2018 i7 MacBook Pro throttling discussion.

[littlepud]

Perhaps that's why The Volta app with a power limit of X watts works very well, i.e., its capping the wattage, I suppose even turbo boost.

Yes that is exactly what Volta is doing - putting a hard cap on the TDP. Volta however only takes one number. It can’t configure the steady-state vs turbo TDP independently.

The other VoltageShift tool appears to be able to configure both values independently, but doing so is a bit more involved as it’s a low-level command line tool that requires the user to push values in hexadecimal.

 

[M.Rizk]

Perhaps that's why The Volta app with a power limit of X watts works very well, i.e., its capping the wattage, I suppose even turbo boost.

That’s where Voltage Shift gets an advantage. Since it doesn’t use one policy for all, Voltage Shift allows full turbo boost and then enforces the power limit fast before the VRM decides to throttle making the performance suit tasks that require very short bursts, and also tasks that require sustained load.

I wish Voltage Shift was easier to setup and control though :/

 

[fokmik]

 

[OzyOly]

Thanks for that video. I’ll be using FCPX so good to know it will be smooth.

 

[fokmik]

its shows that premiere wasnt updated...after the update it was far better

 

[mr.anthonyramos]

I giggle now at all the Apple haters who said it was all the throttling and not anything to do with software optimization...

I’d like to see Dave redo his tests.

 

[maflynn]

I giggle now at all the Apple haters who said it was all the throttling and not anything to do with software optimization...

I’d like to see Dave redo his tests.

I think there was a lot of chatter that Premiere is horrible on the Mac and the fact that Dave2D used that as an example exacerbated the throttling. I don't use either, so I cannot really comment one way or another regarding that specific test.

 

[johnalan]

The good news is that this should be an easy software fix on Apple’s part.



TLDR version of the i9 thread:

Intel chips have a firmware/software configurable TDP limit, even though they are nominally rated for 45W in this case. The chips can turbo higher than 45W for “short bursts” and OEMs can also dial down the TDP, limiting the chip to something below (or above) 45W.

In order to maximize performance, Apple has decided to not enforce any wattage limits (in firmware/software), instead deciding to let the CPU thermal throttle when necessary i.e. when the CPU reaches 100C, which was fine in previous iterations of this machine. However, Coffee Lake can draw much more power than 45W. When left to its own devices, can potentially pull 60-100W during turbo. This is beyond what the MacBook Pro can provide from its power delivery circuitry (the voltage regulation module, or VRM), cause the laptop to power throttle before it reaches its thermal throttling point.

What Apple simply needs to do is issue a patch that configures the software TDP limits of the chip to 45W steady-state and 1.25 x 45W = ~55W turbo (per Intel’s technical datasheet recommendations). The tweak being discussed in the other thread is simply the same thing being done using a user-developed software module that requires disabling SIP to run, due to macOS’s security model.

When will they address this though?

It needs to be done ASAP.

If they do it quietly the will be called out for it. If they don’t they will be laughed at.

 

[mr.anthonyramos]

When will they address this though?

It needs to be done ASAP.

If they do it quietly the will be called out for it. If they don’t they will be laughed at.

This we can never tell when but for sure it will happen. I have an inkling, they will release a statement regarding this and not simply so a silent update.

 

[bwintx]

When will they address this though?

It needs to be done ASAP.

If they do it quietly the will be called out for it. If they don’t they will be laughed at.

Would be interesting if part of the delay on a response were because they're trying to coordinate a statement with Intel.

Even more so if Apple used this to position itself as the first thin-laptop-with-i9 maker to come up with a smart solution (vs., e.g., Dell). Okay, so that's a stretch, but at this point it's all I got.

 

[pixelatedscraps]

If they do it quietly the will be called out for it. If they don’t they will be laughed at.

‘Laughed at’ by hundreds of people on the internet you mean.

I am looking forward to the software update though. Hate to think what all those people running benchmarks all day are going to do with all that spare time...

 

[mr.anthonyramos]

Would be interesting if part of the delay on a response were because they're trying to coordinate a statement with Intel.

Even more so if Apple used this to position itself as the first thin-laptop-with-i9 maker to come up with a smart solution (vs., e.g., Dell). Okay, so that's a stretch, but at this point it's all I got.

I imagine (maybe I’m being hopeful) that Apple is actually covering all corners regarding the throttling issue. It would be a pity if they also rush an update but leave us with other problems. I actually would prefer the wait, have them get this fixed thoroughly and then release the update rather than release something (again) haphazardly.

 

[johnalan]

I imagine (maybe I’m being hopeful) that Apple is actually covering all corners regarding the throttling issue. It would be a pity if they also rush an update but leave us with other problems. I actually would prefer the wait, have them get this fixed thoroughly and then release the update rather than release something (again) haphazardly.

Yup, IF they release something. It’s sad. First time in 15 years I’ve got an Apple product in a box ready to open and I’m not excited.

 

[socialwill]

I imagine (maybe I’m being hopeful) that Apple is actually covering all corners regarding the throttling issue. It would be a pity if they also rush an update but leave us with other problems. I actually would prefer the wait, have them get this fixed thoroughly and then release the update rather than release something (again) haphazardly.

I agree with this. So many people were and still are asking "how could Apple have missed this?" when we just do not know what Apple knows or is doing. As the YouTube video mentioned, just a simple update from Adobe made a huge difference in how the software worked.

I know nothing about chip design or architecture so I am not even going to guess what can be done with software updates except to say that improvements can be made at software levels, not just hardware.

 

[KarmaRocket]

I giggle now at all the Apple haters who said it was all the throttling and not anything to do with software optimization...

I’d like to see Dave redo his tests.

Actually if you follow Apple's guidelines you don't really need to do software optimization for new processors. Maybe if there was something in OSX that was tweaked to address hardware, but Apple already made it easier for themselves and developers (Grand Central) to take advantage of more cores and threads.

The fact that Adobe needed to optimize their software for the newer CPU's just tells you how badly written the software is. Adobe has never really optimized their entire suite for OS X. Back in 2015 WWDC they had a great demo of After Effects taking advantage of Metal. It was almost 8 times faster. But then they quickly retracted that there will be any update of Adobe CC using Metal. They even took down the video.

https://www.macrumors.com/2015/10/05/adobe-backpedals-metal-after-effects/

They don't even have proper support for OpenCL. They are greatly optimized for Nvidia graphics cards using CUDA. That's why it's unfair to compare Adobe software with Windows. If you want to run a fair test they both need to run the same CPU and GPU. I bet if Apple had an Nvidia GPU in their machines, Adobe apps would run faster than a similarly configured Windows machine.

 

[johnalan]

Actually if you follow Apple's guidelines you don't really need to do software optimization for new processors. Maybe if there was something in OSX that was tweaked to address hardware, but Apple already made it easier for themselves and developers (Grand Central) to take advantage of more cores and threads.

The fact that Adobe needed to optimize their software for the newer CPU's just tells you how badly written the software is. Adobe has never really optimized their entire suite for OS X. Back in 2015 WWDC they had a great demo of After Effects taking advantage of Metal. It was almost 8 times faster. But then they quickly retracted that there will be any update of Adobe CC using Metal. They even took down the video.

https://www.macrumors.com/2015/10/05/adobe-backpedals-metal-after-effects/

They don't even have proper support for OpenCL. They are greatly optimized for Nvidia graphics cards using CUDA. That's why it's unfair to compare Adobe software with Windows. If you want to run a fair test they both need to run the same CPU and GPU. I bet if Apple had an Nvidia GPU in their machines, Adobe apps would run faster than a similarly configured Windows machine.

So, brand new MacBook Pro i7 with 560x (2.6ghz), take it home.

Download the game they use in promo material. Let game use suggested settings.

This is how it plays 30 seconds in:
https://twitter.com/johnalanwoods/status/1021458349672599552?s=21

That’s broken.

 

[RumorConsumer]

So, brand new MacBook Pro i7 with 560x (2.6ghz), take it home.

Download the game they use in promo material. Let game use suggested settings.

This is how it plays 30 seconds in:
https://twitter.com/johnalanwoods/status/1021458349672599552?s=21

That’s broken.

That is for sure broken. Lets see what happens to resolve it. I posted the article about the software possibly being at fault and there is no doubt whatsoever that what you posted is greatly disappointing. And I am guessing they are gonna fix it. I can't see how that will be allowed to persist. They just came out so give em a minute and for sure return it if it makes you feel better. Not kidding or making fun.

 

[anshuvorty]

That is for sure broken. Lets see what happens to resolve it. I posted the article about the software possibly being at fault and there is no doubt whatsoever that what you posted is greatly disappointing. And I am guessing they are gonna fix it. I can't see how that will be allowed to persist. They just came out so give em a minute and for sure return it if it makes you feel better. Not kidding or making fun.

I agree that it is broken, but I also think that the software is too blame somewhat. Being a hard core gamer, I can promise you that sometimes the game itself over tweaks the settings to be higher than what the hardware can deliver. Maybe if you manually tweaked some settings, the game would be much more playable and more stable?

 

[KarmaRocket]

So, brand new MacBook Pro i7 with 560x (2.6ghz), take it home.

Download the game they use in promo material. Let game use suggested settings.

This is how it plays 30 seconds in:
https://twitter.com/johnalanwoods/status/1021458349672599552?s=21

That’s broken.

That sucks. Sorry to see that. Games, however are usually single core. They rarely use multi-core. This isn't necessarily software optimization in regards to what I was talking about. You're throttling. This is more of a thermal issue. What I wrote previously is more about people complaining about taking advantage of the 2 extra cores in the newer i7's and i9's.

Plus, I have a feeling drivers aren't really optimized for the newer Radeon Pro 560X. Some users are complaining of really low FPS even on older games in bootcamp. Apple might be using drivers from the Radeon Pro 560 instead.

 

[johnalan]

That is for sure broken. Lets see what happens to resolve it. I posted the article about the software possibly being at fault and there is no doubt whatsoever that what you posted is greatly disappointing. And I am guessing they are gonna fix it. I can't see how that will be allowed to persist. They just came out so give em a minute and for sure return it if it makes you feel better. Not kidding or making fun.

Yup I’m gonna call Apple support. They need to indicate if they are working on it or not.

Thanks for your thoughts.
[doublepost=1532373294][/doublepost]

I agree that it is broken, but I also think that the software is too blame somewhat. Being a hard core gamer, I can promise you that sometimes the game itself over tweaks the settings to be higher than what the hardware can deliver. Maybe if you manually tweaked some settings, the game would be much more playable and more stable?

But you know games, they usually run with a stable FPS, jerky or not.

I’ve never seen a game jump from jerky to smooth constantly.
[doublepost=1532373345][/doublepost]

That sucks. Sorry to see that. Games, however are usually single core. They rarely use multi-core. This isn't necessarily software optimization in regards to what I was talking about. You're throttling. This is more of a thermal issue. What I wrote previously is more about people complaining about taking advantage of the 2 extra cores in the newer i7's and i9's.

Plus, I have a feeling drivers aren't really optimized for the newer Radeon Pro 560X. Some users are complaining of really low FPS even on older games in bootcamp. Apple might be using drivers from the Radeon Pro 560 instead.

Good points. Either way they need to speak up in my view. Too expensive a machine to stay quiet.

 

[RumorConsumer]

Yup I’m gonna call Apple support. They need to indicate if they are working on it or not.

Thanks for your thoughts.
[doublepost=1532373294][/doublepost]
But you know games, they usually run with a stable FPS, jerky or not.

I’ve never seen a game jump from jerky to smooth constantly.
[doublepost=1532373345][/doublepost]


Good points. Either way they need to speak up in my view. Too expensive a machine to stay quiet.

There are a lot of people you might talk to there who wouldn't be able to comment adequately on whether they're working on it or not. On the phone, escalate to a minimum of a Tier 2 rep to get what could possibly be an informed individual. As a customer thats always whats worked for me.

 

[johnalan]

There are a lot of people you might talk to there who wouldn't be able to comment adequately on whether they're working on it or not. On the phone, escalate to a minimum of a Tier 2 rep to get what could possibly be an informed individual.

Completely agree.

 

[HappyIntro]

...snip

The fact that Adobe needed to optimize their software for the newer CPU's just tells you how badly written the software is. Adobe has never really optimized their entire suite for OS X. Back in 2015 WWDC they had a great demo of After Effects taking advantage of Metal. It was almost 8 times faster. But then they quickly retracted that there will be any update of Adobe CC using Metal. They even took down the video.

...snip

Good point. I am old enough to remember when Adobe's software was optimized for Mac and was a total kludge for Windows. Now it has transformed into the opposite. Will Adobe ever put more effort into their Mac products? I don't see much reason for optimism.

 

[WristyManchego]

I've owned maybe 10 macbooks over the years.

Why? Fanboy or doing MacBook Pro drop-tests?

I’m an art director with 10 years on his first and only MacBook Pro. They last if you look after them.

Relax, just ordered a new one.

 

[The Mercurian]

Why?

I’m an art director with 10 years on his first and only MacBook Pro. They last if you look after them.

Relax, just ordered a new one.

Needed a faster computer. If you have the same one 10 years we have every different needs.