2020 Air Heatsink Modification Thread

[Populus]

When I draw the red arrows, I simplified the airflow, they should have gone through the turbine of the fan... but anyways, its a bad cooling design, I think we all agree with that. I’m eager to see if this new MacBook Air has the same cooling design, which would be hilarious.

 

[ilikewhey]

View attachment 900493
First of all, this is a bad design in terms of cooling cause it has to be the opposite.

View attachment 900492
This is how the most server works. There are fans from behind to blow airs efficiently. But MBA's cooling design is reversed. Instead of placing a fan behind, the fan is located on the front side. Do you really think hot air can move outside smoothly? NO.

Also, the red area is so small, unlike the server that I showed above. That's why what you are explaining is clearly a stupid idea. There is a clear heat exchange? Gosh, that does NOT mean it works fine. Dont forget the main topic of this thread: POOR COOLING PERFORMANCE DUE TO POOR COOLING DESIGN. It's not about flowing hot air out, it's about cooling CPU's heat itself. Why dont you build a computer with only a heatsink and a case with a rear fan?

View attachment 900495
The red area I marked is blocked. Instead, it sucks hot air from the top side. However, that's such a small space.

I have no idea what you wanna say but that does not change the fact that MBA's cooling system is terrible in terms of design.

i concur, most servers that i worked on have a pull push config, if the client wants less noise we mainly use push and ignore the pull since push is far more efficient than pulling. using push alone is adequate for most situation.
[automerge]1584906945[/automerge]

When I draw the red arrows, I simplified the airflow, they should have gone through the turbine of the fan... but anyways, its a bad cooling design, I think we all agree with that. I’m eager to see if this new MacBook Air has the same cooling design, which would be hilarious.

for i3 i think it will be fine, but then again its kinda overpriced when you shelling out 1 grand just for light useage.

 

[high heaven]

2020 MBA's cooler is IDENTICAL to previous versions... GOSH really? Even Max complained about this.

 

[Populus]

That’s just hilarious.

 

[high heaven]

That’s just hilarious.

I know...

 

[JTToft]

2020 MBA's cooler is IDENTICAL to previous versions... GOSH really? Even Max complained about this.

- Thanks for sharing that. So same basic design, but a larger heat sink, which I guess should help some (though not a lot).

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Ironic that we're debating airflow in a MacBook Air?

Yeah, that's how it's done in a server... but this machine is not a server. I bet if I compared my Honda Civic to a Ford F-250 I'd find the Civic wasn't optimized to haul loads of construction materials all day long - and the engine and transmission cooling systems would be at the top of the "inadequate" list.

Yeah, folks seem to be in love with heat pipes, but don't get hung up over it. Heat pipes, like any other technology, can be used well or badly. It's just one of a variety of technologies used to move heat. You can attach a massive heat sink, but if there's no airflow around that heat sink or there's no thermal paste... worthless. You can put the biggest whopping fans into a box, but if airflow is poor across the critical components... worthless. How the heat is moved is less important than whether the heat is moved.

And it's really amusing to see people debating airflow in a three-dimensional space based upon two-dimensional photos.

The thermal design, like every other component, is chosen to achieve specific goals. What this heated discussion boils down to is a disagreement with Apple's goals, not Apple's competency at meeting those goals.

You want to run your Honda Civic as if it was a pickup truck? Don't blame Honda if it doesn't meet your desires.

 

[high heaven]

Ironic that we're debating airflow in a MacBook Air?

Yeah, that's how it's done in a server... but this machine is not a server. I bet if I compared my Honda Civic to a Ford F-250 I'd find the Civic wasn't optimized to haul loads of construction materials all day long - and the engine and transmission cooling systems would be at the top of the "inadequate" list.

Yeah, folks seem to be in love with heat pipes, but don't get hung up over it. Heat pipes, like any other technology, can be used well or badly. It's just one of a variety of technologies used to move heat. You can attach a massive heat sink, but if there's no airflow around that heat sink or there's no thermal paste... worthless. You can put the biggest whopping fans into a box, but if airflow is poor across the critical components... worthless. How the heat is moved is less important than whether the heat is moved.

And it's really amusing to see people debating airflow in a three-dimensional space based upon two-dimensional photos.

The thermal design, like every other component, is chosen to achieve specific goals. What this heated discussion boils down to is a disagreement with Apple's goals, not Apple's competency at meeting those goals.

You want to run your Honda Civic as if it was a pickup truck? Don't blame Honda if it doesn't meet your desires.

There is no doubt that MBA 2018~2020 have worst cooling systems than previous-gen MBA.

 

[MacRazySwe]

What do you guys use your Airs for? I hardly ever hear my fan come on.

 

[0iine]

From Max Tech's YouTube video:

Still not connected to the fan and hits 100 degrees in cinebench r20

 

[bosozoku]

From Max Tech's YouTube video:

Still not connected to the fan and hits 100 degrees in cinebench r20

View attachment 900543 View attachment 900544

But at least radiator is bigger...
And, about possibility of 3rd party heat pipe modding solution, I highly doubt there is any space for it.
Antennas connector and bus won't be happy with extra heat nearby

 

[troop231]

But at least radiator is bigger...
And, about possibility of 3rd party heat pipe modding solution, I highly doubt there is any space for it.
Antennas connector and bus won't be happy with extra heat nearby

There's space for a heatpipe if done properly, just like how we implemented 802.11ac cards in unibody MacBook Pros; if there's a will or enough interest, there's a way!

 

[bosozoku]

There's space for a heatpipe if done properly, just like how we implemented 802.11ac cards in unibody MacBook Pros; if there's a will or enough interest, there's a way!

I really hope so. With proper cooling solution core i5 model with 16Gb would be a perfect Mac for me... and only 1300usd
But maybe I'll just wait for mbp with magic keyboard, hope it will come with 16Gb RAM 256Gb SSD 4core i5 base, and for the same 1300usd

 

[throAU]

The point of a MacBook Air isn't to harness the maximum capability of the CPU 100% 24x7. Maybe they could add a heat pipe and a CPU fan but that would force an increase in the case thickness. Maybe you need a bigger battery to handle the power needs. All of sudden you end up with a MacBook Pro.

That.

An MBA is intended for "bursty" workloads where the end user might see a brief spike in CPU while they are interacting with something. This is why it is mostly passively cooled, and so small. It isn't intended to run the CPU flat out, 24/7. It's meant to clock up high (to 3.x Ghz), get the small workload done fast, then drop back to 1 ghz or less and basically sleep until soemthing else happens. During which time it can get rid of the heat briefly accumulated.

If you are planning to do stuff like rendering or other sustained high stress workloads, you probably should be looking at a Macbook Pro. Not just for noise reasons or heat reasons - but performance as well.

Or even better, a desktop - unless you NEED to do that sort of work while on the go. Desktops have better thermals, more powerful CPUs and GPUs, etc.

I say this as someone who has a 2020 Air on order. The air is a tool for a number of jobs. Those jobs are not CPU or GPU heavy sustained throughput workloads.

Not that you CAN'T do stuff like video editing on an MBA. I'm sure you can. it will just be much slower (and probably noisier). It's not what the machine is aimed at.

 

[Mopar]

And it's really amusing to see people debating airflow in a three-dimensional space based upon two-dimensional photos.

Yes it is. The most amusing thing is that some people are commenting on this design like they are experts in thermodynamics, but they don't even understand how it works in the first place.

For example, how many here realise that gas or liquid-filled heat pipes also rely on air-cooling via a fan and heatsink? The only difference is the heat pipe ducts the heat away from a particular area to another area for cooling to occur. All heat exchange eventually occurs in the atmosphere, so all cooling relies on surface area and air flow – wherever that occurs.

Even a liquid-cooled combustion engine is eventually air cooled. The only difference between an air-cooled motorcycle engine with heat fins and a water-cooled motorcyle engine with a radiator is that the radiator is a larger heat-exchange surface that can be placed into a greater air-flow area. The water or coolant merely carries the heat from the engine to the heat-exchanger (radiator).

A CPU is no different. You can cool it at the source (heatsink/cooling fins), or you can duct the heat away for cooling somewhere else (heat pipe). But ultimately, the efficiency of the system relies on just two things: surface area and molecular (air) flow.

So let's be honest. How many people commenting here actually took the time to look at the design before they commented? And how many actually understand it, even after all this explanation?

By the looks of it, not many.

If you don't understand how something works, how are you to make a value judgement on whether it is good design or not? I work with heatsinks every day, so I know a little bit about what I'm talking about.

Now some may make a valid observation that the machine gets hot – if in fact it does – but unless I missed something, none of those commenting have the machine in their hands, and none have conducted thermodynamic tests on them or any other machine that I can see.

They are relying on a few YouTube videos that are taxing the machine far beyond what the design was initially intended for. MacBook Air's are not designed as gaming machines, and nor are they designed as data-intensive number crunchers. If the cooling system is throttling the CPU because it is being taxed to its core for 10-15 minutes at a time – something it is not designed for – then it is not a design fault, it is a user error.

You wouldn't rev your passenger car to 9000rpm compared to a race engine, so why complain about a consumer model CPU being throttled when asked to perform tasks beyond its intended design?

On this last point, I think one of the main issues is that the people who can't see how the system works don't seem to fully understand how a centrifugal fan works. These types of fans are VERY efficient. It's why they are used in turbo-chargers on cars, or ventilation systems in many buildings. Even those annoying leaf-blowers use a similar type of fan – and no-one ever said they couldn't move air!

All I would say is, don't criticise something if you don't understand it. If you can't give us all a good reason why a heatpipe is better for this particular machine compared to an in-situ heatsink and air-ducting system which can achieve the same result, then why exactly are you suggesting it?

 

[throAU]

^yup

The only advantage with liquid cooling vs. direct to air is that liquid is a good heat transporter.

So you can essentially transport the heat away to a much larger heat-sink than you could otherwise fit directly.

If you're limited for space, probably pointless and less efficient.

 

[raymanh]

Have you guys actually looked at the way the airflow works in a MacBook Air? Have a look at these two photos.
...
Guys, just because some people don't understand how something works – and seem to think it's a "deal-breaker" – doesn't mean it is inferior. The proof is in the pudding: does the machine get hot? Are lots of MacBook Air owners complaining about excessive heat or throttling or fan noise?

Well, are they?
[automerge]1584860885[/automerge]

We do understand and, yes, it does get hot; see the new videos and videos of last years MBA.

Yes it is. The most amusing thing is that some people are commenting on this design like they are experts in thermodynamics, but they don't even understand how it works in the first place.

For example, how many here realise that gas or liquid-filled heat pipes also rely on air-cooling via a fan and heatsink? The only difference is the heat pipe ducts the heat away from a particular area to another area for cooling to occur. All heat exchange eventually occurs in the atmosphere, so all cooling relies on surface area and air flow – wherever that occurs.

I think we all realise that a heat pipe just moves heat so it can be transferred to the air at a much higher rate (i.e. next to the fan where air is moving faster).

MacBook Air's are not designed as gaming machines, and nor are they designed as data-intensive number crunchers. If the cooling system is throttling the CPU because it is being taxed to its core for 10-15 minutes at a time – something it is not designed for – then it is not a design fault, it is a user error.

It thermal throttles after 1 minute in cinebench.

I sometimes want to play games on my 2016 MBP nTB base spec, and despite it being a Pro you have to admit it's not designed for gaming with those specs. Yet thankfully because it has a proper heat pipe, I can game for hours without drop in performance. Seriously, user error?

You wouldn't rev your passenger car to 9000rpm compared to a race engine, so why complain about a consumer model CPU being throttled when asked to perform tasks beyond its intended design?

Really? That's not the correct analogy. The correct analogy is having a race engine in a passenger car with poor cooling versus a race engine in a race car with proper cooling. A passenger car has cooling designed for its engine, that's not the MBA. You could take a passenger car with its stock engine on a track and race it around and the cooling would work fine, but now put a race engine in it without upgrading the cooling and it would overheat. That's what the MBA is. The i5 has so much more potential than what the cooling allows.

On this last point, I think one of the main issues is that the people who can't see how the system works don't seem to fully understand how a centrifugal fan works. These types of fans are VERY efficient. It's why they are used in turbo-chargers on cars, or ventilation systems in many buildings. Even those annoying leaf-blowers use a similar type of fan – and no-one ever said they couldn't move air!

Well see the empirical evidence from the videos! It's no good talking theoretically like this when you can see how much the MBA thermal throttles compared to a MBP which is now virtually the same size.

All I would say is, don't criticise something if you don't understand it. If you can't give us all a good reason why a heatpipe is better for this particular machine compared to an in-situ heatsink and air-ducting system which can achieve the same result, then why exactly are you suggesting it?

See above.

Generally I think these are the reasons why people are annoyed at the cooling in the MBA:

1. The i5 has so much more potential.

2. Older MBAs had heat pipes.

3. This 2020 MBA is virtually the same size and weight as a 13" MBP. In fact, the MBA is thicker at it's thickest point (near the hinge) than the MBP. Therefore you can fit a heat pipe in it.

4. Heat pipes are clearly better at cooling, see MBP vs MBA and point 2.

5. Putting a heat pipe in would've added no extra cost. Look at the complexity of the new heatsink they designed for this year's MBA. A heat pipe is much simpler.

6. Not putting a heat pipe in is clearly just a lousy way to differentiate between the MBA and MBP. The MBA could be so much better and more powerful if it just had a heat pipe which is so easily could've had (see above points).

7. Yes we understand the point of the 'use case' or 'average user' or 'target demographic'. In that case you could put an i9 in the MBA and still argue that point.

That's the crux of the matter.

 

[throAU]

4. Heat pipes are clearly better at cooling, see MBP vs MBA and point 2.

5. Putting a heat pipe in would've added no extra cost. Look at the complexity of the new heatsink they designed for this year's MBA. A heat pipe is much simpler.

4. Heat pipes are for heat transport, not cooling. They consume space and directly contribute NOTHING to cooling. They consume space that could be used for other things.
5. Heat pipes are actually pretty expensive to make, vs. a heat sink.


Re: potential of the i5.... it's a low power chip in a low power device aimed at the cheaper and physically smaller size end of the mac market.

Complexity weight and size are all factors.

If you want an MBA with better cooling: buy a macbook pro.

Engineering is the art of stripping away things that aren't required for the product. None of the things you're whining about are required for what the Macbook Air is supposed to be for.


The whole "BUT IT THROTTLES" thing is simply people wanting the impossible.

If you want a machine that doesn't throttle in this form factor the only thing apple could do is just artificially clamp clocks down to a lower clock speed. This machine can BOOST beyond its cooling capability for short periods of time in order to handle brief spikes in workload. This is what boost clocks are. For short term boost.

Which is how most end user tasks load a machine.

Again, if you are gaming or doing sustained high load workloads on this machine, you bought the wrong product.

Sustained clock on this thing is 1.x Ghz, if you're getting beyond that it is not "thermal throttling".

 

[Mopar]

I also would just like to point out that the 2018-2020 MacBook Air cooling system is not a passive design. It is an active cooling system, as the centrifugal fan pulls air over the heatsink through a dedicated thermal (air) channel.

For those who insist that a heatpipe is the answer, consider this 2015 MacBook Air. Here is the opened machine. Note the heatpipe connected to the CPU heatsink. Note where the heatpipe leads to. The way this system works, heat is ducted from the CPU to a heatsink via thermal paste, and the heatpipe ducts heat from that heatsink to the cooling fins that sit over the exhaust duct, in front of the fan. The heatpipe carries gassified coolant from the heatsink to the cooling fins, where it cools back to liquid form and returns to the heatsink etc. The centrifugal fan in this design sucks warm air from inside the case and then blows it over the heatpipe fins to the exhaust vent.

Here is the heatpipe with the fan removed. You cannot see it in this photo, but there are small cooling fins on the underside of the pipe where the person's index finger is, in-between the two fan brackets.

Here is the MacBook Pro heatpipe design. Note the cooling fins on the underside of each pipe, right in front of where the fan blows.

Why am I showing you all this? Because this is how cooling systems actually work. Remember, heat exchange is all about surface area (the conductive area) vs air exchange (volume of air flowing over the conductive area in a given time frame).

To transfer heat more efficiently you either need to create a larger conductive area, or increase airflow. Looking at the above images, you can see how in fact the 2018-20 MacBook Airs have a larger conductive area – the finned heatsinks sitting on top of the CPU – compared to the 2015 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro, which have finned heatsinks at the end of the heatpipe.

So if the conductive area of the 2015 MacBook Air heatpipe design has a smaller surface area than the 2018-20 design, what would make it more or less efficient?

Airflow.

With the heatsink fins sitting in front of the blower, more volume of air can be blown over the ducting fins in the same amount of time.

Or can it?

That is the real question. The efficiency of each design is not whether one design uses a heatpipe or not, but rather which design passes the most air over the largest surface area to duct heat away.

And that is all that matters: airflow vs conductive area. Heatpipes are positively useless if they do not have anywhere for the heat to be ducted away from at the end of them.

So for all the thermodynamics experts in the room, please explain to us all exactly how a heatpipe would improve the current design? Because I don't see any science here, just opinion and conjecture.

Sorry if I have hurt anyone's feelings, but I want to see facts. The mere fact that the 2020 MacBook Air is almost twice as fast at completing the Cinebench test compared to the previous model is directly related to its ability to remove heat from the CPU. Heat kills semiconductor efficiency – you cannot have an efficient CPU that runs hot (or put another way, the same CPU will be more efficient if it is cooled).

So – all things being equal – if CPU A (quad core) performs the same task in half as much time as CPU B (dual core), then CPU A is dissipating twice as much heat in the same amount of time as CPU B. That's how things work in the real world, and that is exactly what we are seeing with the new MackBook Air.

 

[fokmik]

Apple....no proper cooling for the 13" Mba ...
Apple...heres TB3 for eGpu....eGpu for what for burning ?
Apple....contradict itself

 

[raymanh]

4. Heat pipes are for heat transport, not cooling. They consume space and directly contribute NOTHING to cooling. They consume space that could be used for other things.
5. Heat pipes are actually pretty expensive to make, vs. a heat sink.

4. Yes I know they are for heat transport, they help cooling however is my point. See the points again.
5. Not significantly

Re: potential of the i5.... it's a low power chip in a low power device aimed at the cheaper and physically smaller size end of the mac market.

Complexity weight and size are all factors.

Yes it is low power, like the MBP chips. Could sustain higher speeds, like the MBP chips, If it had better cooling like the MBP.

The MBA and MBP are virtually the same size and weight. See my points again

If you want an MBA with better cooling: buy a macbook pro.

"If you want something not intentionally compromised, buy a macbook pro"

Engineering is the art of stripping away things that aren't required for the product. None of the things you're whining about are required for what the Macbook Air is supposed to be for.

Right, so that's why they are offering quad core if you can't actually use it? They've put in a decent quad core CPU with decent G7 graphics yet not enough cooling for it. That's not "the art of stripping away".

The whole "BUT IT THROTTLES" thing is simply people wanting the impossible.

If you want a machine that doesn't throttle in this form factor the only thing apple could do is just artificially clamp clocks down to a lower clock speed. This machine can BOOST beyond its cooling capability for short periods of time in order to handle brief spikes in workload. This is what boost clocks are. For short term boost.

Form factor? Again? See my points above.

That's not what boost is for. You can run a CPU in "boost" for as long you want provided cooling is sufficient. "Boost" is a marketing term, don't take it literally.

Sustained clock on this thing is 1.x Ghz, if you're getting beyond that it is not "thermal throttling".

Lol, it's not sustained clock, it's base clock. They are really not the same thing.

I don't think you really know what "boost" is or about CPU clock speeds in general.

In general, people should stop with the points about size, weight, form factor etc. This MBA is virtually the same size and weight as the MBP, even slightly thicker near the hinge.

I find it hilarious that some are defending this lousy decision to put a heatsink on the MBA in a clear move to differentiate it with the MBP. It's lazy from Apple and that's what we're complaining about.

 

[throAU]

That's not what boost is for. You can run a CPU in "boost" for as long you want provided cooling is sufficient. "Boost" is a marketing term, don't take it literally.

Boost on intel these days is both power and thermal limited. You might want to look up how it works. It has changed in the past couple of years or so, with Turbo Boost 3.0. But you'd know that if you actually knew what you were talking about.

You have no guarantee for sustained performance beyond the base clock. Want something faster? Again - buy a machine with a higher base clock for the CPU and larger form factor for better cooling.

Crying that the MBA doesn't have cooling as "good" as an MBP 13 (which is also pretty bad - but again, it is form factor limited) is pretty funny to be honest.


edit:
What would be better than a heat pipe is if apple were to have the heat SINK extend over that space as well (to increase the surface area for the heat dissipation), but there's probably not enough room to make it worth it. There's probably other concerns doing that. I'm not an apple cooling engineer.

 

[Mopar]

That's what the MBA is. The i5 has so much more potential than what the cooling allows.

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with your analogy, either. The MBA i5 is not a "race" CPU – it is a low-power, 1.1gHz CPU with a short-term boost speed. How can you compare it to higher Watt CPUs that are designed to generate more heat? (In the world of thermodynamics, Watts are always converted to heat eventually.)

For the remainder of your points, I think the previous poster replied better than I did.

4. Heat pipes are for heat transport, not cooling. They consume space and directly contribute NOTHING to cooling. They consume space that could be used for other things.
5. Heat pipes are actually pretty expensive to make, vs. a heat sink.


Re: potential of the i5.... it's a low power chip in a low power device aimed at the cheaper and physically smaller size end of the mac market.

Complexity weight and size are all factors.

If you want an MBA with better cooling: buy a macbook pro.

Engineering is the art of stripping away things that aren't required for the product. None of the things you're whining about are required for what the Macbook Air is supposed to be for.


The whole "BUT IT THROTTLES" thing is simply people wanting the impossible.

If you want a machine that doesn't throttle in this form factor the only thing apple could do is just artificially clamp clocks down to a lower clock speed. This machine can BOOST beyond its cooling capability for short periods of time in order to handle brief spikes in workload. This is what boost clocks are. For short term boost.

Which is how most end user tasks load a machine.

Again, if you are gaming or doing sustained high load workloads on this machine, you bought the wrong product.

Sustained clock on this thing is 1.x Ghz, if you're getting beyond that it is not "thermal throttling".

^ This is someone who actually understands how cooling systems work.

Not to denigrate anyone else who has already posted here, but I think those calling for a heatpipe "solution" really need to think about how, exactly, it is going to cool the CPU (and other components) any better than the current design. Please, if you are experienced in these areas I would love to read your reasoned comments.
[automerge]1584950284[/automerge]
On a related note, why does my wife's MBP always feels so hot on my lap compared to my MBA when doing the same tasks? If the heatpipe design is so good, why is the MBP case hotter than the MBA?

You know, it's not justy about keeping the CPU cool, it's keeping the "lap" part of "laptop" cool as well. Otherwise, whats the point? There is more to internal cooling than simply preserving the motherboard.

 

[Mike Boreham]

The MacBook Air is miles better performance wise than the fanless MacBook 2017. The latter's performance would immediately slow to a crawl when CPU throttling kicked in.

A common misconception. Yes the fanless Macbook throttles of course, but only by 10-20% after a few minutes, which is barely noticeable with no fans kicking in. Many threads about this on the MacBook forum including from me who has owned three of these much misunderstood machines.

Yes, the new 2020 Air with quadcore i5 will have much better performance than the 2017 MacBook. The 2018 and 2019 Airs not much.

 

[raymanh]

Why am I showing you all this? Because this is how cooling systems actually work. Remember, heat exchange is all about surface area (the conductive area) vs air exchange (volume of air flowing over the conductive area in a given time frame).

What's with this patronising explanation again? We understand dude!

To transfer heat more efficiently you either need to create a larger conductive area, or increase airflow. Looking at the above images, you can see how in fact the 2018-20 MacBook Airs have a larger conductive area – the finned heatsinks sitting on top of the CPU – compared to the 2015 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro, which have finned heatsinks at the end of the heatpipe.

So if the conductive area of the 2015 MacBook Air heatpipe design has a smaller surface area than the 2018-20 design, what would make it more or less efficient?

Airflow.

With the heatsink fins sitting in front of the blower, more volume of air can be blown over the ducting fins in the same amount of time.

Or can it?

That is the real question. The efficiency of each design is not whether one design uses a heatpipe or not, but rather which design passes the most air over the largest surface area to duct heat away.

And that is all that matters: airflow vs conductive area. Heatpipes are positively useless if they do not have anywhere for the heat to be ducted away from at the end of them.

So for all the thermodynamics experts in the room, please explain to us all exactly how a heatpipe would improve the current design? Because I don't see any science here, just opinion and conjecture.

Haha. There's a lot more than just airflow and area that govern transfer of heat. For example, temperature difference maybe???

I don't need to justify how a heatpipe would improve cooling based on your iffy analysis. In fact none of us could answer heatsink vs heatpipe just looking at the pictures. That's why we're looking at empirical evidence from videos! And comparing the MBP to the MBA, WHICH ARE THE SAME FORM FACTOR. And the MBP with the heat pipes do not thermal throttle, while the MBA does.

Sorry if I have hurt anyone's feelings, but I want to see facts. The mere fact that the 2020 MacBook Air is almost twice as fast at completing the Cinebench test compared to the previous model is directly related to its ability to remove heat from the CPU. Heat kills semiconductor efficiency – you cannot have an efficient CPU that runs hot (or put another way, the same CPU will be more efficient if it is cooled).

So – all things being equal – if CPU A (quad core) performs the same task in half as much time as CPU B (dual core), then CPU A is dissipating twice as much heat in the same amount of time as CPU B. That's how things work in the real world, and that is exactly what we are seeing with the new MackBook Air.

I'm not sure you're understanding what people are complaining about. That's thermal throttling:

The new MBA with the i5 has a base clock of 1.1 GHz with boost up to 3.5 Ghz. Doing a cinebench test, after about 1 minute of the CPU running near 3.5 GHz it goes down to about 2 GHz because it cannot be cooled enough to sustain a higher speed. That means it has "1.5GHz more potential" if you like.

My 2016 MBP has an i5 with a base clock of 2.0GHz and boost up to 3.1 GHz. While doing cinebench it can sustain 3.0GHz because it's cooling is adequate. That means it can use all of it's potential.

That's the point here, it seems like the i5's quad core and G7 graphics are wasted on the MBA's poor cooling. And just because Apple wants to differentiate it with the MBP instead of making the MBP even better.