No it doesn't, the only thing that needs that are things with soldered USB-A cables on them or things that comes with small wireless dongles that need to be inserted in a USB slot. That is mainly non bluetooth keyboards, mice and headphones which are things you normally do not use inserted into the laptop itself and rather your docking station.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2018 i5 quad core MacBook Pro 13” throttling?
- Thread starter Rasta4i
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it doesn't, the only thing that needs that are things with soldered USB-A cables on them or things that comes with small wireless dongles that need to be inserted in a USB slot. That is mainly non bluetooth keyboards, mice and headphones which are things you normally do not use inserted into the laptop itself and rather your docking station.
And the only thing people uses are keyboards and mice ?
I myself have a mouse for the rare occasion I use one and it was cheaper to buy a dongle for my gaming mouse which I had for my windows laptop then to just buy a new mouse.
I suggest reading what I wrote before forming your response. Otherwise, feel free to name things you might buy for your computer today to plug in that comes with soldered USB-A connectors on it.
I did read and you said headphones ( audio jack) mice and keyboards. Plenty of other stuff. Plus a dongle for a SD card is stupid. Please there is enough articles on the internet complaining about the dongle life so you can just look those up for reference that the dongle life is dumb. Apple could of added one usb type A for legacy port considering there is similarly sized window laptops with one. This thinness also is what is making the laptop throttle
Clearly you didn't read as I said that the things that come with soldered USB-A connectors are mainly non bluetooth wireless mice, keyboard and headsets. The rest do not have soldered cables so you can use a USB-C to whatever cable for them. My phone uses USB-C to Lightning cables, my external drives are USB-C to USB-C or USB-C to micro-USB cables. What do I need dongles for exactly?
As a point of reference for you folks with 2018 machines, I just tested my 13" 2016 w/ 2.9Ghz i5.
I loaded up Prime95 torture test and it's been running for probably 15 minutes now. The CPU has boosted steadily to 3.1Ghz, the fans are running at about 5000RPM, and temps are pretty steady in the low 90's. I am typing this and streaming music in the background and the system has remained totally responsive the whole time.
I'm actually really impressed. I started off with the blended test, then switched to the one that says it will cause "maximum heat and power consumption," but the machine behaved pretty much identically with both. The boost clock pegged at 3.1Ghz and never budged.
I loaded up Prime95 torture test and it's been running for probably 15 minutes now. The CPU has boosted steadily to 3.1Ghz, the fans are running at about 5000RPM, and temps are pretty steady in the low 90's. I am typing this and streaming music in the background and the system has remained totally responsive the whole time.
I'm actually really impressed. I started off with the blended test, then switched to the one that says it will cause "maximum heat and power consumption," but the machine behaved pretty much identically with both. The boost clock pegged at 3.1Ghz and never budged.
IMO that sounds exactly like it's up the alley with the 13" MBPro. Short full on sprints, then a breather.
If you do batch edits then you'd lose much of that quad core benefit. Or preview generation on a large quantity of imported photos.
You perhaps but not everybody. I don’t have any usb C hard drives and not about to buy new ones for the sake of it. Have one usb C to usb A adapter. Going to be buying a dvd drive because it’s going to be my DVD player now so another dongle. My mouse is a third.
I think you may be missing the point. You do not need a dongle, just a cable with a usb-c at one end and whatever the device needs at the other - typically a micro usb, lightning plug etc.
That's not always true either business / engineering professionals like myself consider macOS the least worst operating system at the moment hence sticking with the Macbooks but in a purely financial sense a new laptop is not going to save me 50 hours over the course of a year or two especially if I consider set up time and the time spent agonising on these forums
[doublepost=1532035745][/doublepost]
Stuff that I have used this week that does not have removable cables:
National Instruments GPIB-HS-USB interface, Tektronix RSA503A (>8995 USD excluding sales tax - requires USB 3.0 over a USB A connector) just ordered LimeSDR - again USB 3.0 over USB-A...
Of course all this is over, always hopes et cetera but based on experience I prefer to have fewer interfaces in between my hardware and my computer due to reliability issues in the communications...
Which requires buying cables. Or if you have an external monitor you need a cable or a dongle. The dvd drive will require a dongle, my mouse requires a dongle , SD cards require an adapter. Please these are far from “pro” machines. It’s an annoyance at best.
Yep I have the same processor in my 13" 2016 and tried this test yesterday out of curiosity after hearing about the throttling in the new models. Mine boosted to 3.1GHz then just seemed to stay there indefinitely.
Keyboard aside, I love this laptop. Works very well for me.
I was going to wait for cannonlake, but Intel's ongoing inability to execute pulled the rug out from underneath me. Cannonlake was supposed to be out over a year ago and it's not coming out this year either by the looks of it. I just can't wait any longer - or well I could, but as my 2011 MBP is so old and slow and useless due to battery swelling and obsoleteness which means no official means of repair (and no Mojave update either) that I'd be completely without a usable laptop until whenever Apple releases a cannonlake MBP - which might not even be the same year the processor launches! So MORE than a year from now, and that's just awful.
I'd rather have a good, fast, new laptop now than a pie-in-the-sky 12+ months away from now.
As if the F-keys are terribly useful for most of us. I don't ever use them more than the occasional Alt-F4 on my windows PC or to adjust speaker volume on my Mac, honestly, and I'm a computer nerd. Maybe not the nerdiest nerd, but surely much more so than the regular joe schmoe. I wish all keyboards had a touchbar instead of dumb F-keys, which even if you do use them you need to memorize for each app what they do. Which is bothersome and tedious.
The F-keys are mostly just dead space on the keyboard, about as useful as the printscreen, scroll lock and pause/break keys on a full-size AT keyboard. While the touchbar lacks tactile feedback at least it presents to you what each button or control does, in graphics and possibly also text. That's much better than fumbling in the dark on a set of generically marked mechanical keys.
Me. Ordered BTO core i7 CPU, 16GB RAM, 500GB flash, silver casing tuesday. Store said "1-2 weeks" delivery. Well, we'll see how long it really takes. (Longer than I'd prefer no doubt...
)Do let us know about htrottling when you get it. IF I jump on this I'm probably go for this one tooMe. Ordered BTO core i7 CPU, 16GB RAM, 500GB flash, silver casing tuesday. Store said "1-2 weeks" delivery. Well, we'll see how long it really takes. (Longer than I'd prefer no doubt...
Meant to post this here and ended up in another thread, I out of nothing but curiosity ran the same tests that everyone appears to be basing the throttling on, CineBench. I am no expert however it did not look that bad in all the tests I ran. The latest one is attached.
This is the 13-inch Quad i5.
This is the 13-inch Quad i5.
Attachments
That looks awful.
Your i5 has a base clock of 2.3Ghz with a turbo potential for 3.8Ghz.
My 2016 i5 has a base clock of 2.9Ghz. Under heavy load it'll run both cores boosted to 3.1Ghz indefinitely. Your i5 should run at a minimum of a sustained 2.3Ghz on all 4 cores while under load or you aren't getting what you paid for.
Uhh what? Did you even look at the picture? It shows it constantly beating the 2.3 GHz base, hovering around 2.5+ GHz. The end is what I assume when he finished running the benchmark.
[doublepost=1532046165][/doublepost]I can basically throw another data point in: 2018 13" i5, I don't know ways to test the load by rendering, so I just went with trying to convert a 720p MKV to MP4 using handbrake. Using the same Intel power gadget, I looks to me like the i5 did indeed maintain and was actually slightly exceeding it's base clock speed, bouncing around 2.5 GHz and hanging around 95ºC. So I'm happy with it.
Look at the spikes. When my machine is under full load the CPU frequency line is flat. It boosts to 3.1Ghz and sits there, indefinitely, with the fans moving at about 5000RPM and the temperature in the low 90s.
That graph appears to show a CPU that is hitting its thermal limit, over and over again, and throttling back. I'd be very curious to see what it would do under prolonged use, and to see the part of the chart he snipped out that would have shown the CPU temps during all those spikes.
I'm not at my Mac at the moment or I'd show you a pic of what I mean, but it really is self explanatory: my full-load CPU frequency chart is just a straight line, pegged at an unwavering 3.1Ghz, for as long as I want to leave it that way.
It's fine that it hits/bounces around at it's limit though. That's what it's supposed to do. The issue people had with the i9 was that it throttled down to below it's base clock speed, sometimes worse than the i7 that it is supposed to be an upgrade over. Here, the i5 hits and settles at it's limit, in this case, above it's clock speed. So technically we're getting more than advertised. Your 2.9 GHz settles a bit above at 3.1, this 2.3 GHz settles in around 2.5.
Here's my pic. It maxes out at Turbo Boost of 3.6 for a while, then bounces around above it's clock speed, looks like around 2.7ish.
Here's my pic. It maxes out at Turbo Boost of 3.6 for a while, then bounces around above it's clock speed, looks like around 2.7ish.
Attachments
Last edited:
Remember though, that the 3.8 GHz boost frequency is for one core only. For all core you shouldn't expect it to go that high (not that you said you did, but others might). I don't think Intel publishes all-core turbo frequencies, but based on past experiences with Intel chips, one might reasonably expect a sustained all-core turbo of around 2.5-3.0 GHz something.
[doublepost=1532048727][/doublepost]
That's a good data point. Handbrake is probably a more representative example of a high workload, and more in line with what most users might see. Some tests, like Prime95, push CPUs much harder, but they push them much further than most users ever will.
What does it matter if the line is flat or fluctuating as long as the average speed is above the base clock speed?
That graph does show pretty serious throttling though. For science (and the benefit of people here) it would be interesting if you wanted to run the same test, but turn up the fans to max. (using a 3rd party app, I'm not sure which one works currently)
[doublepost=1532049013][/doublepost]
I think people are concerned that the processor is still not reaching its full potential.
there's a lot that goes into clock speeds, just like there's a lot that goes into benchmarks for cars. It just matters what your work is like. I always think it's more important to focus on things like ram and storage than processor. For processors, focus on number of cores than the clock speed.
For professional users don't follow that advice, but I think we're just wayyyy too focused on every little nugget of detail. You most likely won't feel a difference on a day to day basis.
For professional users don't follow that advice, but I think we're just wayyyy too focused on every little nugget of detail. You most likely won't feel a difference on a day to day basis.
But I don’t get your point. It is reaching its full potential (arguably more). It’s listed at 2.3, yet it hovers around 2.5...