Just read the article about the upcoming M1X models. How ironic that those are going to get a 'High Power Mode' whereas for the current 16" they need to implement a 'Low Power Mode' to stop it from going up in smoke...
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.
(2019) 16" is HOT & NOISY with an external monitor! :(
- Thread starter Appledoesnotlisten
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Monterey Release Candidate is out and the fix is still there. It seems it is going to make it into the official release?
I'm praying every night someone will be able to get make it permanent without CPU throttling.
Looks like Apple finally fixed the heat issues with the Macbook Pro 16. So glad I returned that last hunk of junk...
So low power mode knocks 20-30% off the CPU performance..... is this by disabling turbo boost? I use Turbo Boost Switcher with TB always set to off. Will low power mode be equivalent to this, and CPU performance be the same as TBS with TB off?
You could do the benchmarks yourself and check if there are differences, the benchmarks were posted here
I could indeed .... I could also rediscover Paracetamol myself when I have a headache, but much prefer to buy themYou could do the benchmarks yourself and check if there are differences, the benchmarks were posted here
so wait hahaI could indeed .... I could also rediscover Paracetamol myself when I have a headache, but much prefer to buy them
Disabling Turbo Boost doesn't solve the problem, so it must be something different. Don't know if it is better or worst wrt CPU performance.
OK I just did some quick tests with GeekBench 5:
Turbo Boost ON, LPM OFF: SC = 1035, MC = 6790
Turbo Boost OFF, LPM OFF: SC = 578, MC = 4422
Turbo Boost ON, LPM ON: SC = 709, MC = 5121
So performance is better with Low Power Mode enabled, rather than using Turbo Boost Switcher to disable Turbo Boost.
I noticed no difference in the Metal test between LPM being enabled or not.
Awesome thanks, well done. It seems that indeed they fixed it somehow balancing some drivers and power management. I'm happy to work on my MBP16 intel for many more years in the future as long as there will be security patches and adobe support. nice!
No worries .... v pleased with mine, especially as I use a lot of VMs and have 64GB RAM. I personally think we will be good with updates on intel for 4-5 years.
You have the i9, right? Isn't the base clock of the i9 2,3Ghz and with low power mode they (Apple) limit the frequency to 2,6Ghz? So those scores aren't really a surpise. With the i7 it's a different story because there it's 2,6Ghz both with Turbo Boost disabled and Apple's low power mode, so the scores should be pretty identical.
Last edited:
Yes, i9 2.3. That's an interesting fact, thanks..... pleased I can go to Low Power and actually gain some perf from what I did have with TB disabled.
Yes for people with the i9 it's nice. For people with the i7 not really. I really hope there will be a workaround that gives us Radeon High Side below 10W without the (unnecessary) sacrifice of CPU performance.
Hi guys, what do you think will be better in terms of thermal and performance?
a) i7 with 5600M (suposing that with this config is not necessary turn on low power mode).
I really don't like the new models (and prices) so I'm going countercurrent to get again a refurbished or second hand Intel 16" for a good price, finding the best compromise between performance and thermals.
Thank you!!
a) i7 with 5600M (suposing that with this config is not necessary turn on low power mode).
b) i9 2.3 with 5500M 8GB.
I really don't like the new models (and prices) so I'm going countercurrent to get again a refurbished or second hand Intel 16" for a good price, finding the best compromise between performance and thermals.
Thank you!!
Costco had one 2019 MacBook Pro 16 left in the store today. I think that they had a couple of Intel 13s. So they can still be found here and there.
Honestly, the 5600M because the architecture is much more efficient. I have not enough data for the low power mode to compare it, but do you really want to use the machine always in a low power mode to keep it usable?
But in case you decide to go for the i9/5500M 8GB and you can live with a French keyboard, you could make me an offer I cannot refuse
I really do love the new models, even the styling, which to me is rather retro.Have you actually read this thread? The answer is None of the above. The Intel versions that you mention can also double as space heaters and Cessna aircraft simulators.
You would be better off buying the base model of a new MacBook Pro. CPU, GPU and thermal performance will all be better.
As a previous owner of the 16" 5500M, and then 16" 5600M, and then 13" M1 I can say that this guy is dead on. If you're spending money don't go near the Intel macs. The M1 is incredible and blows the 16" Intel machines out of the water at a fraction of the price. It's not even close.
Can't wait to try the new M1 Max machines!
Yes, I think that too.
If I did not find any MBP with 5600 and 32 GB of RAM I will contact you. Doesn't matter if the keyboard is french, it is easy to change some of the keycaps, thanks!But in case you decide to go for the i9/5500M 8GB and you can live with a French keyboard, you could make me an offer I cannot refuse
Yes, I read this thread from the beggining because I was affected by that too. I sold my MBP a year ago (at a very good price) waiting two things: 1) A solution, 2) The new machines.
There are a pseudo solution for the thermals and the new machines does not convince me (yet). Also I still need some VM and x86 programs that still does not run properly on AS so my way is wait two or three years more and see how the emulation evolves or the industry tend to ARM and the developers remake that programs to RISC platforms. Ïn the meanwhile I will still in Intel Macs till end of they get support
While I'm very convinced already, I think next week will be a slaughterfest of reviews with Intel and MSFT stock going down. Maybe not that extreme, but it's still going to be wildly impressive. If you see what rave reviews the M1 already got (and how happy the users are at work who I got one), I expect nothing else.
But for VMs and native x86 programs, you're right. I hardly use any x86 specific stuff these days. I have a few things I need to do under Windows, both at work and at home. But for that, I set up a virtual machine on a server that I can reach over a VPN. It's a bit more of a hassle than starting up a VM locally, but it works very well. The only exception is apps that need a very responsive UI (e.g. gaming...). Then of course, a remote VM is not an option. But for admin or even apps that require lots of compute power, it's perfectly fine.
It will be interesting to see what happens with Intel 16" resale prices. I actually decided to stick around with my mine now that I've seen the new machines – despite not having the 5600M. I'm not happy about the plugged-in thermals, but things work well enough on battery and I like the touchbar. I don't think mini-LED is a good fit to dark-screen text editing either. More importantly I need to work with Linux/x86 VMs and have a number of programs that only run on Windows. I also like the fact that I can get an eGPU and have 2x the performance of the M1 Max tomorrow if I want/need. (I have some side projects using Metal graphics and GPU compute.)
Last edited:
The design of the new MBPs makes it relatively easy for me to stick to my current 16" for another few years, especially since the performance is still way more than enough for my workflow. My next Mac will definitely either be a Mini or iMac since I have no trust in the longevity of portable Macs anymore (Flexgate etc.) and since the new MBPs look just awful imo. It's not only the notch, it's the chunky side profile, the black keyboard, simply the overall design is a huge step backward and those machines already look dated compared to my Intel 16" or Dell XPS etc. Yes, spec-wise those machines are absolute beasts but you'll get the same and even better performance with the upcoming stationary Macs.
Fun fact: Seems like even with AS Apple is not able to fit the required performance in such thin devices like 2016-2020 Pros otherwise the new machines wouldn't be thicker again. So it was not all Intel's fault in the end, although they definitely deserve criticism they are facing right now.
Fun fact: Seems like even with AS Apple is not able to fit the required performance in such thin devices like 2016-2020 Pros otherwise the new machines wouldn't be thicker again. So it was not all Intel's fault in the end, although they definitely deserve criticism they are facing right now.
Last edited: