2018 i9 MacBook Pro throttling discussion [merged]

[MBX]

Yes. Cook and Ive have backed Apple into a corner catering to both Wall Street and Madison Avenue who really know nothing about tech or the real market for high-end mac hardware. They showed their colors with the mac pro already. It's all about selling disposable computers and making iPhone like appliances. Some more crazy observations...

- almost guaranteed upcoming tear downs will reveal these are not upgradable machines. So one would have to be nuts to consider a 2018 16GB versus 32GB, or anything less than a 1TB SSD. All of which make the real base price $3500 instead of $2500+ (why get stuck with a limited fixed configuration out of the box for this price)

- to drive a capable GPU (a must for the power users this is targeting), you'll need something like BlackMagic which adds another $800 minimum

- @ $4500+ you're in souped up iMac or even iMac pro range (which come with built-in 4K or 5k high-end displays oob)

- mobility is not a real concern for creative power users running FCP or Premiere full blast

The saddest thing is, $15B a quarter of pure cash profit per quarter is apparently not enough to engineer the best laptop in the world anymore . Others are building rockets that can land back on floating structures, targeting Mars travel, supersonic trips to Paris, building hyperloops, attempting to cure cancer, feed the hungry or rid us of malaria with their cash. But no, our boys @ infinite loop can no longer design a thermal paste or cool a cpu correctly. And they lie to us about it. The suits are just laughing at us.

Sad. The only sense this makes is humor ...

Something's out of whack in Cupertino...

Apple just seems too thinly stretched despite being one of the biggest if not the biggest tech company. They still have a team of engineers & designers like they used to have 20 years ago it seems. Not enough man power & resources to deal with all the stuff properly.

You can even see that with the iPhones. Prior to 'X' we had a design that was going on for a full 4 years. While Samsung and other tech co's were doing more design innovation during that time.

Now Apple is even working on self driving cars and probably even more stretched.

They sit on most cash a company ever sat on and they should really invest some of it to build their departments stronger.

You don't need the best experts to see stuff that doesn't add up, like: Why Apple's own iPhones aren't compatible with MBP's USB-C. WTF! I can connect my Samsung Galaxy S8 to a MBP without a dongle and I can even charge it with Apple's MBP charger with super-fast charging but I need a dongle for an iPhone and it can't even super-charge it.

Such things are annoying as hell. How can Apple lose focus and miss these things?

 

[fokmik]

The poster meant the base model i7 MBP of whatever year, the standard config before any potential upgrades to the processor or RAM or whatever are potentially applied, the cheapest "stock configuration" model with the given processor.

At least that's how I read it.

you are correct ! base 2018 15" with Intel i7 2.2Ghz and Amd 555X

 

[Schranke]

here is the test I did on my i9/32gb config. I did two tests, the first one is with the fans set to 65-73 using MAC fan control. finished in 4min 26 sec
the second test, the fans were on the Mac default auto. I had safari running in the background with like 10 tabs open as well.

Thats a fast rendering, but the CPU is really unstable in its clock speed, would be nice if it could average out a bit more instead of jumping.
I might have made a mistake in my first rendering (see edit in my post), after correcting I got times of 8 min and 45 sec +/-2 sec

 

[JD2015]

 

[Elektrofone]

note, see edit

So I wanted to see how my 2017 2.9GHz i7 did, having never use AE for anything the settings were just out of the box. I did 5 runs of the Benchmark file and the results is going to disappoint those i9 people out there...
The fastest time were 5 min and 16 sec, slowest 5min and 23 sec (see edit as this is questionable). The CPU were able to keep a boost on near 3.50GHz constantly with temperatures fluctuating between 90 and 95 Celsius.
I did at no point hit a my 16GB RAM limit according to AE

Note, a few background processes were running, not a big effect. but I had forgotten I had a safari open in another desktop window...

EDIT; So I realised that i had not purged the memory of AE after the first test just to see what I was all about, I did how ever command Q AE thinking that would remove all resources used in the render. So I did a new run of 5 after purging the Memory & Disk Cache and here they came out to 8 min 45 sec +/-2 sec, just to see if the previous consecutive renders would have an impact to a 6th render I did that, it completed 4 min and 32 sec, so consider my first run flawed

Yes. You have to make sure to turn off media and disk cache in the settings as well as purge the memory with each run. Also, even though it doesn’t show it hitting the 16GB limit that is because After Effects limits its RAM usage based on how much you have installed. On my model with 32GB during a render it will go up to 26GB of RAM used.

 

[Schranke]

Yes. You have to make sure to turn off media and disk cache in the settings as well as purge the memory with each run. Also, even though it doesn’t show it hitting the 16GB limit that is because After Effects limits its RAM usage based on how much you have installed. On my model with 32GB during a render it will go up to 26GB of RAM used.

Thanks for confirming, I might do another run at some point just to make sure (maybe not 5 in a row). Must say I was a little impressed at first, but the second run seems much more reasonable and in line with what I expected (given I have no experience with AE and only had other rendering times to relate to).

 

[Elektrofone]

Thanks for confirming, I might do another run at some point just to make sure (maybe not 5 in a row). Must say I was a little impressed at first, but the second run seems much more reasonable and in line with what I expected (given I have no experience with AE and only had other rendering times to relate to).

Thanks for sharing. So I’m saving roughly 2 minutes so far compared to yours but that could be just the RAM. Would love someone with a 2018 i7 model here to chime in.

 

[Ploki]

If Apple set the power limits to say.. 55 -60 watts They could still get the 4.8ghz number but tell customers only on 1 core or 4.5 on 2 cores , 4.2 on 4 cores and so on..

Now take these facts and see what you think. Still like macs, but will stick to my 2016..

technically false advertising (not being able to run 2.9GHz base clock).

I'm holding out with the purchase to see if they make a statement/release a fix that at least allows the CPU to run a steady 2.9GHz (undervolting, fan ramping, whatever, i dont care)

 

[Schranke]

Thanks for sharing. So I’m saving roughly 2 minutes so far compared to yours but that could be just the RAM. Would love someone with a 2018 i7 model here to chime in.

Your welcome
Yah would like to see that too, especially the same i7 with 16GB and 32GB RAM, then we would get an good idea of how much that would change the times

 

[Elektrofone]

I dont have any problem with my base i7 2.2 ghz...i suppose who wants the 2018 15" should go with base only and 555X and upgrade from 2015/2014/2013... otherwise it really doesnt make sense

Do you have After Effects available to run a benchmark?

here is the test I did on my i9/32gb config. I did two tests, the first one is with the fans set to 65-73 using MAC fan control. finished in 4min 26 sec
the second test, the fans were on the Mac default auto. I had safari running in the background with like 10 tabs open as well.

That seems way too fast to be accurate. Did you make sure to purge your RAM after each run? Also, make sure to turn off Media and Disk Cache in the settings. On my i9 the average I got was 6 minutes and 45 seconds.

 

[fate0311]

Everyone keeps talking about under volting and as an electrical guy under volting to me means more heat due to higher amperage.

Just like a 220v A/C is going to run lower in amps than an A/C on 120v.

 

[GerritB]

I made the decision that I'll return mine. Delivery got postponed from the 20th to the 24th, but once it arrives its going back to the store. I just can't accept to spend this kind of money on a laptop that does not do what it is advertised as.

For now I'll just keep my current Macbook 2014 and hope to read news in the coming month that these issues have been fixed. If not (I don't expect them to be able to fix this), I'll start to look at my other options; meaning either a cheaper version or switch to a Windows laptop for the first time in over 10 years.

 

[Queen6]

Everyone keeps talking about under volting and as an electrical guy under volting to me means more heat due to higher amperage.

Just like a 220v A/C is going to run lower in amps than an A/C on 120v.

Fundamental law: When the voltage decreases and resistance stays the same, the amperage MUST also decrease.

It's a DC system. This is why applying an undervolt can be so benifical: not only reducing temperature it allows CPU's to reach higher frequencies if the notebook is thermally limited.

Q-6

 

[ondert]

Just read notebookcheck's pre-review of 15" middle i7-2.6ghz model and things look like real bad. They mentioned also the power adapter gets to 57 C degree which is kind of worrying. Yet, we don't know the results well when both gpu and cpu run under load.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2018-2-6-GHz-560X-Laptop-Review.317358.0.html

 

[Erasmus]

Everyone keeps talking about under volting and as an electrical guy under volting to me means more heat due to higher amperage.

Just like a 220v A/C is going to run lower in amps than an A/C on 120v.

If it was constant power, then yes, lower voltage would cause more heat. But that would also require the internal resistances in the CPU to decrease, so lower voltages could push more current.

Instead, the lower voltage results in lower current, and much lower power. The only limit is if there is still enough current to correctly register in the transistors.

As it's all digital, really any current or voltage higher than the absolute minimum required to get it operating at a particular frequency is wasted.

For example, when my 2011 MBP was new, the stock voltages on the GPU were far too high. In Boot Camp, I could lower the voltage, while simultaneously increasing the clock speed, and still end up with a cooler GPU than stock configuration. It's all about the trade-off between heat versus risk of random crashes. Obviously, it's in Apple's favour to lean towards higher voltage and hotter chips, because the flack they would get from releasing the odd MBP which randomly crashes would be far worse than releasing computers that run hot.

 

[The Mercurian]

Just read notebookcheck's pre-review of 15" middle i7-2.6ghz model and things look like real bad. They mentioned also the power adapter gets to 57 C degree which is kind of worrying. Yet, we don't know the results well when both gpu and cpu run under load.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2018-2-6-GHz-560X-Laptop-Review.317358.0.html

Power adapter at 57C???

This means the thing plugged into the wall ??

 

[dan9700]

How is apple charging more for a slower macbook, im getting it monday and returning it, im thinking of leaving the closed eco system and go back to windows £3300 for laptop that doesnt work right and cant even handle games only a mug would keep it

 

[Erasmus]

I'm pretty sure that Apple will release a firmware update for all 2018 MBPs which will at least adjust the fan curves. Hopefully, they also adjust the CPU/GPU voltages so they generate less heat.

I think this will go along way to fixing the problem. For the extra step, if one is willing to sacrifice some time and their warranty, a new, thinner coat of better thermal paste I expect will significantly drop temperatures and/or increase speeds. Pity they make it so hard.

And pity they slop it on with a trowel to begin with.

I don't care about hot power adapters. Power adapters don't throttle. (afaik, I must admit)

 

[ondert]

Power adapter at 57C???

This means the thing plugged into the wall ??

Yep! the thing we plug into the wall.

 

[Queen6]

Just read notebookcheck's pre-review of 15" middle i7-2.6ghz model and things look like real bad. They mentioned also the power adapter gets to 57 C degree which is kind of worrying. Yet, we don't know the results well when both gpu and cpu run under load.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2018-2-6-GHz-560X-Laptop-Review.317358.0.html

Basically mirroring members experience here. Apple's cooling solution is not capable of adequately cooling the CPU, add in the dGPU that's another 34W to dissapate...

Q-6

 

[Erasmus]

Basically mirroring members experience here. Apple's cooling solution is not capable of adequately cooling the CPU, add in the dGPU that's another 34W to dissapate...

Q-6

I agree that Apple's cooling solution is insufficient. However I also believe there must be a software problem (or a correctible hardware problem, like too much toothpaste) because the CPUs shouldn't need more power to run than the 2016 or 2017 CPUs. They are newer, on more mature lithography, and have lower clock speeds to counteract the extra heat from 2 extra cores.

I think that the cooling issue will be greatly improved with software/firmware updates. I don't think they will ever reach their top clock speed performance for more than very short bursts, however will be a lot better than now.

Still less than other computers with similar hardware in more reasonable chassis.

 

[ondert]

I agree that Apple's cooling solution is insufficient. However I also believe there must be a software problem (or a correctible hardware problem, like too much toothpaste) because the CPUs shouldn't need more power to run than the 2016 or 2017 CPUs. They are newer, on more mature lithography, and have lower clock speeds to counteract the extra heat from 2 extra cores.

I think that the cooling issue will be greatly improved with software/firmware updates. I don't think they will ever reach their top clock speed performance for more than very short bursts, however will be a lot better than now.

Still less than other computers with similar hardware in more reasonable chassis.

Sorry but this is a thermodynamic issue and I don't believe they'll fix this with software or firmware updates. At max, they can set more aggressive fan curvatures and/or maybe they'll set the cpus at lower voltage and yet it won't be beneficial that much.

For the intel part, I think you look so optimistic to the cpus. They are not that "mature". Intel can not answer to AMD Ryzen still after 2 years and they are just fooling around. They simply squeezed 2 more cores on the same die.



Even with this thing i9 reaches 99C degree...



...and we are talking about this!

 

[Queen6]

I agree that Apple's cooling solution is insufficient. However I also believe there must be a software problem (or a correctible hardware problem, like too much toothpaste) because the CPUs shouldn't need more power to run than the 2016 or 2017 CPUs. They are newer, on more mature lithography, and have lower clock speeds to counteract the extra heat from 2 extra cores.

7700HQ rarely exceeds 50W, 8750H can pull close to 90W. If the cooling solutions and or power train is inadequate the CPU will reduce frequency until it reaches a stable state.

All the Window's OEM's with hex cores that do not excessively throttle have increased their notebook's cooling capacity.

For Asus to attain this level of performance with the GL703GS they opted for a far more robust cooling solution, and 12V fans with more blades than a regiment of Ninja's

I seriously doubt a firmware update or paste job will solve the issue, mitigate some yes.

A lot is also related to power with the vast majority of the new hex core CPU's rolling back frequency once the PL-2 limit is hit (current and or time) equally not by a huge margin holding well over 3GHz on all cores.

Q-6

 

[ESA]

7700HQ rarely exceeds 50W, 8750H can pull close to 90W. If the cooling solutions and or power train is inadequate the CPU will reduce frequency until it reaches a stable state.

All the Window's OEM's with hex cores that do not excessively throttle have increased their notebook's cooling capacity.

For Asus to attain this level of performance with the GL703GS they opted for a far more robust cooling solution, and 12V fans with more blades than a regiment of Ninja's
View attachment 771708
View attachment 771709
I seriously doubt a firmware update or paste job will solve the issue, mitigate some yes.

A lot is also related to power with the vast majority of the new hex core CPU's rolling back frequency once the PL-2 limit is hit (current and or time) equally not by a huge margin holding well over 3GHz on all cores.

Q-6

Its the ugliest thing i ever seen.... the only One close to Apple is Razer Blade

 

[ha1o2surfer]

here is the test I did on my i9/32gb config. I did two tests, the first one is with the fans set to 65-73 using MAC fan control. finished in 4min 26 sec
the second test, the fans were on the Mac default auto. I had safari running in the background with like 10 tabs open as well.

Ouch is all I can say