a MacBook would have more AL in its exterior to use as a heatsink, but not that much more...)
The gist of threads like this is, "Will this new product meet my needs? No." After the product is announced the discussion simply turns to, "This new product doesn't meet my needs."
If I had to guess, the vast majority of Air owners are doing little in the way of sustained compute. They won't miss the fan ("quiet as an iPad!"), and From Apple's standpoint, the fan, as the last remaining motor in the machine, the last component with bearings... it's gotta go for the sake of reliability.
The spec sheet will be self-limiting - if it can't meet your needs, then it wasn't designed with your needs in mind. While we all hope Apple's next, great product will be for us, it's not always going to be the case.
If I had to guess, the vast majority of Air owners are doing little in the way of sustained compute. They won't miss the fan ("quiet as an iPad!"), and From Apple's standpoint, the fan, as the last remaining motor in the machine, the last component with bearings... it's gotta go for the sake of reliability.
The spec sheet will be self-limiting - if it can't meet your needs, then it wasn't designed with your needs in mind. While we all hope Apple's next, great product will be for us, it's not always going to be the case.
the 30% less power is when you compare it to the "same" chip of the previous generation.
the Core M were actually claimed to take 2x times less power than haswell.
which seems about right - Haswell-ULX is 10W
but its hard to keep track of all those random marketing numbers
Last edited:
It's not really to do with my needs. In fact, for most intents and purposes I would be fine with a Core M-based laptop. (Until a month ago I was using a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo and that was okay.)
It's just that I can't see Apple taking a step backwards performance-wise for the minimal gains of passive computing:
- Thinner: Okay, they might be able to shave off a couple millimeters from the back. Basically just the lump on the bottom. They sides are already basically the minimum height they can be to still accommodate USB ports. I don't know if many people complain about how thick MBAs are but I won't argue about thinner being better.
- Quieter: I guess. The current MBAs with their 1200 RPM fans are basically impossible for me to hear and I'm a quiet-computing fanatic. So that tells you something that I'm arguing that Apple should keep the fan.
- Reliability: Kind of a moot point IMO, since if the fan in a MBA fails, it's incredibly cheap and easy to swap it for a new one. And I don't know if fan failure is a super common problem anyway. Don't those things commonly have an MTBF rating of around 50k hours, i.e., running 5.7 years straight? Seems like a long time.
Whereas consider the benefits of a fan:
- Can sustain maximum turbo boost indefinitely
- Keeps the case nice and cool
- Good for peace of mind if you're using the computer on a hot day, or outside, or on a pile of blankets, etc. Remember that iPads overheat quickly if you use them in the sun, but not MacBooks.
So considering the pros vs. cons, I think it's almost impossible that Apple will go with a fanless design. Obviously it's not completely impossible.
are you sure about that?
http://www.muada.com/2013/10-30-late-2013-macbook-pro-review-cpu-performance.html
and i believe the biggest advantage will actually be in the weight. they can go with a slimmer design and because of the gained efficiency can probably use a smaller battery.
The MBA in question in that review is a 2011 model which did run very hot. The current 2014 model using Haswell can definitely run at full turbo boost indefinitely. I have run mine for a couple hours under full load and the fan doesn't even spin up much past 2500 RPM although it depends on ambient temperature.
As for the smaller battery, under typical idle-ish load the current MBA's CPU uses between 0.5 and 1.0 watts. I believe the whole system averages around 4.5 watts. So even if the CPU used no power at all (impossible) it would only increase the whole system efficiency by around 20%. So that means *at most* a 20% reduction in battery size to achieve the same longevity... although a retina display would likely more than make up that difference.
If Apple releases a new model with a retina display and a semi-powerful processor and good battery life, it will need a fan and it will need to be roughly the same size/weight as the current 11" model.
we will see. the latest rumors are clearly supporting my reasoning.
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/22/ultra-slim-notebook-usb-type-c/
i don't think apple will have a problem with the CPU being a little bit slower. the marketing can easily go around it. the power of the Intel HD 5300 remains to be seen.
i know i won't have a problem with it. and so will most people, except a few benchmark geeks or people who should be buying a pro anyway.
Last edited:
What is this garbage? The new MBA won't have regular-sized USB ports? Is there no distinction between "rumor" and "fan fiction" here?
it's far from fiction. it would be ahead of everyone else, but all the tech is available.
regular-sized ports are extremely big. if they want to design a computer as thin as possible they would have to replace it with a smaller port. which makes the Type C Port very attractive. it could be used for charging the macbook too, since the new usb standard allows up to 100W.
but it does seem too early for this to happen - since there's not even devices with this standard yet. unless they really are going to ship it with an adapter..
its not impossible - given apples history. but it would be a brave move and they would definitely keep the old MB Airs for a few years too. like they did with the MB Pro, when they removed the CD Drive.
i do hope they do it. i only need usb once in a bluemoon.
but i would not expect such a device before summer 2015.
Apple has been brave in the past but rarely are they idiots. They dropped optical drives more or less at the same time everybody was switching to Netflix and online software downloads. They switched to USB because basically only thing anybody used ADB for was a keyboard and a mouse and it wouldn't kill anybody to get USB keyboards and mice. They dropped wired Ethernet connectors more or less at the same time everybody was connecting via Wifi.
But dropping USB? Sorry, no. The regular-sized USB connector is not on its way out. Not even close. There are a million billion trillion devices and cables that people own with regular sized USB connectors and they'd be PISSED if they had to have an adapter to plug them in.
Sure, having a thinner computer is great. But the MacBook Air has never been the thinnest computer. IIRC there were thinner and lighter Toshiba Porteges long before even the original MacBook Air. Apple picked a size they thought was good based on a bunch of factors and ended up with what we have now. I don't think they're going to be goaded now into a stupid competition to shave a couple millimeters off a computer that's already thinner, at its thickest point, than almost any paperback. There's an "amount" of thinness that's practical and nice and then there's just thin for thin's sake and Apple doesn't seem interested in that game. (There have always been thinner and lighter smartphones than the iPhone too, remember the uproar when Apple claimed to have made the thinnest smartphone with the iPhone 4, and then again with the 5?)
rarely idiots?....you must not know much about there products. LOL
Apple newton ,power pc , iphone 4 antenna gate , iphone 6 BENDING in pockets.
come on , do the research.
There's rumours though that Apple will be moving to the thinner "type C" USB ports.
Good point, I suppose I meant that they are rarely idiots when it comes to choosing which ports to have on which products ... although the original MacBook Air *was* universally panned for having such a limited port selection and then having those ports behind a fiddly door, too. I hope Apple would be reluctant to make a similar mistake.
As for USB-C or whatever it's called, sounds great, sign me up. But the latest I heard about it was a couple weeks ago when some initial prototypes were being demonstrated. Seems like it's still a ways off.
Also remember that the current Thunderbolt connector is about as tall as the USB ports so even if they switched to smaller USB ports, where does that leave them with the Thunderbolt port they would presumably also want to include?
I repeat that Apple has never played the "thinnest laptop" game and I don't see them starting now.
Edit: BTW, PowerPC was not exactly a mistake... well, maybe. But only in hindsight. At the time Apple chose to go the PowerPC direction, every indication was that RISC was the future and that Intel was falling behind. Going the PowerPC route allowed Apple to produce computers that were as fast (maybe faster) than Pentiums a year or two before Pentiums were even released. Pretty great technology at the time. It was only much later that they became an embarrassment.
they set out to make a great looking product with great usability, and no doubt they have succeeded well in that regard. The endgame with this new air will have to be a product i can purchase and not have to make significant accessory changes as they have just forced new sets on us removing firewire and putting thunderbolt in.
i have no doubt there are more plans for thunderbolt but it is moving very slow. I could see a slimmed down version of there thunderbolt port or possible even a integration into the new C type spec usb connector.
as for the cpu's in the air, i would be open to anything that can perform to what i have now without loss as the air is at its perfect performance level cpu/video wise for my uses.
IMO the only way it could be fanless is if they "downgrade" the MBA with a Core M processor intended for tablets/convertibles rather than a ULV mobile Broadwell processor.
They'll tell you it's better for you, but the price tag won't change and the performance won't be quite the same.
They'll tell you it's better for you, but the price tag won't change and the performance won't be quite the same.