Post Preview
postName: Graham
postWebsite: ''
postComment: "I'm not sure Lion's power management is better or more efficient than Coolbook as proposed by others. I have a late 2006 MBP. Under SL I ran Coolbook with a voltage throttle range from 0.95 to 1.10 across the full frequency range of my processor (2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo). I ran like this for almost 2 years with no problems and I saw huge benefits in terms of battery life and keeping the machine cooler. Under normal use, mail, ical, web browsing, iTunes, etc (all together) the processor's temp would hang around 58 degrees C and the fans would idle at just under 2K rpms. Now under Lion the CPU temp never drops below 78 degrees C, jumps up to 81 or 82 when I do almost anything, and so on. The fans run constantly at 6K+ rpms. My claim about Lion's power management inefficiency comes from this: the voltage to the processor never drops below 1.18 volts. I don't know that it actually throttles the voltage at all. I haven't watched the actually clock Hz in relation to voltage across the core yet, but I even when loading up the CPU with video processing of real time affects that I know are taxing the CPU, the voltage never changes. It's always 1.18 on the CPU and the GPU.\n\nI'm so close to pulling the trigger on the hack to make coolbook work under Lion. I wonder, does anyone think that Lion's power management is actually doing anything good that I'm going to miss? Also, am I understanding this hack (work around) correctly? I'm essentially removing Lion's power management (the .kext file/extension) which allows coolbook to work in it's place. Yes?\n"