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.
Yes, your MacBook Pro is running too hot, and yes, it is Apple's fault.
- Thread starter Doward
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
On my stock Late 2011 i7 2.4 15" MBP, watching 1080P in fullscreen the fans don't kick up past 2400 RPM with more than 50 tabs open in Safari using the integrated GPU, switching to the discrete Radeon GPU, same video sequence the fans don't pass 3200 RPM ambient at 27C...
n.b. This system is also doing a lot of background work, which I neither want nor wish to terminate for the sake of this basic test. HD playback taken in isolation I would expect system temps and fan speeds to be lower again. As for my 15" Retina fans never left the default 2160 RPM regardless of GPU
So I rather suggest that the OP`s MBP was flawed from the start and that all MBP`s do not have abnormal temperature issues, as I seriously doubt that mine is special or unique in it`s performance
For those wanting to try for themselves the clip is Planet Earth: Amazing nature scenery (1080p HD)
b.t.w. it`s Chrome thats switching the discrete GPU, and the inbuilt Flash player is outdated pushing the thermals
Last edited:
Flash is Trash, especially on Mac.
----------
Thought you knew what you were on about until this. Doesnt this tell you that at least for this temp rise the problem is chrome and flash? which have nothing to do with hardware. Both flash and chrome stress the CPU and GPU way more than they should for what they do. Safari and HTML5 are your friend.
Flash on OS X is far better than it used to be, and not the all consuming monster it was , all the same it still has a way to go before being what I would call completely stable. Latest versions temperature is not so bad, however it does have a tendency to runaway with it`s self from time to time especially if you have multiple heavy flash based web page open...
Anyway Flash is on the way out the door, the with greater uptake of HTML5
Last edited:
Flash on OS X is far better than it used to be, and not the all consuming monster it was , all the same it still has a way to go before being what I would call completely stable. Latest versions temperature is not so bad, however it does have a tendency to runaway with it`s self from time to time especially if you have multiple heavy flash based web page open...
Anyway Flash is on the way out the door, the with greater uptake of HTML5
Flash still uses up to 50% of my CPU just for streaming video :/ And my macbook runs about 10-15c cooler using HTML5, so i'd say on those results flash is still pretty terrible. Also, youtube actually loads faster through HTML5 for some reason.
I am being pretty picky at this point, we're talking 50-55c down to 35-40c for streaming video, and i wouldn't consider 50-55 to be very hot but it still shows a very substantial difference in temps
I completely agree, just that it`s nowhere near the travesty it was, all the same I will be happy to see the back of it
I find more and more are converting to HTML5, soon as what I need Flash for is updated it will off my systems.Flash is still bad.I completely agree, just that it`s nowhere near the travesty it was, all the same I will be happy to see the back of it
I can stream a html5 YouTube 4k video and my temp will never hit 45C.
But one lousy window playing pandora and it starts to push 60C.
You're not upgrading the CPU; you're only selecting one. After you buy your Mac, you can't upgrade the CPU.
I know right? This guy is a self proclaimed expert and by his own admission, he has only owned a mac for about 3 months. The sad part is that some take him seriously.
Well, whatever you guys think, but I can tell you that in a technical point of view, he is definitely right.
The surface finish of the heatsinks in MBP's are pretty bad. Did you ever examine the surface of a cpu or gpu? Why do you think the surface of the gpu and the cpu is so shiny and perfectly finished?
I agree that generally MBP's work very well over several years and there is no severe heat issue.
But I can totally understand Doward. If Apple can lower the temps by 15° or so, I would expect them to improve the surface finish of the heatsink. And honestly, this would add about 10$ to the cost of a MBP, so the economical thing is not really an argument.
And if you pay 3k+ for a Notebook, man, stuff like this should not happen.
And yes, 2011 MBP have a significant throttling issue. Read Anandtech's review, where they compared the 2011 with the 2012 retina model.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/12
Edit: And whenever I play a game, the fans ramp up to max and the MBP gets very loud. And the surface between the keycaps get very hot.
Let's say with this improvement of the heatsink Apple could reduce the fan speed by 20% while playing a game, wouldn't that be great? That's the way a think about this stuff. This would improve the users experience.
The surface finish of the heatsinks in MBP's are pretty bad. Did you ever examine the surface of a cpu or gpu? Why do you think the surface of the gpu and the cpu is so shiny and perfectly finished?
I agree that generally MBP's work very well over several years and there is no severe heat issue.
But I can totally understand Doward. If Apple can lower the temps by 15° or so, I would expect them to improve the surface finish of the heatsink. And honestly, this would add about 10$ to the cost of a MBP, so the economical thing is not really an argument.
And if you pay 3k+ for a Notebook, man, stuff like this should not happen.
And yes, 2011 MBP have a significant throttling issue. Read Anandtech's review, where they compared the 2011 with the 2012 retina model.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/12
Edit: And whenever I play a game, the fans ramp up to max and the MBP gets very loud. And the surface between the keycaps get very hot.
Let's say with this improvement of the heatsink Apple could reduce the fan speed by 20% while playing a game, wouldn't that be great? That's the way a think about this stuff. This would improve the users experience.
Last edited:
To sum this thread up in my eyes:
There isn't a heat problem.
Yes, they can be cooler if the surface was smoother.
However 97% of people will never experience an issue.
----------
Okay, I had to say something. This is a ridiculous statement.
You know there are people employed by companies like Apple being paid hundreds of thousand of $ to find ways to save FRACTIONS of cents on each computer right? Ten dollars added production cost is hilariously high to just add on. Every single day new methods are being developed to streamline everything possible and cut spending by minuscule amounts.
There isn't a heat problem.
Yes, they can be cooler if the surface was smoother.
However 97% of people will never experience an issue.
----------
Okay, I had to say something. This is a ridiculous statement.
You know there are people employed by companies like Apple being paid hundreds of thousand of $ to find ways to save FRACTIONS of cents on each computer right? Ten dollars added production cost is hilariously high to just add on. Every single day new methods are being developed to streamline everything possible and cut spending by minuscule amounts.
Well, by cost, I meant the cost for the user, the price the customer has to pay. Everything you say is true but, this would not be an issue for a company like Apple.
I considered what you meant that it would be transferred to the user but that involves Apple raising the price (which a company doesn't want to do because it could mean less sales and make customers angry) or they take a smaller profit margin. And a 10 dollar cut in profits means a massive amount of revenue lost when spread over 4 million computers a quarter.
I guess what I'm trying to say is it isn't just that easy to add costs like that
I understand everything you say and I completely agree. But if someone is ready to pay 3000$ for a notebook, the same person will pay 3010$ oder even 3050$. Of course, adding this improved heatsink to an MBA which sells for 1000$ doesn't make sense. But for a premium, high end MBP, it does.
If you need to buy the 'upgrade' (in which case you ARE buying cpu and you are getting an upgrade--its called 'buying an upgrade'--can we stop these schematics games?) then what you are saying is that you probably shouldn't be using that computer.
The responder who mentioned ECONOMICS basically explains it all there.
Engineers design a cooling system and they can specify that the suppliers lap their heatsinks or whatever but if the current design meets their specs they won't.
Now, if those 17C of temperature made the difference between meeting the spec of lasting at least three years then yes they would do something about it. But as long as they don't see an abnormal number or returns, then they go about doing business as normal.
They are not interested in making hardware that lasts especially long. They want you to make that upgrade purchase three years down the line. And as a power user you will because you will notice how your system seems to take longer to do computations for your photo work or how that game you love now stutters. If you are not a power user you will probably keep that MBP a good bit longer and probably be fine for another couple of years.
This is not just an Apple thing. This is an industry thing and they can't stay in business if their equipment lasts forever. They can't make it if every user keeps their system for five+ years.
Note: I'm not saying MBPs won't last longer than three years of CPU-crunching use. Just saying they penny-pinch wherever they can enough to safely fit their profit models.
Engineers design a cooling system and they can specify that the suppliers lap their heatsinks or whatever but if the current design meets their specs they won't.
Now, if those 17C of temperature made the difference between meeting the spec of lasting at least three years then yes they would do something about it. But as long as they don't see an abnormal number or returns, then they go about doing business as normal.
They are not interested in making hardware that lasts especially long. They want you to make that upgrade purchase three years down the line. And as a power user you will because you will notice how your system seems to take longer to do computations for your photo work or how that game you love now stutters. If you are not a power user you will probably keep that MBP a good bit longer and probably be fine for another couple of years.
This is not just an Apple thing. This is an industry thing and they can't stay in business if their equipment lasts forever. They can't make it if every user keeps their system for five+ years.
Note: I'm not saying MBPs won't last longer than three years of CPU-crunching use. Just saying they penny-pinch wherever they can enough to safely fit their profit models.
Last edited:
Buying an upgraded model is quite different than "upgrading the CPU", which implies you're changing to a different CPU after you buy the computer, like "upgrading the RAM" or "upgrading the hard drive".
And that's actually the opposite of what I've been saying. I've been saying that the MBP in all its configurations works fine with no heat issues for the vast majority of users. For the minority of users that demand more performance with less heat than the MBP offers, they should do their pre-purchase research and should buy a computer better suited to their needs. That's a wiser and more productive approach than buying something that doesn't meet their needs, then blaming the manufacturer for their buying decision.
I apologize for that - linked right at the top of the first thread, starting the video @ 9m26s, so you can see the specific issues i found. You can always rewind if you want to see more, and toward the end of the video (about 30 minutes in) you can see the temperature difference.
Naturally adding the GPU to the mix will increase temps over CPU alone. Flash happens to be a commonly used scenario, hence why I mentioned it. It's not like you can disable the GPU completely after all.
And why should you? I didn't buy a MacBook Pro to deal with integrated graphics when I need more GPU prowess. I expect my GPU and CPU to be able to run 100% without thermal issues. This wasn't the case, prior to my teardown.
Flash on OS X is far better than it used to be, and not the all consuming monster it was , all the same it still has a way to go before being what I would call completely stable. Latest versions temperature is not so bad, however it does have a tendency to runaway with it`s self from time to time especially if you have multiple heavy flash based web page open...
Anyway Flash is on the way out the door, the with greater uptake of HTML5
Agreed, and honestly, I'm happy for it.
All in the video!
'Self-proclaimed' expert? Guess I better return those certifications and degrees those pesky schools send me. That's how I got my job, btw, on my resume is "self-proclaimed expert" - even told them that in the interview. "Why should we hire you?" "Cuz I'm an eggspert, yo"
In all seriousness, the ownership length of a product in no way correlates to the ability to sort, find, and solve a problem.
My user experience post-reworking has been 100% excellent. No more ramping up fans, I can play games without burning my legs, and my CPU has plenty of muscle.
FYI, if you ever want to know if your MacBook is throttling you, Download Link For Intel Power Gadget and Download Link for Prime95
Run them both, let Prime95 get the system good and hot, and see just where your CPU ends up running at.
100% Correct. And a shame, I miss the days of people taking pride in their work, but that's neither here nor there.
Absolutely! Ivy Bridge has made strides over Sandy Bridge due to the die shrink and other technical bits, and Haswell will do it again. I also expect to see GT3 take over the majority of graphics duties, meaning Apple may not include a separate GPU.
I, for one, want a Mini / GT3 combo.
Doing server / network revamping tonight, so gotta run!
I dont expect my computer to run inferior software without performing at least somewhat underpar. Today flash was bumping 104% CPU (on a site where i couldn't block it/replace it) and hence pushed the temps up to about 60c, almost 25c above HTML5 on youtube. The mind boggles. In this case the thermal issues are all to do with software, don't try and twist it otherwise. Your expressed methods may help with some thermal issues on some MBP's, it's nothing more, nothing less.
and when Apple provides work environments such as these, do you really expect workers to have much 'pride' in what they do?
http: //www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
http: //www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
With Lion I didn't have a thermal issue like Mountain Lion. I feel like putting Lion on mine. Mountain Lion wow it needs to get fixed up fast! I like MacBooks because of the choice you have to run both Mac OS X or Windows. There isn't anything out there like that and a Hackintosh system doesn't count. Once in a while I feel like seeing if mine needs to have the paste redone but I still have warrenty.
I just find it a little twisted that you consider a $2000 professional laptop that throttles at CPU usage "user error." That's usually "engineer error", or "designer error"... not user error.
That's something they don't give you on the specs page at most retailers. Users do not have the information they need to make an informed decision.
Saying that you expect people to dig through numerous web forums to find a bug just makes it sound like you will defend Apple to the death, even if they are wrong. Most of the people who bought this computer did so before there were even findings of throttling under load. Come on man, be practical.
----------
The difference is Honda's cars are cheap, whereas Apple's computers are expensive.
Last edited: