Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

lbass

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 26, 2014
81
20
I asked this in the 16" overheating thread, but I wanted to start its own thread. My MacBook Pro 2017 died (2.9 GHz Quad-Core i7, Radeon Pro 560, 16GB 2133MHz, 512 SSD). I was offered the entry level 16" as a replacement (2.6 GHz i7, 16GB, 5300m, 512 SSD).

I am allowed to pay for any upgrades to the base machine. Some options:
  • $600AUD - move to the higher spec 16" (i9, 5500m, 1TB).
  • $600AUD - 32GB ram
  • $1200AUD - 5600m graphics
  • $300AUD - 5500m 8GB
  • $300AUD - 1TB SSD
My main use is FCPX and Lightroom. I would love the ram and the graphics card but I could buy an m1 macbook pro for that amount of money. Those with the 16" what would you recommend upgrading? I know there are heating issues with the non 5600m cards, but that is a lot of money.
 

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
How much heat was your 2017 MacBook Pro exposed to? (did it by chance die from heat?)
How do you use external displays?
How much do you use FCPX? (to my understanding, this can heavily utilize the GPU, correct?)
How long do you want to keep this system?
How much do you use the dGPU when on battery power?
How much do you care about fan noise?
 

lbass

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 26, 2014
81
20
How much heat was your 2017 MacBook
How much heat was your 2017 MacBook Pro exposed to? (did it by chance die from heat?)
A lot. The thing was always cooked. Whether charging or plugged into displays.
How do you use external displays?
I do tend to use them in clamshell mode. But that eventuated because my laptop would not roast as much if I did that.
How much do you use FCPX? (to my understanding, this can heavily utilize the GPU, correct?)
I have been using it less recently. I have not been very productive through covid so I have not done a lot of editing. It is a hobby for me, but ideally I would be going it all the time.
How long do you want to keep this system?
3 years.
How much do you use the dGPU when on battery power?
Rarely of late.
How much do you care about fan noise?
I do care. It is annoying when these rev up.
 

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
I feel the 5600M is a very good investment for you*, and that the performance, temperature, and noise difference between the 5500M and 5600M is what I consider to be very significant. The 5600M is, like the 5500M, rated at 50 watts TGP. However, from a performance standpoint, the more capable 5600M more or less plays with the Nvidia RTX 2060 mobile, which is a 90-ish watt GPU and laptops with it are generally not as thin as the MBP. The 5600M's use of HBM2 (high bandwidth memory) is what made this possible and enabled a GPU with this level of performance to be put inside of the MacBook Pro (there isn't enough cooling and USB-C charging doesn't supply enough power for an 80-90 watt GDDR card + these power-hungry Intel CPUs.)

If you use the 5600M without an external display, a few things are noticeable to me. Tasks using the GPU work better, and the temperature of the computer stays quite a bit lower (as do fan speeds). For example, using a Windows 10 VM via Fusion Pro, which can utilize the GPU pretty extensively, the performance is so good it feels like running native Windows, and yet the operating temperatures are significantly lower than when performing the same tasks in my MacBook Pro with a 5500M. Following intensive GPU tasks + peak heat, the 5600M MBP seems to cool down faster, possibly because of the smaller GPU footprint or possibly just my imagination? But overall, there is a significant perceivable difference in actual use. The 5500M wasn't bad by any means, but the 5600M is still a significant improvement. I've also noticed that the 5600M MBP has better battery life than the 5500M when performing tasks that use the GPU. If you hate fan noise, the 5600M has a big advantage right from the start--obviously it does not change the amount of heat made by the CPU, but it does reduce the amount of total heat.

Now we get to externals. As you know, the 5300M/5500M will consume 18-20 watts of power even at idle when using any external displays with the clamshell open, and will do the same with certain displays with the clamshell closed (it appears this high draw in clamshell mode can often be eliminated when the refresh rate is exactly 60 Hz.) During this high power draw, this elevates the idle temp considerably, and even lighter tasks will further elevate temperatures to a point where the fans may become audible. Under more intensive tasks, I've observed the high power consumption of the GPU as well as the heat being made from the GPU results in system throttling more rapidly and more severely. In some cases, this can be significant to a point where it is frustrating. Take my example of the Windows VM and now factor this in with the clamshell open and two externals being used. The 5600M MBP is almost completely unfazed by this from the performance standpoint, whereas the 5500M MBP was slower, hotter, and louder. It's a much more amplified difference because the 5600M's power draw in this situation is so much lower.

Finally, there is of course costs. HBM cards are really expensive to make and generally they wind up in applications where cost is of less importance than efficiency and performance (e.g., high performance computing). That said, its efficiency gets you to a level of performance you can't get with GDDR5/6 in the MacBook Pro's frame.

*One alternative you could also explore is an eGPU. There are some significant advantages in going this route as well, but I ultimately decided I personally wanted the 5600M rather than eGPU for several reasons. Someone with an eGPU could probably tell you their experiences and the pros/cons of this setup and given the 5600M's high price, I think it is worth considering not only a 5500M vs 5600M, but also a 5300M/5500M + eGPU as a third possibility.

I know a lot of this is more experiential rather than statistical, but I hope it helps.
 
Last edited:

lbass

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 26, 2014
81
20
Thank you so much for that write up. Incredible feedback.

The 5600m alone would take up my whole budget really. How important do you think the i9 processor and 32gb ram are comparatively? Because I am considering getting the base model with a 5600m.
 

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
It is very workload dependent. I went with 32 GB, which is sufficient for my needs today. If I could do it again I might instead do 64 GB (but that would literally put the price of my MBP well over what I paid for the car I drive on a daily basis). Someone who uses FCPX and Lightroom might be able to add more insight regarding those apps than I can and their thoughts on potential RAM needs for a three year outlook. I can't even speculate with those.

I don't think the i9 is massively important over the i7, but I went with it as it was only like a hundred bucks more in the US specifically for the CPU upgrade. Having only had two 2.3 GHz i9s, I really can't say a ton here though with confidence.

As the price of the 5600M might limit your ability to get other options, I would definitely read a little on eGPUs, especially as you noted you are not using your MBP on battery much with the dGPU. If you are mainly working at a desk, an i9/?RAM/5300M/1TB + an eGPU might be a good match as you could start with the MBP and then get the eGPU a few months later down the road (and you could even buy a used eGPU setup to save a few bucks). The Hot and Noisy thread has a lot of good eGPU experiences in it.
 

lbass

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 26, 2014
81
20
So what do you think my hierarchy should be between the i9, 32gb ram, and the 5600m.

I cannot believe these M1 macs by the way. Feels like I should just swap to a macbook air.
 

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
If an eGPU is something that works for you and your work is RAM-heavy, 32 / i9 / 5600M in that order (and if an eGPU does work, the 5300M might be perfectly acceptable). If not RAM-heavy, swap processor and RAM.

If an eGPU is not something that works for you, 5600M / 32 / i9.
 

hallux

macrumors 68040
Apr 25, 2012
3,443
1,005
An eGPU is going to cost at least as much as the 5600m upgrade, isn't it? Unless the eGPU option is to limp along until it can be purchased.
 

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
An eGPU is going to cost at least as much as the 5600m upgrade, isn't it? Unless the eGPU option is to limp along until it can be purchased.

Before I returned my 5500M MBP, I priced up the eGPU I wanted (Core X and a 5700XT) and it was something like $150 more expensive than the 5600M upgrade for me (over my 5500M 8GB) (note that does factor my academic staff discount.) That said, a less-expensive GPU like a 5500XT or a RX580 or going used would make the eGPU less expensive than the 5600M.

Beyond the pros/cons of an eGPU, the financial plus could be the ability to buy the eGPU down the road when the budget permits. Alternatively, if the 5300M/5500M has satisfactory standalone performance, then the eGPU would not even be necessary.
 

Grohowiak

macrumors 6502a
Nov 14, 2012
768
793
Easy with eGPU. As of now, BigSur crashes mac into reboot when you disconnect a box.
Silicon mac doesn't even support eGPU.
Unless you MUST I would stay away unless you get it cheap like I did.
 

crymimefireworks

macrumors 6502
Dec 19, 2014
314
369
As someone who went over whether to get the 5600 or the 5500, I don't think you actually need 5600 for your use. I watched some YouTube videos about FCP and the speed boost for 5600 just isn't there. Not worth it. I recall MaxTech has a good comparison. (FCPX at 6:20
)

secondly, heating: I always use my computer in clamshell mode, so I haven't had the issues with overheating while running display and the computer open. Unless you use your computer open and with monitor it doesn't seem like an issue. But yeah if you use your computer open with external monitor at the same time the power/heat bug is real.

MBP 16", 32 GB, 1 TB, 5500 4 GB, 2.3 Ghz i9
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lbass

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 26, 2014
81
20
Wow this is very interesting. Thanks for all of the replies. I do not think an eGPU would suit my workflow. At the end of the video Max suggested going with the higher graphics over CPU etc for FCP.

I have two options which I am struggling between. Option one is purchasing a 16" hoping it lasts 5 years. If I was to do that I think I would get the base model with the 5600m (maybe 32gb ram).

I am getting seriously swayed by the M1 macs though. I think the eventual silicon 16" is the computer to have. If I was planning around moving to the 16" silicon then I think I should get the base 16". Sell it while it is still brand new and sealed. And buy a macbook air to hold me over until the 16" is announced.

Am I overvaluing the m1 macs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: crymimefireworks

DanMan619

macrumors regular
Dec 30, 2012
213
157
Los Angeles, CA
I am getting seriously swayed by the M1 macs though. I think the eventual silicon 16" is the computer to have. If I was planning around moving to the 16" silicon then I think I should get the base 16". Sell it while it is still brand new and sealed. And buy a macbook air to hold me over until the 16" is announced.

Am I overvaluing the M1 Macs?

I personally don't think you're overvaluing the M1 Macs. If i personally were in your position and had to buy something, that's probably what i'd do too... I'd be heavily leaning towards the M1 Macs (note that i'm a tad biased though because i've been itching to ditch these Intel Macs for a while now). Based on what you've described your needs to be here. There isn't really much reason that you have to stick with the 16" Intel MBP. You mentioned you don't need an eGPU, so the fact that the M1 Macs do not support eGPUs is a non issue for you. You said your main programs you use are FCPX and Lightroom.

The former runs natively on M1 Macs out of the box, and the latter is confirmed getting a native M1 version next month in December and will run through Rosetta 2 in the meantime. There's risk apps running through Rosetta 2 may not run perfectly to consider, but it hasn't seemed to be an issue thus far. Still something to consider though

If you've seen the benchmarks and real world testing reviewers have done with the M1 Macs doing things in native FCPX and even some apps through Rosetta 2 emulation, it's pretty impressive performance that could easily hold you over till M1 16" MBPs come out. I think the biggest thing you'd want to check on is look for videos of people testing M1 Macs using FCPX using the same cameras or the same file types you use. Various Youtube tech reviewers like Max Tech, Luke Miani, Greg's Gadgets, TLDToday, Rene Ritchie and many others are all doing or have done videos on this.

M1 Macs have been shown to handle H.265/HEVC like it's essentially nothing, while even higher end Intel laptops and even some desktop computers all struggle with it to the point that some editors avoid using H.265/HEVC entirely or have to convert it to something else more useable. The M1 Macs also can operate under load and generate very little heat and don't rely on kicking up the fans into high gear anywhere near as much as the Intel Macs do, which is extremely appealing to me.

I don't know about your needs outside of FCPX and Lightroom, but the main reasons i could see for sticking with the Intel MBP 16" would be if you need multi monitor support. This first batch of M1 Macs has more limited monitor support compared to the Intel Macs. The M1 Macbook Air and M1 Macbook Pro 13" can only do one external monitor. The M1 Mac Mini can do two (one through a USB C port and the other through the HDMI port).

Another big reason to go for the Intel Mac would be if you need to access Windows through Bootcamp. The M1 Macs do not have this ability currently (though access to Windows through Parallels is coming). Another reason to still go Intel Mac now would be if you're really particular about screen size. I know for some people the 13" is absolutely unusably small for their use case. RAM may be another concern, as these M1 Macs all top out at 16 GB of RAM. However, reviewers have also shown this to not really be an issue as the RAM usage is more efficient and RAM swap is so fast it's nearly imperceptible (but probably still get the 16GB if you do go M1). Lastly, if you still use any 32 Bit applications, then you need to stay Intel and on OSX Mojave. As Catalina drops support for anything 32 Bit.

If you're using this professionally for work. It is a risk to use a gen 1 product for time sensitive work, but based on what i've seen so far of these Apple Silicon Macs, they seem perfectly useable. They seem far more stable than any gen 1 product should be. No one's reported any major issues with these systems that you'd expect with gen 1 products. I myself would feel confident making the switch. The risk would feel pretty minimal for me. Only reason i haven't yet is because i can wait out the 16" Apple Silicon model and am not in a position where i have to buy something right now.

So yeah, if the 16" replacement is being offered to you and you only have to pay the upgrade difference and you, and not your company, would own it thus giving you the right to sell it if you chose. Grab the 16" base like you said. Keep it sealed, buy a M1 Macbook Air or Pro that would easily hold you over. Then sell both and put it towards an Apple Silicon 16" MBP when those come out. That or just politely decline the 16" Intel MBP, buy the M1 Macbook Air or Pro and get your company to reimburse you for that instead. It would actually save them money since it costs less than the Intel 16" MBP.
 
Last edited:

ght56

macrumors 6502a
Aug 31, 2020
839
815
I think it is reasonable to assume that the AS 16-inch will be pretty badass. In your instance, GPU, followed by RAM, and then CPU seems to make the best route of prioritization in my personal opinion.

I think I recall you mentioning you had a LG UltraFine 5K? I don't believe the current M1 Macs can run it at full resolution due to it needing two DisplayPort 1.2 HBR2 signals.
 

Feisar

macrumors regular
Aug 16, 2010
226
520
Wow this is very interesting. Thanks for all of the replies. I do not think an eGPU would suit my workflow. At the end of the video Max suggested going with the higher graphics over CPU etc for FCP.

I have two options which I am struggling between. Option one is purchasing a 16" hoping it lasts 5 years. If I was to do that I think I would get the base model with the 5600m (maybe 32gb ram).

I am getting seriously swayed by the M1 macs though. I think the eventual silicon 16" is the computer to have. If I was planning around moving to the 16" silicon then I think I should get the base 16". Sell it while it is still brand new and sealed. And buy a macbook air to hold me over until the 16" is announced.

Am I overvaluing the m1 macs?

I don’t think so. I just sold my mid-2018 MBP 15.4” 2.9 6-core i9/32g/1TB/Vega 20 and planning on picking up a refurb MBP 16” 2.4/32g/2TB/5600 or holding out for a MBP 16” refresh.

But after reading the M1 reviews, I’m having a hard time justifying $3800-4K on a new or refurb Intel MBP16.

Decided to order a M1 MBP 13 16/1TB (got a decent offer for my mid-2018 which covers the cost for the new M1 MBP13 as config) and use it until a new Silicon MBP 16 launches.

Only con for me is the smaller screen size - have a Dell P2720Q 4K to use as needed - but bonus is speed, portability, and money in pocket to save for new Silicon MBP 16.
 

richinaus

macrumors 68020
Oct 26, 2014
2,432
2,187
I personally don't think you're overvaluing the M1 Macs. If i personally were in your position and had to buy something, that's probably what i'd do too... I'd be heavily leaning towards the M1 Macs (note that i'm a tad biased though because i've been itching to ditch these Intel Macs for a while now). Based on what you've described your needs to be here. There isn't really much reason that you have to stick with the 16" Intel MBP. You mentioned you don't need an eGPU, so the fact that the M1 Macs do not support eGPUs is a non issue for you. You said your main programs you use are FCPX and Lightroom.

The former runs natively on M1 Macs out of the box, and the latter is confirmed getting a native M1 version next month in December and will run through Rosetta 2 in the meantime. There's risk apps running through Rosetta 2 may not run perfectly to consider, but it hasn't seemed to be an issue thus far. Still something to consider though

If you've seen the benchmarks and real world testing reviewers have done with the M1 Macs doing things in native FCPX and even some apps through Rosetta 2 emulation, it's pretty impressive performance that could easily hold you over till M1 16" MBPs come out. I think the biggest thing you'd want to check on is look for videos of people testing M1 Macs using FCPX using the same cameras or the same file types you use. Various Youtube tech reviewers like Max Tech, Luke Miani, Greg's Gadgets, TLDToday, Rene Ritchie and many others are all doing or have done videos on this.

M1 Macs have been shown to handle H.265/HEVC like it's essentially nothing, while even higher end Intel laptops and even some desktop computers all struggle with it to the point that some editors avoid using H.265/HEVC entirely or have to convert it to something else more useable. The M1 Macs also can operate under load and generate very little heat and don't rely on kicking up the fans into high gear anywhere near as much as the Intel Macs do, which is extremely appealing to me.

I don't know about your needs outside of FCPX and Lightroom, but the main reasons i could see for sticking with the Intel MBP 16" would be if you need multi monitor support. This first batch of M1 Macs has more limited monitor support compared to the Intel Macs. The M1 Macbook Air and M1 Macbook Pro 13" can only do one external monitor. The M1 Mac Mini can do two (one through a USB C port and the other through the HDMI port).

Another big reason to go for the Intel Mac would be if you need to access Windows through Bootcamp. The M1 Macs do not have this ability currently (though access to Windows through Parallels is coming). Another reason to still go Intel Mac now would be if you're really particular about screen size. I know for some people the 13" is absolutely unusably small for their use case. RAM may be another concern, as these M1 Macs all top out at 16 GB of RAM. However, reviewers have also shown this to not really be an issue as the RAM usage is more efficient and RAM swap is so fast it's nearly imperceptible (but probably still get the 16GB if you do go M1). Lastly, if you still use any 32 Bit applications, then you need to stay Intel and on OSX Mojave. As Catalina drops support for anything 32 Bit.

If you're using this professionally for work. It is a risk to use a gen 1 product for time sensitive work, but based on what i've seen so far of these Apple Silicon Macs, they seem perfectly useable. They seem far more stable than any gen 1 product should be. No one's reported any major issues with these systems that you'd expect with gen 1 products. I myself would feel confident making the switch. The risk would feel pretty minimal for me. Only reason i haven't yet is because i can wait out the 16" Apple Silicon model and am not in a position where i have to buy something right now.

So yeah, if the 16" replacement is being offered to you and you only have to pay the upgrade difference and you, and not your company, would own it thus giving you the right to sell it if you chose. Grab the 16" base like you said. Keep it sealed, buy a M1 Macbook Air or Pro that would easily hold you over. Then sell both and put it towards an Apple Silicon 16" MBP when those come out. That or just politely decline the 16" Intel MBP, buy the M1 Macbook Air or Pro and get your company to reimburse you for that instead. It would actually save them money since it costs less than the Intel 16" MBP.
I agree with this 100%.

Just picked up the 5600m yesterday after a year of pain with the 5500.

The laptop has the same i9 so the only difference is the GPU, and the difference is very noticeable. General work and the desktop seem smoother, and when I push the machine the extra speed is there.

Totally recommend this model if you need a 16".

Also I have done the egpu route - its a pain although it does divert a lot of heat outside the laptop. But for total convenience and speed the 5600m is great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erthquake

richinaus

macrumors 68020
Oct 26, 2014
2,432
2,187
i like that plan too. especially if you're thinking of going for 5600, just not worth it imo.

5600 only worth it if you need it. Plus is it for earning money or just fun?

I wouldn’t have got it if the opportunity to get it very cheap hadn’t presented itself

But if you can use a 13” screen [or monitor] and all the apps you use are on the M1 then I would get that.

Personally my apps are not native on the M1 and there are reports of Rosetta crashing them too, so its a no go for me I think for about 6 months.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.