When will a Mac with a less than 29W charger or PSU be offered?

[sam_dean]

Over 6 years ago Apple released their 1st Macbook using 14nm Intel chips that uses a 29W charger.

With Apple now using 4nm and in future 3nm, 2nm and smaller die shrink Apple chips makes me wonder when they will offer any Mac that uses a 20W or lower powered charger.

Yes, I am aware that going too low will impact the Mac's ability to power or charge other USB devices like a USB hub, iPhone, etc but I'd love to see the stand alone power draw of a 2022 Apple TV 4K's less than 2.4W courtesy of an Apple A15 Bionic chip one day come to a Mac that sells for between $149-699.

Apple A16 Bionic chip found in this year's iPhone is much more power efficient so I could guess less than 1.85W?

Those of us with unchanged use cases from year 2015 or earlier already find the Mac mini M1 overpowered. Its only usefulness in upgrading is lower power bill.

If you are using any computer from 2012 or earlier the performance per watt and power input figures of the M1 & M2 are just so sci-fi.

Imagine how it will be by year 2032, 2042 and 2052?

 

[maflynn]

Those of us with unchanged use cases from year 2015

I'm going to go out on a limb and state that those people who's use case hasn't changed in nearly 8 years are probably not the target audience for Macs.

If your needs are that low, maybe an iPad would be a better fit for you and your wishes to have an even lower consumption

 

[sam_dean]

I'm going to go out on a limb and state that those people who's use case hasn't changed in nearly 8 years are probably not the target audience for Macs.

If your needs are that low, maybe an iPad would be a better fit for you and your wishes to have an even lower consumption

A Mac with an iPhone chip would be perfect. Sadly it does not run macOS.

 

[chrfr]

With Apple now using 4nm and in future 3nm, 2nm and smaller die shrink Apple chips makes me wonder when they will offer any Mac that uses a 20W or lower powered charger.

What's your theoretical goal here? You can charge a MacBook Air off a smaller adapter but it'll be slow to recharge.

 

[sam_dean]

What's your theoretical goal here? You can charge a MacBook Air off a smaller adapter but it'll be slow to recharge.

The wanted outcome is full speed recharge using a 18W/20W charger without any discharge even at full load.

Prior to Apple using 30W USB-C chargers with Macbook & Macbook Airs it used to use 45W MagSafe chargers. The power efficiency improvement from 45W to 30W was 33.33%.

Makes me wish I could replace my 2016 LG B6 OLED TV's System on a Chip with a Apple A16 Bionic 4nm.

 

[theorist9]

Prior to Apple using 30W USB-C chargers with Macbook & Macbook Airs it used to use 45W MagSafe chargers. The power efficiency improvement from 45W to 30W was 33.33%.

Can you cite a source for that figure, and explain what efficiency measurement it refers to? Is it the efficiency of the charger by itself in converting AC to DC, or the whole-system efficiency in converting AC energy to battery energy?

If Apple decides to release an ultrabook (i.e., an AS version of the old MacBook), you'll probably see a lower-powered stock charger.

 

[sam_dean]

Can you cite a source for that figure, and explain what efficiency measurement it refers to? Is it the efficiency of the charger by itself in converting AC to DC, or the whole-system efficiency in converting AC energy to battery energy?

If Apple decides to release an ultrabook (i.e., an AS version of the old MacBook), you'll probably see a lower-powered stock charger.

TBH I dont know but you could look up the corresponding chips matched to the 45W MagSafe chargers.

I looked as the 2015-2019 Macbook Intel and they used chips had a TDP of ~5W.

M1 is ~3.7W

I am unsure if Apple will ever be interested in catering to ~$700 laptop market.

 

[theorist9]

TBH I dont know but you could look up the corresponding chips matched to the 45W MagSafe chargers.

I looked as the 2015-2019 Macbook Intel and they used chips had a TDP of ~5W.

M1 is ~3.7W

I am unsure if Apple will ever be interested in catering to ~$700 laptop market.

Those sound like the chip TDP's. They wouldn't have anything do with what you're interested in, which is charging efficiency.

 

[sam_dean]

Those sound like the chip TDP's. They wouldn't have anything do with what you're interested in, which is charging efficiency.

I am not talking about efficiency of the charger or PSU.

I am specific to the chip or SoC.

 

[theorist9]

I am not talking about efficiency of the charger or PSU.

I am specific to the chip or SoC.

When chfr asked you this:

What's your theoretical goal here? You can charge a MacBook Air off a smaller adapter but it'll be slow to recharge.

You replied with this, in which you seem to be saying the reason you'd like a Mac with lower TDP is because you think the lower-powered charger would give you higher efficiency:

The wanted outcome is full speed recharge using a 18W/20W charger without any discharge even at full load.

Prior to Apple using 30W USB-C chargers with Macbook & Macbook Airs it used to use 45W MagSafe chargers. The power efficiency improvement from 45W to 30W was 33.33%.

But if that's not the objective, i.e., if you just want a Mac with a lower TDP, then why not just ask for that, instead of framing your objective in terms of the charger, which seems to be confusing things?

 

[leman]

With Apple now using 4nm and in future 3nm, 2nm and smaller die shrink Apple chips makes me wonder when they will offer any Mac that uses a 20W or lower powered charger.

Why would it be useful? current chargers are already compact and a lower wattage charger will charge the battery slower. The power draw of Apple Silicon systems on idle is already extremely low, the purpose of the charger is primarily to replenish the battery as quickly as possible.

If you want a smaller charger and don’t mind slow recharge speeds just use the iPad charger. Works with every Mac.

Apple A16 Bionic chip found in this year's iPhone is much more power efficient so I could guess less than 1.85W?

Where do you get these numbers from? And what do they mean?

Imagine how it will be by year 2032, 2042 and 2052?

I surely hope that by 2050 the computing paradigm will change fundamentally.

 

[unrigestered]

weird question, as the charger has almost nothing to do with the efficiency of the system.
all equipment is drawing the power they require.
the PSU is simply providing (hopefully enough) power that the connected device "wants".
you could use a 10 Mega Watts charger and your Mac would still draw exactly the same power it would do with any other one that's still providing enough to power your Mac.
higher W simply ensure that your system charging is not hampered.
if you're using low wattage chargers, your system will only charge slower (which can be healthier for long term battery conditions though), or if going too low, will not be able to charge your system at all anymore.
the energy required to fully charge your Mac will roughly be the same though, but one high wattage charger might have charged your system in 1 to 2 hours, while a really low wattage charge might have spread the same energy consumption across 12 to 16 hours

so the answer to the question would be: ... when the systems will require significantly less power.
of course smaller manufacturing nodes will be able to do so, but then again, people also usually want more processing power from their newer devices.
if you really want low power consumption devices, they can already be had today. an Apple Watch is a pretty low power consumption device, or if you want to go further, your AirPods are requiring even less.
question is, wether the processing power of those would be enough for your usage on your computer.

having said that, while of course technology and efficiency will still continue to improve in the future, Apple Silicon is already pretty good by today's standards regarding power to efficiency ratio.
if you want significantly more "green" systems, don't look for "high end" processors that top the Geekbench charts

 

[maflynn]

I am unsure if Apple will ever be interested in catering to ~$700 laptop market.

Of course not. Apple is a premium brand, and selling such a cheap computer will do harm to their reputation and market position. They have successfully resisted the price wars that happened over the past few years where dell and HP (and before that compaq) kept rolling out cheaper and cheaper computers.

You want a 700 or sub 700 dollar computer then consider a chromebook

 

[Alex Cai]

Over 6 years ago Apple released their 1st Macbook using 14nm Intel chips that uses a 29W charger.

With Apple now using 4nm and in future 3nm, 2nm and smaller die shrink Apple chips makes me wonder when they will offer any Mac that uses a 20W or lower powered charger.

Yes, I am aware that going too low will impact the Mac's ability to power or charge other USB devices like a USB hub, iPhone, etc but I'd love to see the stand alone power draw of a 2022 Apple TV 4K's less than 2.4W courtesy of an Apple A15 Bionic chip one day come to a Mac that sells for between $149-699.

You obviously can use a 20w charger for Mac, I'm currently using an Anker 20w for traveling and it works well with MacBook Air even though it charges slower.

Those of us with unchanged use cases from year 2015 or earlier already find the Mac mini M1 overpowered. Its only usefulness in upgrading is lower power bill.

If you are using any computer from 2012 or earlier the performance per watt and power input figures of the M1 & M2 are just so sci-fi.

Imagine how it will be by year 2032, 2042 and 2052?

Agreed, I'm imagining a redesigned ultralight MacBook with slim bezels(probably have 13in screen) and use A15 or A16

 

[OneBar]

If you're using a 3000 maH battery, then you're using a 3000 maH battery. The SoC's efficiency has nothing at all to do with charging the battery. The only time you're charger is going to matter is when you're using your laptop plugged in. If you're concerned about that, unplug it and use the stored and paid for electricity within it.

Conversely, the longer it's plugged in to charge, the more energy is paid for and lost due to thermal conversion. But you can't charge too fast lest you damage the battery. So there's a line to walk between charging the battery quickly and safely. You might be changing out some saved cash now in efficiency for expenditure later in more often replacement.

If you want the absolute in power sipping computation, buy a Pro phone. They do most of what people need computationally and are very efficient as you stated.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Was gunna say, I've used the Apple 20w USB C charger to keep my 13' MBP i7 charged up in a bind and it worked really well. lol.

My M1 Max sips 7-11 watts just posting here, so a 20w charger EASILY keeps it topped up. I can run this thing off of a small Anker 25,600 mAh battery for a very long time.

If I read a book on my M1 Max - it sips watts. Turn down the brightness, close everything but Apple Books - I can read for hours and not even consume a few % points. Normal (reading) web browsing barely uses a handful of % points. I assume the Airs do even better. I've never seen a laptop use so little power. (I have a kill-a-watt and use iStat Menus).

 

[maflynn]

then you're using a 3000 maH

That's the bottom line, it doesn't matter what's connected to the wall, rather how much power the computer is using. Macs are great and sipping the power, and if plug in a 20w charger, its still going to use the battery. You'll need to charge it up longer which offsets the savings, i.e., you still need to recharge the battery, whether it takes 9 hours or 1 hour

 

[darngooddesign]

My Anker 511 Nano Pro 20W is (very) slowly charging my 16" M1-Pro MBP via MagSafe as I post this.