cpu hit 98 degrees when transferring photos?

[Ma2k5]

Again, you don't understand how PowerGadget reports utilization! In PowerGadtet, 100% is full load across all the cores, of which you have 12! So your 20% is actually two fully loaded cores! Which you can also see from the fact that your CPU draws 30 watts of power and your clocks are at 3.6Ghz! That is a clear-cut 100% low-multitask CPU utilisation scenario! Your CPU is running on 60% of its TDP and boosting as hard as it can. This simply doesn't happen in a "light" workload!

And as to why LR pushes your CPU so hard in a "simple task", you'll have to ask Adobe, they programmed the thing.

P.S. Here, just for you, this is a single-thread workload with 100% CPU utilisation. Created by running a single CPU-time demanding thread. Note how PowerGadget reports 8% CPU utilisation, which is very misleading.

You keep misquoting me 🙂 (hapened a couple of times today).

 

[maflynn]

Again, you don't understand how PowerGadget reports utilization!

Oh, I understand. Its you who takes a blind eye to the fact that apple chose not to implement a thermal solution to adequately address the needs of the coffee lake processors. It seems the OP has all the information and the fact remains the MBP cannot adequately cool like prior generations. No matter how you slice it, the laptop runs hot. I see no further need to beat a dead horse with you.

 

[leman]

Oh, I understand. Its you who takes a blind eye to the fact that apple chose not to implement a thermal solution to adequately address the needs of the coffee lake processors. It seems the OP has all the information and the fact remains the MBP cannot adequately cool like prior generations. No matter how you slice it, the laptop runs hot. I see no further need to beat a dead horse with you.

I don't know even to respond to this. You, a forum moderator, make a post in which you clearly show lack of factual understanding about interpreting a certain readout. When your lack of understanding is politely pointed out to you — with examples, detailed explanation, and clear arguments (at least I hope so), you choose not only to ignore these arguments (it seems you are not even bothering to read them!) but also immediately accuse your opponent of being biased and unreasonable. Frankly, I didn't expect this from you, I always though you were a considerate and attentive poster.


[doublepost=1536237103][/doublepost]

You keep misquoting me 🙂 (hapened a couple of times today).

Sorry friend, pieces of previous quotes keep hanging in the reply box and I sometimes fail to edit them properly. I fixed it now, I hope.

 

[maflynn]

I don't know even to respond to this.

First, I'm a member and discussing the topic without getting personal is fine. Secondly, I'm done discussing this with you, so reply any way you wish, I'll not reply. I'll still be active in the thread but I choose to not respond.

 

[leman]

First, I'm a member and discussing the topic without getting personal is fine. Secondly, I'm done discussing this with you, so reply any way you wish, I'll not reply. I'll still be active in the thread but I choose to not respond.

Its your choice whether to respond or not, but what you are doing right now is literally creating fake news — simply because you don't seem to understand how to read CPU stats — and what is worse — not even willing to consider the possibility that you might be confused. This makes your posts harmful to the MR community as far as I am concerned, and I will continue to point this out at any relevant opportunity.

 

[nerowolfe19]

People may have forgotten this, but the 2012 rMBP, being a new design at the time, had many throttling issues when it first came out, especially in Bootcamp, and it took multiple OS and firmware updates to iron out some of these issues to where it became acceptable.

Now the 2018 MBP isn't a totally new design, but the cpu/components overhaul makes it equivalent to one, at least on the software side, and it might take some time to fix those issue all the same.

 

[Ma2k5]

People may have forgotten this, but the 2012 rMBP, being a new design at the time, had many throttling issues when it first came out, especially in Bootcamp, and it took multiple OS and firmware updates to iron out some of these issues to where it became acceptable.

Now the 2018 MBP isn't a totally new design, but the cpu/components overhaul makes it equivalent to one, at least on the software side, and it might take some time to fix those issue all the same.

It isn't a good argument really - I mean Apple have as you said faced these issues in 2012, what you are really saying is they haven't learnt their lesson, nor created a process to avoid it etc. Too many products these days are needing post-sale patches/firmwares and in many cases are months of waiting.

What happened to "It just works"? Is it now "It will work, 6 months from now, maybe"?

 

[duervo]

is this normal?

What system are you doing this on? 2010, 2012, etc? 13”? 15”? What version of macOS?

I’d have to assume a ton of stuff in order to begin to answer your question, and that would be a waste of everybody’s time, regardless of which way the answer would lean.

Ie: If “x”, and “y”, or “a” and “b”, then maybe ... it depends.

 

[Painter2002]

I bet OP didn't expect this much debate on a simple question. I forgot to bring the popcorn.

@mpc91 what model is your MacBook Pro (year and CPU), and how large are the files you are trying to transfer? Also, what version of OS are you using (i.e. is it the most recently updated version of of High Sierra)?

I think everyone is automatically assuming that you are referring to a 2018 model MBP, which, if it is, this is unfortunately the new norm. I won't go into detail on my opinions on this, as this has been hashed out by other posters, but the high heat is related to a combination of factors, namely thermo-dynamics of the slim MBP design, extra cores and core utilization, and possibly software optimization issues.

If you have a model that is older (2017 or older), then 98 degrees for transferring data is on the high side, I have transferred over 140 GB of data in 6 minutes to an external drive on my 2017 MBP (with 3.1ghz dual core processor), and it never passed 55 degrees celsius.

 

[Plutonius]

Oh, I understand.

I will continue to point this out at any relevant opportunity.

You are both correct 🙂.

Apple appears to have skimped on the hardware thermal solution by designing the MacBook Pro using the existing laptop case while adding components that generate more heat.

Likewise, the software applications try to get the most out of the MacBook Pro leading to more heat dissipation.

Essentially, you just have been arguing over what is the primary source of heat 🙂.

Expecting companies to throttle their apps to reduce heat dissipation is probably not realistic.

Likewise, expecting Apple to change the basic design of the MacBook Pro (i.e. make it thicker with maybe more fans) doesn't seem realistic considering Apple.

The long term solution for Apple is probably replacing the Intel Processor with a lower power ARM processor although I would rather see them to continue to use Intel in a thicker laptop.

 

[maflynn]

I bet OP didn't expect this much debate on a simple question. I forgot to bring the popcorn.

LOL, no

The bottom line is these bad boys run hot, there's no debating that. I'm pleased with my MBP and while I didn't withhold my criticism on Apple, I do think its a great laptop and I don't have any buyers remorse 🙂
[doublepost=1536249330][/doublepost]

The long term solution for Apple is probably replacing the Intel Processor with a lower power ARM processor although I would rather see them to continue to use Intel in a thicker laptop.

That's my guess as well. Intel doesn't help themselves by continuing to delay the CPUs.

 

[Painter2002]

I would rather see them to continue to use Intel in a thicker laptop.

Now there's some wishful thinking.

While I agree with this, but Apple will never go along with this, I have never understood the obsession for super thin computers.

As for ARM processors, I would be ok with this, only so long as there was still a bootcamp option that allowed for windows to be installed on the machines. Whether or not they make that an option when that day comes will be a turning point for many users.

 

[Plutonius]

As for ARM processors, I would be ok with this, only so long as there was still a bootcamp option that allowed for windows to be installed on the machines. Whether or not they make that an option when that day comes will be a turning point for many users.

That's why I think I'll get one now to replace my 2010 15" MacBook Pro.

 

[leman]

Essentially, you just have been arguing over what is the primary source of heat 🙂.

I've been arguing that running a core at 100% load does not constitute a light load and its fairly normal for a laptop to run hot during such an operation.

Expecting companies to throttle their apps to reduce heat dissipation is probably not realistic.

It's not about throttling the app, it's about efficient use of resources. An app probably shouldn't ask for 100% CPU uptime if it doesn't do any useful work. Especially with modern hardware that can go from zero to crazy in milliseconds. Apple has been making this point over and over at WWDC for the last couple of years, and they have introduced many technologies to that end.

Nothing in this discussion is exclusive to 2018 machines by the way. It has been the case since turbo boost is a thing.And for some reason neither my 2018 i9, not the four other 2018 machines (one 15" and three 13") are running abnormally hot under regular operations.

By the way, just to be sure, I now started copying a 12GB file from the laptop to a NAS. First, some validation routine started (100% single thread CPU utilisation, 30W power draw, max turbo boost), so the temps obviously shot up to around 80, but around 30 seconds later, the actual copy process has started — the CPU utilisation is now at under 5%, 5-7 watt power draw, temperature at 45-50C. Again, this is on an i9.

So again guys, I have no idea what you are talking about when you are claiming that copying files or doing other basic stuff on this laptop makes it run hot. And yes, I could probably write an app that uses 100% of CPU time to copy some files. Anybody interested? If enough people are willing to pay for it, we might do business.

 

[doitdada]

I
So again guys, I have no idea what you are talking about when you are claiming that copying files or doing other basic stuff on this laptop makes it run hot. And yes, I could probably write an app that uses 100% of CPU time to copy some files. Anybody interested? If enough people are willing to pay for it, we might do business.

Again, wouldn't be a problem to use a lot of CPU if the form factor wasn't small and the cores are trying to stay cool with higher clock speeds. Again thermal design doesn't accommodate the increased performance, so then you are left with bad thermals. The MacBook Pro from 2015 may be the last great traditional laptop. Nobody has been able to create a hybrid that gets copied by the rest of the industry. There is nobody stealing each others ideas blindly. Every company is trying to outcompete themselves with bells and whistles because they can't really make the laptops thinner with the current hardware and the performance is not really needed by a large number of buyers. It is down to being funny, cheesy and just up for giggles.

The 2080 RTX and 2080 RTX Ti is in the same position. There is nothing really game changing in the world of gaming. There are FPS and roleplaying fantasy games. All you are left with is taxing performance gains that need consumers to wait for the next revision to play at 4K or 5K at Ultra settings. There is no GPU out on the market to really utilise the 5K display in the iMac in games. Though the RX 5xx series is good enough to drive macOS environment in 5K without slow downs.

So both desktops and laptops are "broken." As long as hardware is playing catchup with other pieces of hardware, and the prices are so high that only 1.2% of the gaming market adapt a card like 1080 GTX Ti, then there isn't any hope for most people to be part of hardwares future. The only market that has truly valued performance has been crypto mining, but that part of the game is getting rigged with custom hardware, so the need for consumer grade GPUs will be faltering. I'm still looking for a GPU that can run all titles without minimum frames dropping below 60 frames in all games, but even the 2080 RTX Ti may be a bit too slow for the most demanding games on the market.

 

[leman]

Again, wouldn't be a problem to use a lot of CPU if the form factor wasn't small and the cores are trying to stay cool with higher clock speeds. Again thermal design doesn't accommodate the increased performance, so then you are left with bad thermals. The MacBook Pro from 2015 may be the last great traditional laptop.

Well, its not like the 2015 MBP runs cool and quiet with high CPU utilisation, right? Or in fact, any Mac. There is no doubt that Coffee Lake runs hot when boosting. And sure, with improved cooling system it could boost even higher. But that won't really help it run cooler.

I think what people are missing is that there is a feedback loop. Improving cooling alone won't get you cooler CPU under load — it will get you a CPU that's just as hot, but boosts higher. You could put a hard limit on the CPU power draw (like most laptop manufacturers do) — that would stop it from boosting at some point, lowering the temperature. I never really got the point of this however — why would one want to limit the performance for the sake of slightly cooler operating temperature? Its not like you'll notice a practical difference between CPU at 80C or a CPU at 100C — in both cases the chassis will get hot and the fans will be loud.

What else can we do? Well, we could make the fans spin faster. That would result in lower temps (at the cost of added noise). We could also increase the size of heat exchangers (extra weight and size!). But again, we'll have the problem if the CPU boosting higher and thus getting hotter. We can break out of this loop by providing cooling that is over-designed for the CPU's power consumption — that is, that can cool more than the CPU can output. But then we end up with a large and expensive (in terms of size/weight/battery) cooling system that doesn't really do anything useful.

All in all, I think that Apple's approach to this problem is sensible. They let the fans kick in late, since they know that most boost workflows are short-lived. So this way the user probably doesn't even notice that the CPU is under 100% load, unless that occurs for more than a couple of seconds. Second, they design the system and the fan curve so that the CPU hits its maximal allowed operating temperature (100C) at the same exact moment when it draws its sustained TDP (45W for the 15" model). I did some testing here and the fan settings seem to be deliberately chosen to make the relation between consumed power and the temperature linear. Max TDP - max temperature. 50% TDP — temperature roughly halfway between the idle and max temperature.

 

[doitdada]

What else can we do? Well, we could make the fans spin faster. That would result in lower temps (at the cost of added noise). We could also increase the size of heat exchangers (extra weight and size!). But again, we'll have the problem if the CPU boosting higher and thus getting hotter. We can break out of this loop by providing cooling that is over-designed for the CPU's power consumption — that is, that can cool more than the CPU can output. But then we end up with a large and expensive (in terms of size/weight/battery) cooling system that doesn't really do anything useful...

I think most people on this forum are crying out for a desktop, but then again, you can't move it around the house or take it with you. There is no such thing as a desktop replacement. I'm testing out a iMac now, and I like the performance. No lags driving an external 4K and the 5K internal display. I see that the temps are around 50-60 celsius, and the load is around 3GHz all the time, so I guess it is the cooling that makes this machine so stable and silent. That puts my usage to above clock speed and into Turbo Boost mode, so fan noise is expected from the 15" chassis. Maybe I should just buy a cooling mat to accommodate the MacBook Pro 15" and call it a day. Something that will lift the laptop from the surface it is lying on. I just hate having extra accessories on my desk.

 

[nerowolfe19]

It isn't a good argument really - I mean Apple have as you said faced these issues in 2012, what you are really saying is they haven't learnt their lesson, nor created a process to avoid it etc. Too many products these days are needing post-sale patches/firmwares and in many cases are months of waiting.

What happened to "It just works"? Is it now "It will work, 6 months from now, maybe"?

It isn't, and it wasn't meant to be an argument because I didn't think it was acceptable when my laptop had those problems. Just being matter-of-factly and balanced about the thermal issues concerning the two models.

I'll raise you another. With the stock thermal paste the machine couldn't turboboost all the way to its max turboboost speed and sustain it for long. Once I changed the TIM to a higher-quality one, removing the excessive gob that was there and applying a proper amount, the machine could sustain turboboost all the way forever as long as the dGPU isn't active. And a bonus both idle and load temperatures (in addition to fan rpm) under all but the heaviest of loads went down by 5-15c. I likely voided my warranty (never needed to use Applecare though) but it was worth it.

2011 MBPs? Same story. You get a cooler and better-performing machine overall after doing something as simple and as cheap as changing the thermal paste. I've done that 12X, tube cost me $16 and still has enough for 4-5 more applications, and my machine has been all the better for it.

I'd never expect Apple to do that for me, even if I provided them with said thermal paste and paid them to apply it. Just how it is.

 

[Ma2k5]

It isn't, and it wasn't meant to be an argument because I didn't think it was acceptable when my laptop had those problems. Just being matter-of-factly and balanced about the thermal issues concerning the two models.

I'll raise you another. With the stock thermal paste the machine couldn't turboboost all the way to its max turboboost speed and sustain it for long. Once I changed the TIM to a higher-quality one, removing the excessive gob that was there and applying a proper amount, the machine could sustain turboboost all the way forever as long as the dGPU isn't active. And a bonus both idle and load temperatures (in addition to fan rpm) under all but the heaviest of loads went down by 5-15c. I likely voided my warranty (never needed to use Applecare though) but it was worth it.

2011 MBPs? Same story. You get a cooler and better-performing machine overall after doing something as simple and as cheap as changing the thermal paste. I've done that 12X, tube cost me $16 and still has enough for 4-5 more applications, and my machine has been all the better for it.

I'd never expect Apple to do that for me, even if I provided them with said thermal paste and paid them to apply it. Just how it is.

Changing TIM will improve the thermal performance of every laptop that exists, that is a given. People have been regularly doing this for decades particularly the gaming community.

 

[leman]

I see that the temps are around 50-60 celsius, and the load is around 3GHz all the time, so I guess it is the cooling that makes this machine so stable and silent

Being a large stationary machine, iMac can get away with using a much larger fan + heat exchanger. So it can provide much higher airflow at lower noise level. You can't fit that kind of cooling in a laptop.
[doublepost=1536258234][/doublepost]

I'll raise you another. With the stock thermal paste the machine couldn't turboboost all the way to its max turboboost speed and sustain it for long. Once I changed the TIM to a higher-quality one, removing the excessive gob that was there and applying a proper amount, the machine could sustain turboboost all the way forever as long as the dGPU isn't active.

This is something that I find absolutely infuriating btw. That Apple has had problems with the thermal compound application has been pointed out over and over again for as long as I can remember. But they still haven't done anything to address this. Its such a simple and cheap improvement! They have a decent cooling solution with the 2016-2018 design, but the poor transfer of heat to the heatsink messes it up.

 

[doitdada]

@leman
The selection of desktops from Mac has been slim for five years. So ... no real alternative. iMacs have old CPUs and GPUs. The newest kid on the block is the MacBook Pro which got updated out of the blue.

 

[leman]

@leman
The selection of desktops from Mac has been slim for five years. So ... no real alternative. iMacs have old CPUs and GPUs. The newest kid on the block is the MacBook Pro which got updated out of the blue.

I am fairly sure that we will have an iMac update with Coffee Lake CPUs very soon (before end of October).

 

[macintoshmac]

I am fairly sure that we will have an iMac update with Coffee Lake CPUs very soon (before end of October).

We should. Hex core iMacs will be awesome. Let's see what they mate it with, graphics chipset wise. A backlit keyboard will also be very nice to have.

 

[doitdada]

YouTube may be giving your MacBook Pro some problems due to the fact that it doesn't support hardware acceleration of VP9 codec even though the CPU has built in support. YouTube is the fastest growing community on the Internet, and not supporting 4K playback in their beloved Safari is a shame. What is the use of adding new CPU architectures to their lineup if they are not taking advantage of hardware acceleration?

VP9 is positioned as a competitor for H.265 developed by Google with no patent licensing restrictions.

AV1 is the forthcoming successor to VP9 also without patent licensing restrictions.

Apple has joined the Alliance for Open Media, a technology consortium that is working on a new industry standard, high-efficiency video codec called AV1.

The group includes Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix, Hulu, Intel, and many others. Apple was quietly added to the website’s homepage today, and is even considered a founding member (via CNET).

Video makes up roughly 70% of all internet traffic today. That number is expected to rise to 82% in 2021, according to Cisco research.

This summer CC collection from Adobe also got updated to support new CPU and GPU architectures rather late. It seems they are adding the hardware, but not getting the software publishers support. Another example is gaming, where publishers are not rushing to enrich macOS with new titles.

“We have no plans of giving this game on the Mac. There are several technology decisions that Apple has made that has made it a little difficult for us to release Overwatch in the way we want it to be consumed, and that is why we haven’t pursued it," said Tim Ford, Lead Engineer on Overwatch at Blizzard to Gadgets 360 on the sidelines of BlizzCon 2017.

The long term solution for Apple is probably replacing the Intel Processor with a lower power ARM processor although I would rather see them to continue to use Intel in a thicker laptop.

Or simply utilise existing technologies through hardware acceleration?