2018 i9 MacBook Pro throttling discussion [merged]

[Painter2002]

I can't believe there is people acting like there is no problem. For apple fans this is not good news.

For the record, I clearly stated in my response that there could be an issue, just saying that it is too early to assess this until Mojave comes out. This would be the first software optimized for six core, and despite what some people say, software optimization DOES make a difference.

But since this will clearly be a very opinionated section where people automatically jump to conclusions without all the facts, I think I’m gonna check out of this thread. Lol

 

[Aea]

For the record, I clearly stated in my response that there could be an issue, just saying that it is too early to assess this until Mojave comes out. This would be the first software optimized for six core, and despite what some people say, software optimization DOES make a difference.

But since this will clearly be a very opinionated section I think I’m gonna check out of this thread. Lol.

That's making a lot of assumptions for what very very very very much feels like a hardware problem with the thermal solution being inadequate.

In my testing (see reply #100) temperature spikes are in-line with throttling events.

 

[zshane1125]

More data are in:

Another YouTube running into throttling issues:

 

[Zellio]

For the record, I clearly stated in my response that there could be an issue, just saying that it is too early to assess this until Mojave comes out. This would be the first software optimized for six core, and despite what some people say, software optimization DOES make a difference.

But since this will clearly be a very opinionated section where people automatically jump to conclusions without all the facts, I think I’m gonna check out of this thread. Lol

Yes, please leave just as soon as it becomes obvious you are wrong

 

[joebclash]

I bought this machine (i9 / 32 GB / 1 TB) and while it benchmarks fine I am setting extremely thermal throttling if I let it run for longer than ~2 minutes. With Prime 95 I'm throttling down to 800 Mhz (you read that right) at around the 2 minute mark. With Cinebench I'm down to 2.4-2.5Ghz (from a base clock of 2.9 GHz).

Here's the Prime95 data: https://imgur.com/a/vVJLCka

And here's my reddit post with more benchmarks: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comm...15_inch_macbook_pro_throttles_itself/e2ktw6z/

TLDR: Feels bad man.

If this was samsung people would complain they built a computer to look good in benchmark and get good reviews from site that doing quick reviews. As a long time mac user this is not how I want apple to look...

 

[Painter2002]

That's making a lot of assumptions for what very very very very much feels like a hardware problem with the thermal solution being inadequate.

In my testing (see reply #100) temperature spikes are in-line with throttling events.

Ok. I don’t understand how people are reading my replies as me saying that there isn’t a hardware issue. I have stated, and will say again, YES THERE COULD BE a hardware issue. Whether that is related to inadequate thermal paste, or cooling fans, YES that could be the cause.

But if the computer is focusing on trying to run the majority of the processes on four cores, as High Sierra and any Mac applications you use were designed on, it is possible that it is not evenly distributing processing power across all six cores and thus overheating the four cores it has. ITS JUST A HYPOTHESIS. None of us at this point no what the issue is.

I’m sorry for all the caps lock, but I am just clearly highlighting so everyone can read that I am not saying there isn’t an issue, just more to the story possibly. Please don’t beat me up for that.
[doublepost=1531887866][/doublepost]

Yes, please leave just as soon as it becomes obvious you are wrong

Excuse me? And how do you know you’re right? Please friend show me the hard evidence...

 

[New_Mac_Smell]

Umm he didn't actually run this inside a freezer guys, I'd watch this video with it's intention clearly known - as entertainment...

If he did really run it in a freezer like the video suggests, then it clearly isn't throttling due to heat - as using a freezer the way he did would result in more heat...

Cables hanging out the door, meaning it can't get a seal. A freezer that isn't shut correctly is basically an oven, couple that with a small insulated box and the heat would rapidly rise in there. Also if it was actually turned on, there would be a moisture buildup on the inside due to condensation.

This is literally a brand new freezer, and he's put a MBP in there without turning it on for the purposes of the video. There may well be throttling issues, but this video in particular is nothing but clickbait nonsense. Take it with a pinch of salt and hold out for actual evidence.

Also worth checking what version of Premier they are using, Adobe are pretty useless at updating their software, this could just be an optimisation issue as has been mentioned, which will be patched. It's be more interesting to test this on a comparable software, Premier has too many caveats on MacOS to be a true indicator.

 

[gobikerider]

It entirely can be related to the software, but... you know what, I’m don’t even going to bother explaining because you seem set on there being a hardware issue already.

Just FYI, this YouTuber is another one of those that has been constantly complaining about Apple products of late so why even bother. He is making money off you watching his video, whether it’s biased or not. I mean come on, do you really think he put it in his freezer? And if he did, I wouldn’t take his advice with a grain of salt, because nobody in their right mind would put a laptop in a freezer where it could short or have battery damage.

Not to mention him showing Adobe. If I’m buying a Mac I’m much more curious about how FCP performs.

 

[Feenician]

I bought this machine (i9 / 32 GB / 1 TB) and while it benchmarks fine I am setting extremely thermal throttling if I let it run for longer than ~2 minutes. With Prime 95 I'm throttling down to 800 Mhz (you read that right) at around the 2 minute mark. With Cinebench I'm down to 2.4-2.5Ghz (from a base clock of 2.9 GHz).

Here's the Prime95 data: https://imgur.com/a/vVJLCka

And here's my reddit post with more benchmarks: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comm...15_inch_macbook_pro_throttles_itself/e2ktw6z/

TLDR: Feels bad man.

Do you have a non potato mode screenshot? I can’t see crap on it. Maybe the problem is on my end though.

 

[Aea]

Do you have a non potato mode screenshot? I can’t see crap on it. Maybe the problem is on my end though.

They were posted at full resolution:

Better?

 

[fokmik]

So, return that i9 and buy the base i7...maybe this way Apple understands something....

 

[Feenician]

They were posted at full resolution:

Better?

Yep, clear now. I couldn’t get the imgur thumbs to expand for some reason. Thanks.

Gotta say, looks pretty bad.

 

[zshane1125]

800 mhz, holy shxt...

 

[Kevinfinity]

Is this the problem coming with Macbook pro's extremely thin size? So Apple cannot put in an efficient cooling system to get most of the juice out of i9?

 

[gobikerider]

Yep, clear now. I couldn’t get the imgur thumbs to expand for some reason. Thanks.

Gotta say, looks pretty bad.

It also looks like a simple glitch...one test showed perfect performance under a full load while another throttled. Unless I missed something Apple just needs to slightly fine tune MacOS’s thermal firmware.

 

[joebclash]

800 mhz, holy shxt...

i9 --> g5

 

[Aea]

So, return that i9 and buy the base i7...maybe this way Apple understands something....

You see the frustration here is that I paid around $4.5K for this machine. That's a lot of money for a laptop, heck that's a lot of money in general. I paid it for a top-end machine (this will be the 4th MBP I've owned) because I had trust in Apple. It was also the only machine with 32GB of RAM that I felt comfortable pulling the trigger on.

That... and I also had the basic, absolutely non-controversial expectation of: pay more money, get more processor, get more performance. It's a $400 upgrade that at BEST is lateral, and for a lot of use cases an downgrade.

So now if I actually want the best performance, I have to go return this machine, purchase the "middle-end" CPU, and transfer everything over again.

That is not an Apple Experience.
[doublepost=1531888812][/doublepost]

It also looks like a simple glitch...one test showed perfect performance under a full load while another throttled. Unless I missed something Apple just needs to slightly fine tune MacOS’s thermal firmware.

The Cinebench test throttled too, down to 2.4Ghz. I'll re-run it.

 

[gobikerider]

You see the frustration here is that I paid around $4.5K for this machine. That's a lot of money for a laptop, heck that's a lot of money in general. I paid it for a top-end machine (this will be the 4th MBP I've owned) because I had trust in Apple. It was also the only machine with 32GB of RAM that I felt comfortable pulling the trigger on.

That... and I also had the basic, absolutely non-controversial expectation of: pay more money, get more processor, get more performance. It's a $400 upgrade that at BEST is lateral, and for a lot of use cases an downgrade.

So now if I actually want the best performance, I have to go return this machine, purchase the "middle-end" CPU, and transfer everything over again.

That is not an Apple Experience.

Have you tried doing your own work on the machine yet? Honestly in your actual workflow you might not even notice the throttling that is going to stick out when hammering the machine with Prime 95...

 

[Kevinfinity]

Does the problem coming from the extremely thin size of Macbook pro? So Apple cannot put in an efficient cooling system to get most of the juice out of i9.

 

[Feenician]

It also looks like a simple glitch...one test showed perfect performance under a full load while another throttled. Unless I missed something Apple just needs to slightly fine tune MacOS’s thermal firmware.

Possibly. Possibly not. It’ll all shake out in the end.

 

[terraphantm]

But if the computer is focusing on trying to run the majority of the processes on four cores, as High Sierra and any Mac applications you use were designed on, it is possible that it is not evenly distributing processing power across all six cores and thus overheating the four cores it has. ITS JUST A HYPOTHESIS. None of us at this point no what the issue is.

Not a great hypothesis IMO. Not like these are the first macs with > 4 cores. Don't forget about the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. Rendering applications have been maximizing the core usage on those machines well before these macs existed, and generally rendering responds very well to additional cores.

 

[gobikerider]

You see the frustration here is that I paid around $4.5K for this machine. That's a lot of money for a laptop, heck that's a lot of money in general. I paid it for a top-end machine (this will be the 4th MBP I've owned) because I had trust in Apple. It was also the only machine with 32GB of RAM that I felt comfortable pulling the trigger on.

That... and I also had the basic, absolutely non-controversial expectation of: pay more money, get more processor, get more performance. It's a $400 upgrade that at BEST is lateral, and for a lot of use cases an downgrade.

So now if I actually want the best performance, I have to go return this machine, purchase the "middle-end" CPU, and transfer everything over again.

That is not an Apple Experience.
[doublepost=1531888812][/doublepost]

The Cinebench test throttled too, down to 2.4Ghz. I'll re-run it.

Benchmarks aside does this laptop perform your day to day tasks and work more efficiently then your old Mac did? I’d bet it does and I’d also bet it’s by far the quickest of any machine in its class.

 

[Aea]

The benchmark starts when the CPU Utilization (Bottom Graph) hits 100%, and ends when it drops to near zero. It starts off strong, and then as soon as it hits the 100C ceiling (which I suspect is a no-throttle, full-bore) zone it starts going all over the place. Jumping between 2.0 Ghz and 3.0 Ghz regularly.
[doublepost=1531889196][/doublepost]

Benchmarks aside does this laptop perform your day to day tasks and work more efficiently then your old Mac did? I’d bet it does and I’d also bet it’s by far the quickest of any machine in its class.

I don't upgrade my machines all that often (3-4 years) so it's a definite improvement, my beef is with selling a top-end processor that is unable to really perform at it's full potential for more than 15-20 seconds before being passed by the mid-end. The $400 cheaper mid-end.

 

[KarmaRocket]

Actually it is not surprising, it is entirely possible to see programs and software limited to a set number of cores. For example in Excel on a windows machine, you can set it to run on all core, or limit it to less than full core capacity. On my business computer I can set it to run on 4 or less cores on the quad core i5 that the machines offers.

People say that it isn’t true the software makes an impact, but it really is entirely possible that the MacOS truly isn’t optimized for 6 core processors.

You are correct that you can choose how many cores you can use with some software. You can do the same with Virtual machines. However, with FCPX and other professional software (most software really), there is no option for the user to do that. Never was and never will. Simply because back in OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) Apple implemented something called Grand Central Dispatch. Basically it's a technology Apple built into OS X to optimize application support systems with multi core processors. This allows the software to use the maximum cores available. Including GPU with OpenCL if it is supported by the application.

To say Apple didn't "optimize" FCPX (or any software) for new hexacore processors is kind of a lame excuse. There was no issue when Apple went from dual core processors to quad core. Or what about the Mac Pro and iMac Pro with multiple cores? Did Apple have to rewrite all their software and OSX for those new processors? It's the whole point why they made Grand Central.

We have to call this for what it really is. Thermal Throttling. They tried to squeeze in too much power into a chassis that doesn't have enough room for proper cooling. They got lazy and they should be called out for it. No way you should pay a premium for a processor you can only use 80-90% of. Most Windows manufacturers redesigned their laptops for hexacore. Those that didn't get thermal throttling. The same thing is happening to Apple.

 

[drvelocity]

Thanks for posting all of this, my i9 gets here tomorrow and I appreciate the heads up.

Question: How crazy are the fans going when it hits 100? Is it possible Apple is being too conservative with the fans?

The benchmark starts when the CPU Utilization (Bottom Graph) hits 100%, and ends when it drops to near zero. It starts off strong, and then as soon as it hits the 100C ceiling (which I suspect is a no-throttle, full-bore) zone it starts going all over the place. Jumping between 2.0 Ghz and 3.0 Ghz regularly.
[doublepost=1531889196][/doublepost]

I don't upgrade my machines all that often (3-4 years) so it's a definite improvement, my beef is with selling a top-end processor that is unable to really perform at it's full potential for more than 15-20 seconds before being passed by the mid-end. The $400 cheaper mid-end.