Macbook Pro 2019 Benchmarks and First Impressions! Post yours!

[Silvestru Hosszu]

This new Mac is very interesting.
After I sold everything Apple related I`m really tempted to buy a 15'' 8 core Vega 20 MacBook.
My greatest fear is related to the keyboard liability. So, I'll have to wait and see.
Does anybody read this article?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple...ple-using-selected-test-samples.423827.0.html

Notebookcheck is usually a very reliable source and I hope that they are mistaking here.

 

[applesed]

Yeah. You know... I don’t have that option on this machine as I bought it through Apples EPP (friend) and even if I did I still love it enough to keep it.

eh? I'm sure your buddy with return it for you, if you're w/i the 14 days.

But yes, this machine blows through so much of what you throw at it.

 

[RumorConsumer]

eh? I'm sure your buddy with return it for you, if you're w/i the 14 days.

But yes, this machine blows through so much of what you throw at it.

Terms of purchase are that it’s not returnable. Part of the deal.

 

[Thysanoptera]

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple...ple-using-selected-test-samples.423827.0.html

Notebookcheck is usually a very reliable source and I hope that they are mistaking here.

This is all a matter a perception. Just like the 2018 6 core wasn't as bad as is being portrayed, 2019 8 core didn't become somehow a marvel of engineering overnight. It is the same machine as 2018 just with a different CPU - as it turns out it is better to run more cores at lower multicore clocks while rising single core frequency, with lower frequency you can lower voltage, power needed is proportional to square of voltage - you end up with machine that generates less heat. Add some undervolt and you get really good results - compared to 2018. Just like with 6 core 2018 you were getting much better results when compared to 2017 4 core in the same chassis.

When equipped with 6 core CPU (which doesn't differ in any substantial way from the 8th gen) you'll get essentially the 2018 version. Which is to be expected and there is nothing disappointing about it. Although there was nothing preventing Apple from undervolting the 6 core also.

The second factor is that the natural competitors of MBP - XPS 15 and X1E have not yet been released with the 8 cores CPUs, which is the opposite of what was happening last year. Once they're up it will be repeat of last year where the undervolted Windows machines with power limits removed will again be faster than Apple offering.

Notebookcheck has fallen down on my list of reliable sources, I see multiple mistakes or outright misinformation being produced - you need to be familiar with particular model to spot it though. They quote LTT now for crying out loud. I still look at their raw data, because they maintain some consistency in testing methodology, but they never address obvious discrepancies in results, like running a suite of tests on a gaming notebook in power saving mode.

 

[kp98077]

Does anyone have the 2019 13" i7 model? if so what does your Geekbench or CB look like? Especially compared to the 2019 13" i5, 500gb....

 

[Boomer5100]

Does anyone have the 2019 13" i7 model? if so what does your Geekbench or CB look like? Especially compared to the 2019 13" i5, 500gb....

I have a 2019 i7 2.8, 16, 1tb. Just reran benchmarks this morning after closing out some of the autoload programs. Waited for it to cool down to around 40c and ran both Geekbench 4.0 and Cinebench r20. Results were 5617/19695 for Geekbench and 1788 for Cinebench. Based on checking same processor in 2019 MacBook on Geekbench, these were right there near top.

 

[RumorConsumer]

Does anyone have the 2019 13" i7 model? if so what does your Geekbench or CB look like? Especially compared to the 2019 13" i5, 500gb....

I posted these back a ways. Top of the line 13” owned by my friend. 2.8 quad core i7.

 

[kp98077]

I have a 2019 i7 2.8, 16, 1tb. Just reran benchmarks this morning after closing out some of the autoload programs. Waited for it to cool down to around 40c and ran both Geekbench 4.0 and Cinebench r20. Results were 5617/19695 for Geekbench and 1788 for Cinebench. Based on checking same processor in 2019 MacBook on Geekbench, these were right there near top.

Any idea what the numbers are on GB for the i5 13"

 

[Boomer5100]

Any idea what the numbers are on GB for the i5 13"

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?dir=desc&q=i5-8279U&sort=multicore_score

 

[nameste]

I know this topic related to cpu performance but I wonder how's the battery life with your machines?I am constantly checking the battery % and it drops %1 every 4 mins using only safari.It looks max I can get around 6.5hours which is kinda low to me

 

[x-evil-x]

This is all a matter a perception. Just like the 2018 6 core wasn't as bad as is being portrayed, 2019 8 core didn't become somehow a marvel of engineering overnight. It is the same machine as 2018 just with a different CPU - as it turns out it is better to run more cores at lower multicore clocks while rising single core frequency, with lower frequency you can lower voltage, power needed is proportional to square of voltage - you end up with machine that generates less heat. Add some undervolt and you get really good results - compared to 2018. Just like with 6 core 2018 you were getting much better results when compared to 2017 4 core in the same chassis.

When equipped with 6 core CPU (which doesn't differ in any substantial way from the 8th gen) you'll get essentially the 2018 version. Which is to be expected and there is nothing disappointing about it. Although there was nothing preventing Apple from undervolting the 6 core also.

The second factor is that the natural competitors of MBP - XPS 15 and X1E have not yet been released with the 8 cores CPUs, which is the opposite of what was happening last year. Once they're up it will be repeat of last year where the undervolted Windows machines with power limits removed will again be faster than Apple offering.

Notebookcheck has fallen down on my list of reliable sources, I see multiple mistakes or outright misinformation being produced - you need to be familiar with particular model to spot it though. They quote LTT now for crying out loud. I still look at their raw data, because they maintain some consistency in testing methodology, but they never address obvious discrepancies in results, like running a suite of tests on a gaming notebook in power saving mode.

Don’t forget the thermal paste Apple is using on the 2019 models is better than previously used from what I’ve seen reported.

 

[Thysanoptera]

Don’t forget the thermal paste Apple is using on the 2019 models is better than previously used from what I’ve seen reported.

What you've seen reported is Anthony from LTT holding the laptop in his bare hands and using his superpower x-ray eyes to analyze molecular structure of the thermal compound buried beneath layers of aluminum and cooper. It is possible they use different TIM, not necessary better, the bottleneck is the heatsink/fan - the real heat dissipation is the same as in 2018. Actually, since the die area is larger (it has two more cores using the same process) you need lower temperature gradient to dissipate same power, the TIM used on 2019 could have 3/4 of the conductivity used before and still manage to provide the same overall thermal performance.

 

[RumorConsumer]

What you've seen reported is Anthony from LTT holding the laptop in his bare hands and using his superpower x-ray eyes to analyze molecular structure of the thermal compound buried beneath layers of aluminum and cooper. It is possible they use different TIM, not necessary better, the bottleneck is the heatsink/fan - the real heat dissipation is the same as in 2018. Actually, since the die area is larger (it has two more cores using the same process) you need lower temperature gradient to dissipate same power, the TIM used on 2019 could have 3/4 of the conductivity used before and still manage to provide the same overall thermal performance.

Slay all day.

 

[x-evil-x]

What you've seen reported is Anthony from LTT holding the laptop in his bare hands and using his superpower x-ray eyes to analyze molecular structure of the thermal compound buried beneath layers of aluminum and cooper. It is possible they use different TIM, not necessary better, the bottleneck is the heatsink/fan - the real heat dissipation is the same as in 2018. Actually, since the die area is larger (it has two more cores using the same process) you need lower temperature gradient to dissipate same power, the TIM used on 2019 could have 3/4 of the conductivity used before and still manage to provide the same overall thermal performance.

It wasn’t from him it was from this tech review

good review also.

 

[Thysanoptera]

It wasn’t from him it was from this tech review

It is better, he actually opened the machine and replaced stock with LM. But here are the things that this guy also got wrong:
1. Because paste is "more gooey" doesn't make it better. You'd need to test the thermal conductivity to make such determination and you cannot do it by eyeballing its viscosity.
2. Old paste tends to harden even after couple of months
3. Too much paste doesn't have negative effect on thermal transfer
4. His results with LM are withing 5% of stock, which is pretty much within normal benchmarks spread when running this multiple times, or what you will get just by mounting the heatspreader with slightly different pressure using same TIM. Which is more or less what people were getting while replacing TIM on 2018 also.
5. He didn't notice that the 2019 and 2018 both dissipate around 50W.
6. He didn't notice the 2019 CPU is undervolted.

Thus - the cooling system performance is the same. IMHO what Apple improved is not the TIM but the assembly quality. In 2018 we've been having huge differences between what users were reporting, like 20% difference between individual, identical machines. In 2019, from what we can see, every single one is able to stay comfortably above 50W

 

[x-evil-x]

It is better, he actually opened the machine and replaced stock with LM. But here are the things that this guy also got wrong:
1. Because paste is "more gooey" doesn't make it better. You'd need to test the thermal conductivity to make such determination and you cannot do it by eyeballing its viscosity.
2. Old paste tends to harden even after couple of months
3. Too much paste doesn't have negative effect on thermal transfer
4. His results with LM are withing 5% of stock, which is pretty much within normal benchmarks spread when running this multiple times, or what you will get just by mounting the heatspreader with slightly different pressure using same TIM. Which is more or less what people were getting while replacing TIM on 2018 also.
5. He didn't notice that the 2019 and 2018 both dissipate around 50W.
6. He didn't notice the 2019 CPU is undervolted.

Thus - the cooling system performance is the same. IMHO what Apple improved is not the TIM but the assembly quality. In 2018 we've been having huge differences between what users were reporting, like 20% difference between individual, identical machines. In 2019, from what we can see, every single one is able to stay comfortably above 50W

just saying whatever they did is an improvement even if it's little. Not sure what apple will do with a redesign anyway. You think they would make these thicker? I doubt the chassis will go up in size for better cooling. They would redesign the cooling system but I don't expect huge changes in a new slim design anyway. Unless they open up vents all over the place .

 

[RumorConsumer]

From the 2.4 8c 32gb. From dead idle after a restart
View attachment 843155

At dead idle @getheo
View attachment 843156

about 39 degrees if I sit and stare at it long enough. Lowest I saw was 37.xx or so.

Happily bouncing between 33 and 34 idle this morning as I use it after its been off all night. @getheo

 

[fate0311]

Happily bouncing between 33 and 34 idle this morning as I use it after its been off all night. @getheo

So what is the consensus on thermals versus the 2018?

 

[Thysanoptera]

So what is the consensus on thermals versus the 2018?

Improved on 8 core, same on 6 core.

 

[getheo]

The last years 6-core have idle temps 45 C. According to @RumorConsumer, the idle temp for 2019 i7 is 30 C.https://forums.macrumors.com/members/rumorconsumer.1033822/

 

[Thysanoptera]

The last years 6-core have idle temps 45 C. According to @RumorConsumer, the idle temp for 2019 i7 is 30 C.

My 2.2 2018 6 core hovers in the low 30C.

 

[RumorConsumer]

After using the 13” 2017 for a year, getting the 2019 15” I can say for sure this keyboard is vastly improved. I just typed in a 2017 and it feels absolutely terrible. Like typing on a bunch of broken crackers. The 2019 is lovely.

 

[kp98077]

After using the 13” 2017 for a year, getting the 2019 15” I can say for sure this keyboard is vastly improved. I just typed in a 2017 and it feels absolutely terrible. Like typing on a bunch of broken crackers. The 2019 is lovely.

yeah agreed, 2019 is much improved, more travel as well...

 

[applesed]

My 2.2 2018 6 core hovers in the low 30C.

Hey what’s the best app to check idle temp?

 

[Thysanoptera]

Hey what’s the best app to check idle temp?

Intel power gadget