My takeaway is Apple underpomise and overdeliver in this case, but just like everything about Apple, many complains come from nitpicking the word '4.2GHz' and assumed that's what is 'promised as the baseline' because it just makes the narrative for the thermal problems more plausible.
No one believes that's promised either, that's just what this CPU is capable of in an ideal system (which is likely in a larger size and weight class than what the MBP 15).
At the same time, sites aren't plastering that the MBP can't hit its base clock.
Again, the only way to judge the thermals will be to compare it to its peers in the same size/weight class. If laptops like the new Dell OLED XPS 15 or Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic can't hit those sustained clock speeds, then Apple has over-delivered. If those laptops are capable of higher sustained performance, then perhaps Apple's thermal solution could be better. We'll have to wait and see before we can pass judgment.
My takeaway is Apple underpomise and overdeliver in this case, but just like everything about Apple, many complains come from nitpicking the word '4.2GHz' and assumed that's what is 'promised as the baseline' because it just makes the narrative for the thermal problems more plausible.
No one believes that's promised either, that's just what this CPU is capable of in an ideal system (which is likely in a larger size and weight class than what the MBP 15).
At the same time, sites aren't plastering that the MBP can't hit its base clock.
Again, the only way to judge the thermals will be to compare it to its peers in the same size/weight class. If laptops like the new Dell OLED XPS 15 or Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic can't hit those sustained clock speeds, then Apple has over-delivered. If those laptops are capable of higher sustained performance, then perhaps Apple's thermal solution could be better. We'll have to wait and see before we can pass judgment.
In the end I doubt most buying the 15" MacBook Pro really care what the Dell XPS or Gigabyte Aero does as far as performance. It over performs what Apple says it will do and people buying this will buy it because it's a Mac. They're not going to compare spec for spec.
My takeaway is Apple underpomise and overdeliver in this case, but just like everything about Apple, many complains come from nitpicking the word '4.2GHz' and assumed that's what is 'promised as the baseline' because it just makes the narrative for the thermal problems more plausible.
No one believes that's promised either, that's just what this CPU is capable of in an ideal system (which is likely in a larger size and weight class than what the MBP 15).
At the same time, sites aren't plastering that the MBP can't hit its base clock.
Again, the only way to judge the thermals will be to compare it to its peers in the same size/weight class. If laptops like the new Dell OLED XPS 15 or Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic can't hit those sustained clock speeds, then Apple has over-delivered. If those laptops are capable of higher sustained performance, then perhaps Apple's thermal solution could be better. We'll have to wait and see before we can pass judgment.
In the end I doubt most buying the 15" MacBook Pro really care what the Dell XPS or Gigabyte Aero does as far as performance. It over performs what Apple says it will do and people buying this will buy it because it's a Mac. They're not going to compare spec for spec.
That's true to an extent, if you require macOS on a 15 inch laptop, you have no other option and you're going to buy the MacBook Pro 15. Simple as that.
However, this is the only way to compare how well Apple's implementation of its CPU actually is. If for some reason it is worse, perhaps it's just a sign that Apple should be changing their cooling solution. If it's the reverse, those buying the XPS 15 or Aero Classic (and have heavy CPU requirements) might consider the MBP 15 as you can still install Windows.
Although Intel Corp. had problems delivering 10nm processors, no one blamed Intel Corp. Apple is the company that had to take the heat of having a MacBook Pro that thermal-throttled. Just as Intel Corp. screwed up with their modem chip-set, it was Apple that had to take the blame for slower modem speeds in the iPhones. It's just easier for people to blame Apple for everything that goes wrong. Maybe that's the way it should be, but I think it may be a wee bit unfair.
If a company designs a product around a component that was promised and that component company doesn't deliver, then it's the product maker that's immediately blamed if something goes wrong with said product. I never heard one tech-head product tester blame Intel Corp. for a MacBook Pro that thermal-throttled. It was always Apple's fault and Apple's fault alone. It was always Apple that didn't do their job properly and how the MacBook Pro was just a poorly designed notebook computer that didn't have decent enough cooling for such high-powered processors. Apple may have gotten stuck with 14nm processors instead of getting their 10nm processors but who cares. It's always easier just to blame Apple because that's the company that delivers the clicks.
I’m surprised that Apple’s R&D didn’t attach a Peltier cooler to the heat sink. For smaller projects, the technology is available, still a bit expensive but no fan noise...
One reason for not innovating, the rumored Arm based Macs might not need active cooling. Apple wouldn’t spend the time and money investing in an expensive solution that could be null in a few years.
Though they have done it before...
"One reason for not innovating, the rumored Arm based Macs might not need active cooling."
or like AI mentioned in this article, Intel didn't keep its end of the bargain by not releasing 10nm processors on time. They're 3 to 4 years late
I this thread is a perfect example of why I’m glad the masses don’t care what spec-heads think. This MBP looks fantastic, performs even better than what Apple advertises, and yet some people here just have to troll their ignorant, uneducated, possibly even iHating nonsense.
That’s a surprisingly poor write-up for AI. For one, the claim of “no thermal throttling issues whatsoever” is unsupported, save for one machine running one benchmark.
I this thread is a perfect example of why I’m glad the masses don’t care what spec-heads think. This MBP looks fantastic, performs even better than what Apple advertises, and yet some people here just have to troll their ignorant, uneducated, possibly even iHating nonsense.
What Apple does (putting a workhorse machine in a slim design) is like Massey Ferguson offering a 800bhp tractor in a Honda hatchback form factor. Yes, it will look and sell better, but it is still the wrong idea. Stop palliating intrinsically flawed design with inadequate cooling infra - accepting what the masses consider the norm
That’s a surprisingly poor write-up for AI. For one, the claim of “no thermal throttling issues whatsoever” is unsupported, save for one machine running one benchmark.
Six machines, and multiple benchmarks. We've just presented the one here. There are also other accounts of the same thing from other venues, using their own testing methodologies, and you'll find that they're all substantively the same.
All of the the machines we had access to for testing were bought at retail, by multiple parties, in disparate geographical locations.
I this thread is a perfect example of why I’m glad the masses don’t care what spec-heads think. This MBP looks fantastic, performs even better than what Apple advertises, and yet some people here just have to troll their ignorant, uneducated, possibly even iHating nonsense.
Yes this was my point in my post. Most consumers going in to buy a laptop like the MacBook Pro don't really care about the specs. Its only the nerds who want bragging rights that really care about speed in the end.
I'm really glad you did these tests, thank you! However Apple has made me gun shy about buying one; releasing the Vega series GPUs in November of last year, 3 months after release the supposed 2018 models, makes me wonder if I should wait to see if they do the same this year.
Cinebench is not the perfect tool to test throttling for enclosed systems like this. In a real world scenario the GPU is likely to generate additional heat, the shared thermal solution will negative influence throttling by adding a massive heat source.
100°C is also likely kill components in this machine over time. A lot of components in a mac are not designed to withstand that amount of heat. One example: More heat / heat fluctuations can increase humidity: All new Macs have the 50volt line next to a vital low voltage line. This can fry your system, apple will blame you for water damage and charge massively for repairs, which will reoccur in the next "repaired" system. It's a flawed design stay away if you want to render a lot.
PS: a similar post of mine some months ago to the iMac "disappeared".
The issue is what is the performance delta between the i7 & i9 six core and the new i9 eight core at the same clock. Is the eight core worth the cost?
Just like cars the top speed mark on the speedometer is less important if you can't find a road to get to that speed! Then you need to focus on what the vehicle can offer, is it gas milage or how many people/cargo it can carry?
Most Pro's who are working on video need the highest sustained clock so if the frame's cooling can't offer it it's of little benefit to their work flow. Someone working in graphics or animation may find the system useful as they tend to need spirts of performance.
So far I have not seen any proper benchmarking that focuses on holding the workload at the comparative clock rate across the CPU's. So at an example Apple (Intel) makes the clam the CPU can run sustained at 2.4 GHz so what does the other CPU's in this series offer in performance at this same clocking?
Cinebench is not the perfect tool to test throttling for enclosed systems like this. In a real world scenario the GPU is likely to generate additional heat, the shared thermal solution will negative influence throttling by adding a massive heat source.
100°C is also likely kill components in this machine over time. A lot of components in a mac are not designed to withstand that amount of heat. One example: More heat / heat fluctuations can increase humidity: All new Macs have the 50volt line next to a vital low voltage line. This can fry your system, apple will blame you for water damage and charge massively for repairs, which will reoccur in the next "repaired" system. It's a flawed design stay away if you want to render a lot.
PS: a similar post of mine some months ago to the iMac "disappeared".
I'm really glad you did these tests, thank you! However Apple has made me gun shy about buying one; releasing the Vega series GPUs in November of last year, 3 months after release the supposed 2018 models, makes me wonder if I should wait to see if they do the same this year.
This will happen no matter what...your Mac will never always be new. Apple is damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they don't update their products people are bitching because Apple never updates their products. When they do, people bitch because they just bought a Mac and now it's out of date. It's the way technology works.
I'm really glad you did these tests, thank you! However Apple has made me gun shy about buying one; releasing the Vega series GPUs in November of last year, 3 months after release the supposed 2018 models, makes me wonder if I should wait to see if they do the same this year.
This is how it used to be -- relatively rapid iteration with spec-bumps.
A machine you buy now, or bought six months ago, is not suddenly going to light on fire because there is new gear. There will always be something new coming
Cinebench is not the perfect tool to test throttling for enclosed systems like this. In a real world scenario the GPU is likely to generate additional heat, the shared thermal solution will negative influence throttling by adding a massive heat source.
100°C is also likely kill components in this machine over time. A lot of components in a mac are not designed to withstand that amount of heat. One example: More heat / heat fluctuations can increase humidity: All new Macs have the 50volt line next to a vital low voltage line. This can fry your system, apple will blame you for water damage and charge massively for repairs, which will reoccur in the next "repaired" system. It's a flawed design stay away if you want to render a lot.
PS: a similar post of mine some months ago to the iMac "disappeared".
My dog, the people complaining about “malicious anti-Apple rants” in here... You guys attacked well before, and more often than, anyone who constructively criticized Apple’s machines in here. Chill the frell out.
I this thread is a perfect example of why I’m glad the masses don’t care what spec-heads think. This MBP looks fantastic, performs even better than what Apple advertises, and yet some people here just have to troll their ignorant, uneducated, possibly even iHating nonsense.
Yes this was my point in my post. Most consumers going in to buy a laptop like the MacBook Pro don't really care about the specs. Its only the nerds who want bragging rights that really care about speed in the end.
Actually this is nonsense. The whole point of the 15” MBP is high performance for professional use.
Personally I'm more concerned about the keyboard and issues with Apples service practices.
Cinebench is not the perfect tool to test throttling for enclosed systems like this. In a real world scenario the GPU is likely to generate additional heat, the shared thermal solution will negative influence throttling by adding a massive heat source.
100°C is also likely kill components in this machine over time. A lot of components in a mac are not designed to withstand that amount of heat. One example: More heat / heat fluctuations can increase humidity: All new Macs have the 50volt line next to a vital low voltage line. This can fry your system, apple will blame you for water damage and charge massively for repairs, which will reoccur in the next "repaired" system. It's a flawed design stay away if you want to render a lot.
PS: a similar post of mine some months ago to the iMac "disappeared".
While I agree running chips at their thermal limit is a problem your statement about humidity is ill advised. Heat will keep condensation away.
As for Apples repair practices that needs to be addressed even if your points are in question.
Comments
At the same time, sites aren't plastering that the MBP can't hit its base clock.
Again, the only way to judge the thermals will be to compare it to its peers in the same size/weight class. If laptops like the new Dell OLED XPS 15 or Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic can't hit those sustained clock speeds, then Apple has over-delivered. If those laptops are capable of higher sustained performance, then perhaps Apple's thermal solution could be better. We'll have to wait and see before we can pass judgment.
However, this is the only way to compare how well Apple's implementation of its CPU actually is. If for some reason it is worse, perhaps it's just a sign that Apple should be changing their cooling solution. If it's the reverse, those buying the XPS 15 or Aero Classic (and have heavy CPU requirements) might consider the MBP 15 as you can still install Windows.
If a company designs a product around a component that was promised and that component company doesn't deliver, then it's the product maker that's immediately blamed if something goes wrong with said product. I never heard one tech-head product tester blame Intel Corp. for a MacBook Pro that thermal-throttled. It was always Apple's fault and Apple's fault alone. It was always Apple that didn't do their job properly and how the MacBook Pro was just a poorly designed notebook computer that didn't have decent enough cooling for such high-powered processors. Apple may have gotten stuck with 14nm processors instead of getting their 10nm processors but who cares. It's always easier just to blame Apple because that's the company that delivers the clicks.
or like AI mentioned in this article, Intel didn't keep its end of the bargain by not releasing 10nm processors on time. They're 3 to 4 years late
Stop palliating intrinsically flawed design with inadequate cooling infra - accepting what the masses consider the norm
All of the the machines we had access to for testing were bought at retail, by multiple parties, in disparate geographical locations.
100°C is also likely kill components in this machine over time. A lot of components in a mac are not designed to withstand that amount of heat. One example: More heat / heat fluctuations can increase humidity: All new Macs have the 50volt line next to a vital low voltage line. This can fry your system, apple will blame you for water damage and charge massively for repairs, which will reoccur in the next "repaired" system. It's a flawed design stay away if you want to render a lot.
PS: a similar post of mine some months ago to the iMac "disappeared".
Just like cars the top speed mark on the speedometer is less important if you can't find a road to get to that speed! Then you need to focus on what the vehicle can offer, is it gas milage or how many people/cargo it can carry?
Most Pro's who are working on video need the highest sustained clock so if the frame's cooling can't offer it it's of little benefit to their work flow. Someone working in graphics or animation may find the system useful as they tend to need spirts of performance.
So far I have not seen any proper benchmarking that focuses on holding the workload at the comparative clock rate across the CPU's. So at an example Apple (Intel) makes the clam the CPU can run sustained at 2.4 GHz so what does the other CPU's in this series offer in performance at this same clocking?
https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/comment/3146484/#Comment_3146484
This is how it used to be -- relatively rapid iteration with spec-bumps.
A machine you buy now, or bought six months ago, is not suddenly going to light on fire because there is new gear. There will always be something new coming
Personally I'm more concerned about the keyboard and issues with Apples service practices.
As for Apples repair practices that needs to be addressed even if your points are in question.