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.
Brand new MBP '13 (2019) taking 45+ seconds to start up
- Thread starter blitzr
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How long should it take?
You are going to return a computer because of how long it takes to turn on?
You are going to return a computer because of how long it takes to turn on?
Huh? Someone with the same model just told me that it takes 7 seconds for theirs to turn on, and I can't have concerns over my brand new $2000 machine that takes 7 times as long?
You need to compare the same CPU and SSD. Hopefuly someone with those same specs will chime in.
Also which build of Mojave is it? (About this Mac -> System Report -> Software. I’m running 10.14.5 build 18F132 for example.
I clocked my 2015 MacBook Air. 23 seconds to login screen. Another five seconds after that.
My question is do you have any other programs installed that are set to start up with the computer? Anything that runs in the background etc? Is the computer brand new?
I may be wrong but I was under the impression when a computer is new files are indexed for spotlight and other features. Sometimes that takes a while and then things speed up. Have you run disk utility?
[doublepost=1567016206][/doublepost]
Unless you have the same exact programs, and use the same exact amount of storage space, it would be hard to compare yours to other machines. I have found my start up times increase or decrease with programs installed, OS updates, and even internet connection.
https://www.macbookproslow.com/guide-optimizing-slow-startup/
My question is do you have any other programs installed that are set to start up with the computer? Anything that runs in the background etc? Is the computer brand new?
I may be wrong but I was under the impression when a computer is new files are indexed for spotlight and other features. Sometimes that takes a while and then things speed up. Have you run disk utility?
[doublepost=1567016206][/doublepost]
Unless you have the same exact programs, and use the same exact amount of storage space, it would be hard to compare yours to other machines. I have found my start up times increase or decrease with programs installed, OS updates, and even internet connection.
https://www.macbookproslow.com/guide-optimizing-slow-startup/
Last edited:
It happened the first time I had to turn it off and on, on the very first day of purchase, before I installed any applications.
Nothing has changed in the three days since, and I have only installed two third party applications.
I clocked my 1.4/512/16 at 20s to get to the login screen and another 20s after entering my password to get to the desktop. Filevault is turned on on my machine, not that I think that this has an impact with the T2 chip.
So about the same times the OP seems to be getting. I don't think there is any reason to worry, my MBP has been performing fine.
So about the same times the OP seems to be getting. I don't think there is any reason to worry, my MBP has been performing fine.
Thanks. I'd expect the 256 to be a little slower. Sounds like it's in the right ballpark for sure.
45 seconds is pretty slow starting time these days but I don't think ssd speed has much to do with it. Most difference is if machine has ssd or hdd. Differencies in ssd speed are neglible in ordinary use and you see mostly it when transferring large files or running benchmark tests, not in os boot time. I myself updated my desktop sata SSD (300mb read speed) to PCIe/NVMe ssd with 10x higher transfer speed (based on benchmarks ran on the same machine) and I honestly cannot not tell the difference in everyday use (If it did not install it myself I never would have noticed anything).
Seriously? To me this kind of problem solving is the same as when you break your leg, you don't get if "fixed" but just rather avoid using it...
Do not turn off your Mac is correct advice today. There is nothing to fix here...
These beasts are designed to be always on and sleep/hibernate well enough, that (same as iPhones and iPads) they will not need shutdown for long time.
iPhone also boots forever. Apple invests little effort in speed of startup (rare event in their plans) and lot in sleep/hibernation (common event, all the time).
And before this starts another fight "I (you should) shut down my computer each night"... Sure, you can, but you do not have to, and the Mac will be FINE.
Yup. And along those lines, from Terminal:
Code:
nvram -p | grep AutoBootIf says %00, AutoBoot is off, so:
Code:
sudo nvram AutoBoot=%03Not sure if still applicable to 2019 MBP. But will cut some of the boot time.
For Macs with the T2 chip it's my understanding that File Vault has no (or close to none) impact on the drive read/write performances.
My guess is that upon booting the T2 chip is doing some check up and extending the boot time. Nothing to worry about if the machine is performing correctly when using it.
My guess is that upon booting the T2 chip is doing some check up and extending the boot time. Nothing to worry about if the machine is performing correctly when using it.
I own the top of the line MacBook Pro, the best MacBook Pro you can possibly purchase as of this moment, and it takes 47 seconds to boot. I have a large number of helper applications installed, which slows down the boot process. Before I installed any software (i.e., fresh from the box), my computer took 9 seconds to boot.
Do not worry about how long it takes to boot, and do not try to compare your boot time with the boot time of other computers. Boot time is HIGHLY dependent (as I have shown) on the applications you have installing directly from boot.
Joe
Do not worry about how long it takes to boot, and do not try to compare your boot time with the boot time of other computers. Boot time is HIGHLY dependent (as I have shown) on the applications you have installing directly from boot.
Joe
Do you think it could be because of the low clock speed?
that 1.4 GHz base clock is a real turn off for me.
Even when they came out with the 2016 model refresh with 2.0GHz base clock I was dissapointed
If it isn't at least 2.6 GHz I'm out
EDIT:
I do use a MacBook core m3 which is obviously not the greatest processor but runs good very snappy
that 1.4 GHz base clock is a real turn off for me.
Even when they came out with the 2016 model refresh with 2.0GHz base clock I was dissapointed
If it isn't at least 2.6 GHz I'm out
EDIT:
I do use a MacBook core m3 which is obviously not the greatest processor but runs good very snappy
OK, good to know about that sleep is recommended in MacBooks. As an old Windows user I have so gotten used to turn off the machines always after use, as sleep and hibernation modes are more or less problematic at times and since booting does not take that long it has not been an issue for me, and is not even with my MBP, I can wait that 45 seconds easily, my comment was just about that it is still rather slow for some reason compared to Windows. I was expecting more from MacOS being optimized only for Apple computers, not like Windows where are like millions of manufacturers with all kinds of hardware combinations compared to Apple that has only few configurations and much more easy to optimize.
Also as my MBP seem to lose these days anywhere from 0,5% to little over 2% overnight just powered off, I think drain in sleep mode would be much more, so this way I have more predictable battery left when I use it next time.
1.4 got turbo more when it needs more "torque", so nominal 1.4 is not much limitation. Sure 2.4 has better cooling so it may run longer in turbo mode, or at least is able to keep cooler doing that but that's about it.
I have for fun compared power consumption in full load between 2.4 and 1.4 model and based on Coconut, the power draw in 2.4 is only few watts more than in 1.4 during full CPU load. So basically that mean 1.4 cannot anyway be capped to 15W in turbo more, I'd say it is more like 25W vs 28W (that 3W is about the difference when both running on full CPU load), because you would see much bigger difference in power draw on full load it the difference was 15W vs 28W. Just go check it yourself if you don't believe. Also running CPU benchmarks, you can see that the difference between the two is negligible.
Honestly, go compare the machines yourself and you will see.
Also as my MBP seem to lose these days anywhere from 0,5% to little over 2% overnight just powered off, I think drain in sleep mode would be much more, so this way I have more predictable battery left when I use it next time.
It has nothing to do with the clock speed. Practically 1.4 is almost as fast as 2.4. This is more marketing, as most peoples think bigger number equals better and faster.
1.4 got turbo more when it needs more "torque", so nominal 1.4 is not much limitation. Sure 2.4 has better cooling so it may run longer in turbo mode, or at least is able to keep cooler doing that but that's about it.
I have for fun compared power consumption in full load between 2.4 and 1.4 model and based on Coconut, the power draw in 2.4 is only few watts more than in 1.4 during full CPU load. So basically that mean 1.4 cannot anyway be capped to 15W in turbo more, I'd say it is more like 25W vs 28W (that 3W is about the difference when both running on full CPU load), because you would see much bigger difference in power draw on full load it the difference was 15W vs 28W. Just go check it yourself if you don't believe. Also running CPU benchmarks, you can see that the difference between the two is negligible.
Marketing seems to work as they intended.
Honestly, go compare the machines yourself and you will see.
If you are happy with core m3, I think you will be amazed with any current MBP 2018-2019 model.