Tested: Thermal conditions in the 2018 i9 MacBook Pro dramatically hampering performance

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 158
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    I don't know if I would go so far as to have serious doubts based on this instance.  I don't think I am a full-on fanboy, but I am inclined give Apple the benefit of the doubt that there is some justification or reasoning for the 2.9GHz claim.  It's not worth the bad PR to lie and get called out for it.  In any case, Apple should either deliver what they advertise, or advertise what they deliver.
    jdiamond
  • Reply 102 of 158
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,858member
    You’re doing it wrong.  Offices are supposed to be well chilled.

    Kind of sad the i9 is a waste of money...

    I’m sure the iMac Pro also has thermal issues.  All of Apple’s designers/QC testers must be assigned to iPhone & IPad...
    It does not.
    The good thing about the iMac Pro is that Apple pre-throttled it so that you don't have to. The Xeons in the iMac Pro have higher base clocks when used in PCs. At least Apple is honest about the nature of the tradeoffs between form factor and performance in the iMac Pro. 

    It looks like Apple perhaps should have similarly described the chips in the MBP as having a lower base clock. 
  • Reply 103 of 158
    rcfarcfa Posts: 698member
    What surfaces were the laptops on, during testing?

    I noticed thermal throttling with older MB* models, when used on wooden desks. Same ambient temperature, and used on a stone, glass, or metal desk, no throttling.
    rising ambient temperature, throttling. Meaning using some laptops outside in summer: close to impossible, as they can’t handle real life ambient temperatures.

    These days, laptops seem to be useful only to carry from one air conditioned office to another.

    if the MacMini weren’t so woefully outdated, it would be best to keep a screen at home, in the office, and just carry a macMini between places, and use an iPad for casual work on the move...
    cgWerks
  • Reply 104 of 158
    dewmedewme Posts: 1,492member
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    I've never seen any claims that the advertised base frequency is a guarantee of anything at all. It's just a specification of one component in a larger system. The system designer/architect is free to throttle the CPU clock frequency to keep the entire system running reliably for a given condition.  

    I think Friedmud has the most logical and disciplined approach to these types of problems, which need to be evaluated systematically. All systems, machine based, human based, and hybrids are subject to the Theory of Constraints (ToC). For any given system configuration there will always be one component or process that is the primary constraint to the performance of the system. As soon as you make a change to eliminate or reduce the current primary constraint a new primary constraint is created. This is unavoidable. To prevent a vicious cycle, or endless game of whack-a-mole, you need architects, designers, and product owners who are willing to apply sound engineering and economic practices and judgement to reach a reasonable set of compromises that results in a product that can actually be built and sold for a profit.

    The hope in this case is that Apple did a sufficient number of iterations and evaluations and properly weighed the customer impact of the remaining constraints they knew they'd have to ship with this product in order to deliver the best value that they could to buyers given the current technology, cooling strategies, and chassis design. The ultimate pass/fail grade, i.e., product validation, will come from customers. 
  • Reply 105 of 158
    tmaytmay Posts: 2,863member
    dewme said:
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    I've never seen any claims that the advertised base frequency is a guarantee of anything at all. It's just a specification of one component in a larger system. The system designer/architect is free to throttle the CPU clock frequency to keep the entire system running reliably for a given condition.  

    I think Friedmud has the most logical and disciplined approach to these types of problems, which need to be evaluated systematically. All systems, machine based, human based, and hybrids are subject to the Theory of Constraints (ToC). For any given system configuration there will always be one component or process that is the primary constraint to the performance of the system. As soon as you make a change to eliminate or reduce the current primary constraint a new primary constraint is created. This is unavoidable. To prevent a vicious cycle, or endless game of whack-a-mole, you need architects, designers, and product owners who are willing to apply sound engineering and economic practices and judgement to reach a reasonable set of compromises that results in a product that can actually be built and sold for a profit.

    The hope in this case is that Apple did a sufficient number of iterations and evaluations and properly weighed the customer impact of the remaining constraints they knew they'd have to ship with this product in order to deliver the best value that they could to buyers given the current technology, cooling strategies, and chassis design. The ultimate pass/fail grade, i.e., product validation, will come from customers. 
    I suspect, but couldn't prove, that a combination of Mac OS X Mojave and a bit of tuning by the various application developers would do wonders to reduce the phenomenon of "throttling" that these benchmarks are showing, some of which looks nothing like "throttling" at all. It's a little early in this release cycle for "pearl clutching".

    Of course, each user's workload and workflow varies, so I would advise potential buyers to wait a bit until their chosen applications are updated for both the hardware and Mojave, and then find some savvy tester to confirm performance, one way or another.
  • Reply 106 of 158
    teedeeteedee Posts: 10member
    teedee said:
    The i9 CPU averaged at about 2.4-2.8Ghz during throttling. So if we were to disable turbo boost, the CPU should be able to sustain at a consistent 2.9Ghz, improving its performance correct?

    Undervolting the CPU might also help with the performance. Apple could also just release a firmware to limit the turbo boost speed (e.g. to 3.9Ghz) which will reduce heat, which should lead to better performance. Am I right about these?
    We talk about the latter in the article.

    As far as the former, we're working on it.
    Undervolting CPU on Windows laptops have proven to help reduce heat, thus improving performance. There are several MacOS apps that claims to be able to undervolt the CPU. Are you able to test them and let us know if the improvements are huge?
  • Reply 107 of 158
    migididmigidid Posts: 1member
    Also one problem what Louis Rossmann noted in previous generation macbooks the fans only starts to spin when computer hits 82 Celsius. And till 95 it runs in minium RPM and it will never get to full RPM before thermal shutdown.

    So they could improve it much but it's more important to keep it quiet than last over 3 years before it burns itself completedly.  Ofc this can be fixed by downloading fan control app but it is still over 6k laptop (7,5k in my country) at its highest you shouldn't need to download external app to give the laptop doubled lifespan.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 108 of 158
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,022member
    I know a simple solution: burn the super expensive Intel processors and use ARM A.. processors instead!
  • Reply 109 of 158
    jdiamondjdiamond Posts: 38member
    I sincerely hope that people out there run these tests across ALL the 2018 Macbook Pros, including the 13" models, to see if any of them can out perform the earlier models.

    It's so ironic - I'm used to dealing with Apple not designing Macbook Pros to handle the GPUs, because they design the thermals for the base configuration.  I always get the high end version, and I always have heating problems.  So when I saw that Apple now has discrete GPUs in ALL versions of the 2015 Macbook Pro, I thought "FANTASTIC!  Apple will finally have to design the thermals to accommodate a discrete GPU.  And now this happens.  :(

    Did I mention the enormous volume of these fans drives me batty?  I had to hack my Macbook Pro to keep the fans on all the time at a low level so that they wouldn't spike up to a high level whose I couldn't bear.

    Well, at least the keyboard works now.
    muthuk_vanalingamcgWerks
  • Reply 110 of 158
    jdiamondjdiamond Posts: 38member
    [EDIT[ I meant to say 2018. not 2015
  • Reply 111 of 158
    tipootipoo Posts: 911member
    Notebookchecks observations are interesting and come to the same conclusion - on the 13", it jumps up to 50W power use before crashing down to 20W, and repeating that cycle. The comparable T480S rather sticks to a more middling 35W - and completes the test 20% faster for it. 


    So the solution could be two halves, one, allowing the fans to ramp more quickly on the i9. Two, making its peak burst shorter in duration before settling at a more middling clock speed, so that it doesn't crater down past base. 


    https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-2018-Touch-Bar-i5-Laptop-Review.316648.0.html
    cgWerks
  • Reply 112 of 158
    tommy65tommy65 Posts: 3member
    DuhSesame said:
    tommy65 said:
    Dutch magazine showed that The TDP is not 45W but 120W under load. Now all make sence. So no thermal but TDP problem instead.
    120W for an core i9?  I remembered the worst chip from Intel in the previous generation only hit 90W almost, but not more than 100W.

    Not even a Type-C can give enough power to drive that thing.

  • Reply 113 of 158
    I was able to reduce throttling a lot on my fully specced 2016 macbook pro by getting a metal stand that passively cooled the laptop. The metal exterior works as a heat sink and cooling the outside helps a lot.  I would be interested seeing this test again using a couple different exterior cooling options for the macbook. Also when I went to an EGPU it was totally not an issue for me anymore that I noticed so that would be a great test as well.  The only time you keep the CPU continually pegged aside from benchmarks would most often be games or renders.


    cgWerks
  • Reply 114 of 158
    tommy65tommy65 Posts: 3member
    If all cores are at work, 4.8GHz the i9 will use around 120Watts. So you need a power adapter let’s say 320Watt? And amazing cooling to handle this speed continuously.
  • Reply 115 of 158
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 281member
    friedmud said:
    BTW - as a way of comparison...  Here's a quick run of our custom scientific simulation software using 4 cores in my 2017 MBP that with a 3.1GHz i7-7920HQ that can turbo to 4.1 GHz:



    As you can see it looks like it's thermal throttling - but it's actually not.  Those dips in frequency actually correspond to dips in the instruction intensity of our software.  This is software that gets run on the largets computers in the world (literally... later this year we're planning a run that uses all of the new Summit supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory... which is currently THE fastest computer in the world (according to Top500 anyway))... so it has been incredibly optimized... but even it still has dips and stalls that allow the processor to clock down slightly.

    I would expect something like a rendering program to have even more... it probably has to do plenty of file i/o... at least writing out the frames!  Every time it goes to the filesystem the CPU frequency will drop because the processors don't have enough to do.  This will average out to something less than spectacular looking.
    So you can reach full turbo on all cores?  Have you tried Prime95 or even LinPack?
  • Reply 116 of 158
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 281member

    seankill said:
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    ^This
    It’s only logical. 
    Oh please.

    Try find someone who can sustained the max turbo boost speed that’s not a gaming laptop.

    please read the post before.
  • Reply 117 of 158
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 281member
    tommy65 said:
    If all cores are at work, 4.8GHz the i9 will use around 120Watts. So you need a power adapter let’s say 320Watt? And amazing cooling to handle this speed continuously.
    Any benchmark suggests that?
  • Reply 118 of 158
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 281member
    migidid said:
    Also one problem what Louis Rossmann noted in previous generation macbooks the fans only starts to spin when computer hits 82 Celsius. And till 95 it runs in minium RPM and it will never get to full RPM before thermal shutdown.

    So they could improve it much but it's more important to keep it quiet than last over 3 years before it burns itself completedly.  Ofc this can be fixed by downloading fan control app but it is still over 6k laptop (7,5k in my country) at its highest you shouldn't need to download external app to give the laptop doubled lifespan.
    The fan spinning only means it will be slower to cool it down, not the maximum cooling capabilities.  This time is different.
  • Reply 119 of 158
    seankillseankill Posts: 396member
    DuhSesame said:

    seankill said:
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    ^This
    It’s only logical. 
    Oh please.

    Try find someone who can sustained the max turbo boost speed that’s not a gaming laptop.

    please read the post before.
    Maybe it is you that should read his post again. The post I was replying to notes that the processor should be able to handle sustained base frequency loads. 

    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 120 of 158
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 281member
    seankill said:
    DuhSesame said:

    seankill said:
    cropr said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    People surprised about this should get a desktop, like a Mac Pro. This is nothing new. The thinner the body , the more likely the computer will throttle,to maintain temperatures. I suspect there would be even more complaints , if fans on MacBooks made more sound.

    The issue is that the i9 MBP isn't performing as advertised in these tests.  That's a completely different issue from a user choosing the right tool for the job.
    Did Apple say that the processor wouldn’t be throttled? Don’t think they did, no. 
    It is logical that there is throttling for the burst frequency, but it is unacceptable that a there is throttling below the base frequency, which is defined as the frequency at which   the CPU can run irrespective of the load.  

    If these test results are confirmed by others and Apple has no remedy in the short term, I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be  a trustworthy laptop supplier, who does not deceive the customer by marketing claims it cannot fulfil.

    Apple would better invest more time in building the best qualitative laptop available iso. focusing on thinness, which is, for professional laptop users, not that important.
    ^This
    It’s only logical. 
    Oh please.

    Try find someone who can sustained the max turbo boost speed that’s not a gaming laptop.

    please read the post before.
    Maybe it is you that should read his post again. The post I was replying to notes that the processor should be able to handle sustained base frequency loads. 

    "I can only have serious doubts that Apple can still be a trustworthy laptop supplier."

    Sure.  Meanwhile your "trustworthy suppliers" still throttles like hell, but I'm sure you know how to keep i9 throttle-free.
    edited July 19
Sign In or Register to comment.