Comparing the temps of a Core Duo to a Core 2 Duo

Comparing the temps of a Core Duo to a Core 2 Duo

Summary: I took some temperature benchmarks comparing the MacBook Pro (Core Duo) and MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo). The results substantiate what I uncovered in a previous post about the Core 2 Duo running significantly cooler than the Core Duo.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Tech Industry
47

MBP Hot SpotsI took some temperature benchmarks comparing the MacBook Pro (Core Duo) and MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo). The results substantiate what I uncovered in a previous post about the Core 2 Duo running significantly cooler than the Core Duo.

For this test I took both a Core Duo MBP (2.0GHz) and a Core 2 Duo MBP (2.33GHz) and booted them into a clean OS X account at the same time. Both were connected to power and Energy Saver settings were optimized for high performance.

I let both machines run the Nature Patterns screen saver for an hour then took 12 temperature readings from the top and 12 readings from the bottom and compared them. Readings were taken using a MasterCool 52224 infrared thermometer gun.

Click through for the numbers...

Temperatures (in °F) from 12 locations on the top case after one hour:

Top CD (°F) C2D (°F) Difference (°F)
1 111 90 21°F
2 104 89 15
3 103 90 13
4 103 90 13
5 99 85 14
6 98 85 13
7 96 84 12
8 91 83 8
9 90 80 10
10 92 80 12
11 83 80 3
12 80 80 0
Temperatures (in °F) from 12 locations on the bottom case after one hour:

Bottom CD (°F) C2D (°F) Difference (°F)
1 104 91 13°F
2 110 96 14
3 113 96 17
4 110 92 18
5 96 86 10
6 99 87 12
7 101 83 18
8 101 87 14
9 89 82 7
10 90 82 8
11 94 82 12
12 93 82 11

As you can see the Core 2 Duo machine runs significantly cooler than the Core Duo it replaces. Observed temperatures were as much as 21°F cooler (on the top) and as much as 18°F cooler (on the bottom).

Topic: Tech Industry

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

47 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • This article and the study behind it gets ...

    ... the "Duh" award. The only change that affects the thermals was the processor and according to Intel's literature the Core 2 Duo has a better thermal envelope. Now we have scientific proof that if the processor runs cooler the overall laptop will run cooler. Earth shaking!
    ShadeTree
    • Think about it Shade

      They have to do [b]something[/b] while waiting for someone to write the first OSX application. Not all of them can afford to overpay for a Mac [b]and[/b] pay $399 for a copy of Vista to actually run stuff! ;)
      NonZealot
      • Don't bother to think about it NZ

        How many OSX apps do you need to have before you can admit that there's been a "first OSX application?"

        BTW who wants to pay $399 for XP SP3, er "Vista" anyway?
        msolgeek
        • Why bother?

          Responding to [b]WinZealot[/b] and [b]shadcrook[/b] is not worth
          the time. They both worship the "gods in Redmond". It says so on
          their NMB membership cards.
          Rick_K
          • I'll take that as a compliment ...

            ... considering the source. Spoken like a true Mac lemming.
            ShadeTree
    • So trusting....

      On the contrary this sort of study is exactly what we need - I would trust 'Intel's literature' as much as I would a Pharmaceutical companies literature on side effects of their drugs.
      BalmainBug
      • Love those drug commercials.....If you listen very carefully

        you'll often hear "On rare occasions a patient will actually explode"

        Pagan jim
        Laff
      • Since I work for a PC OEM and we use those ...

        ... numbers to do our thermal designs I can assure they are quite accurate. Intel has always stated the numbers accurately good or bad. The benchmarks we have done for our own systems confirm the Core 2 Duo numbers are conservative.
        ShadeTree
    • Real world results

      Shade -

      Sorry that the article is pretty obvious to you. I thought that (like me) a lot of people would be interested in know the actual temperature difference of a C2D machine compared to a CD.

      - Jason
      Jason D. O'Grady
      • This article is the result of having too much time on your hands (nt)

        .nt.
        Scrat
  • Well despite Shade being underwhelmed and Non being well Non

    I for one am always happy to see progress made more power,
    less downside all good:)

    Now Non as for paying for Vista....well I don't see an immediate
    need to go to Vista nor can I say me or my company will be
    jumping on that bandwagon for sometime to come. Granted
    with time and further development of Applications that will take
    full advantage of Vista there will probably be a good reason to at
    least try Vista down the road but for now I just don't see it.

    Pagan jim
    Laff
    • By the time

      Vista "optimized" apps appear, computers will undoubtedly increase in processing power and memory. Think about, computers will have to get better to run all the bloat in Vista while giving apps some left-over resources to run.

      Hope those Vista "optimized" apps get here soon.
      msolgeek
    • You misinterpet what I am saying.

      My comment is about why captain obvious had to design a test to prove the obvious. Was there anyone in this industry that knows Intel's roadmap that didn't know the Core 2 Duo was cooler? First an article about how Core 2 Duo is faster then Core Duo and now this. One has to wonder what earth shattering revelation is coming next. Maybe, Water is Wet?
      ShadeTree
      • Well see there are different levels of geek and or tech.

        While I am a Mac or Apple guy and to a certain extent find much
        about Apple's moves interesting, and I do repair computers
        Macintosh for the very most part. I have to admit I'm not down and
        dirty expert onf chips. I know a bit more than the average Joe and
        when I saw the Core 2 advertised I knew it would be faster but I
        was not so much aware of the heat reduction. So these articles do
        give me some further appreciation of the progress being made.

        Pagan jim
        Laff
        • Let me help.

          intel's Core 2 Duo Press release.

          Core 2 Duo
          Maximum everything. Energy-efficient performance. Multimedia power.
          Based on revolutionary Intel? Core? microarchitecture, the breakthrough Intel? Core?2 Duo processor family is designed to provide powerful energy-efficient performance so you can do more at once without slowing down.

          World's Best Desktop Processor. With Intel? Core?2 Duo desktop processor, you'll experience revolutionary performance, unbelievable system responsiveness, and energy-efficiency second to none. And, you won't have to slow down for virus scan, multiple compute intensive programs, or multimedia downloads - these desktop processors are up to 40 percent faster and over 40 percent more energy-efficient.?

          World's Best Mobile Processor - now available. Intel? Centrino? Duo mobile technology has just gotten a mobility upgrade with the new Intel Core 2 Duo mobile processor. Its advanced capabilities provide twice the multitasking performance? while using 28 percent less power? so you get the benefit of a powerful dual-core PC plus all the benefits of mobility.+
          ShadeTree
          • Thanks thats litteraly COOL!!!!

            Pagan jim
            Laff
          • PR

            So, you believe everything you read in press releases then?
            Jason D. O'Grady
          • I belive that Intel has to back the claims they ...

            ... make in print. Our own benchmarking shows the numbers are conservative. Sounds like your little experiment does too. So where is the beef?
            ShadeTree
          • And where, Obi Wan, is the part about heat?

            I see faster and more energy efficient, but nothing about heat.
            nomorems
          • The part about heat

            :wtf

            Right there in your post, sir. Electrical energy is transformed into heat energy, which is wasted. If the chip is more energy efficient, there will be less heat generated.

            Also from the Intel blurb:
            [b]"these desktop processors are up to 40 percent faster and over 40 percent more energy-efficient.?

            World's Best Mobile Processor - now available. Intel? Centrino? Duo mobile technology has just gotten a mobility upgrade with the new Intel Core 2 Duo mobile processor. Its advanced capabilities provide twice the multitasking performance? while using 28 percent less power? "[/b]

            If they're "up to" 40% faster and "over" 40% more efficient, does that not equal less heat? ;)

            And, if it uses 28% less power, doesn't that also equal less heat? Remember, energy out can never be greater than energy in, so if energy in is reduced, so must energy out.
            brichter