Heat Difference is Huge 6-core 15" 2018 vs 4-core 15" 2017. 160 degrees vs 126 degrees.

[Appledoesnotlisten]

I have a work issued Dell XPS with an 8th Gen i7 (i7-8750H) (6 cores) @ 2.20Ghz.
My 2017 MBP 13' has a 7th Gen i5 (i5-7287U) (2 cores) @ 3.30Ghz.

The heat difference between these two laptops when doing CPU intensive tasks is night and day. XPS constantly overheats, is difficult to use on lap, and has fans screaming all the time while my MBP is cool to the touch and rarely turns on the fans if ever.

I've had the XPS overheat several times, shut off, run itself to 0% overnight, …. I am not impressed with it. The CPU I love.

But yes, a MASSIVE heat difference in these new CPUS.

That said… The i7-8750H is amazing and keeps up with my workflow like no other processor ever has while I develop in Visual Studio 2017. It powerhouses through processes noticeably faster than my last work computer: Dell Precision Tower 3620 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700 CPU @ 3.40GH). Minus the heat output, I like it. Can't imagine it in a MBP body though...

Thanks for the input.

Do you think that 2.2 6-core 555X will heat less than 2.6 6-core 560X?
Or it's a number of cores, and not the clock speed of each core?

 

[BigMcGuire]

Thanks for the input.

Do you think that 2.2 6-core 555X will heat less than 2.6 6-core 560X?
Or it's a number of cores, and not the clock speed of each core?

My estimation would be the number of cores not the clock speed being more of a determiner of heat. But I'm no expert, just a programmer and computer hardware hobbyist.

 

[Ploki]

There wasn’t a viable contingency plan.

It takes two years to design a chassis and change the supply chain.

AMD don’t offer a competitive mobile CPU in this space. Lower single core performance, will still throttle, no TB3 support.

Laptops had to be released as the same time as competitors. All competitors in thin and light also suffer from Intel’s heat.

No company can underclock CPUs. They are obliged with Intel to ship at the specs listed on Intel’s spec sheets. Under clocking violates terms and just pisses off internet fanboys.

iMac Pro 10 core is an underclocked chip. stock chip is clocked at 3.2GHz, imac Pro 3.0GHz.
same chip, just a "B" variant. Apple could get something like that.

a viable contingency plan was starting to redesign a cooling system in 2017 when it became obvious Intel wont supply a 7nm chip.
[doublepost=1543529248][/doublepost]

I want to enjoy the 2018 keyboard without the 2018 overheating. Performance of the 2017 machine is more than enough for me.

Perhaps I can just convince Apple to put a 2018 keyboard into my 2017 (touchpad is faulty and the machine is under warranty, so top case replacement might be needed) and keep the 2017?

unfortunately keyboard parts are supposedly incompatible.
and my keyboard had a double-stroking letter "i" in one month since purchase, so they'er not all that better.
[doublepost=1543529360][/doublepost]

I think it does have an effect, but at best its minimal, though any help in cooling these laptops would be a good thing

Isn't the keyboard netted and sealed from below anyway?

 

[maflynn]

Isn't the keyboard netted and sealed from below anyway?

I don't know, but I do know prior versions had the heat being vented out of the keyboard area, maybe that design was changed with the butterfly keyboard

 

[unglued]

Put it on a quality heat sink cooling plate and no worries, it will shutoff if temps go over its threshold.

 

[Ploki]

I don't know, but I do know prior versions had the heat being vented out of the keyboard area, maybe that design was changed with the butterfly keyboard

that design was obsolete with 2012 retina already - the keyboard was glued to the topcase and was pretty air tight. all the air got sucked in by left/right sides of the comptuer (side vents) and middle of the back side where hinge is. the hinge port was split to three parts - left/right were fan exhaust, middle was intake. (and side ports were intakes).

the new one has a similar design.

(the design where the air is vented through keyboard would be a death sentence for clamshell mode)
[doublepost=1543530787][/doublepost]

Thanks for the input.

Do you think that 2.2 6-core 555X will heat less than 2.6 6-core 560X?
Or it's a number of cores, and not the clock speed of each core?

All three chips hit the thermal limit at 3.1GHz turbo boost when they are under full load.

They constrained by the thermals anyway, all of them, and none of them can hold single core turbo as advertised.

so... none of these run cold. They're all pretty hot. Hotter than any Quad-core 15" i used - all of them.

 

[Plutonius]

Hello,

I just bought a refurbished 6-core 15" 2018 and it is running extremely hot (150-162 degrees).

Indexing is done, the system has settled down, but the machine is much hotter than my 2017 sitting next to me. The GPUs are more or less the same. And, the 2017 is loaded with 40 tabs in safari + emails + powerpoint, while the 2018 is only running 5 simple safari tabs.

When I connect 4K external monitors to each of them, the difference is even bigger. The numbers are below: 160 degrees vs 126 degrees.

I am really upset.

Do you think it's because
(1) I bought a refurbished one or
(2) because it's 6-core or
(3) it's supposed to be like this?

Because it's 6-core and very fast and it's supposed to be like that.

I'm glad I have a 2017 MacBook Pro on order because I don't need the increased performance and I like my laptop to run cooler.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

iMac Pro 10 core is an underclocked chip. stock chip is clocked at 3.2GHz, imac Pro 3.0GHz.
same chip, just a "B" variant. Apple could get something like that.

a viable contingency plan was starting to redesign a cooling system in 2017 when it became obvious Intel wont supply a 7nm chip.

There’s no B like variant for these mobile chips otherwise all computer makers would ask for them.

Judging from your reply you’re not versed in this topic. When someone is trying to give you knowledge you should at least take your time to absorb it, fact check it, before you hit the reply button.

Intel promised 10nm (not 7nm) by 2018. They failed and nobody would have known in 2017 or 2016 that would have happened.

A chassis redesign and supply chain update takes 2 years. Every product you see in electronic stores today was in design and planning 2-3 years ago. Following Intel’s roadmap there was no reason to do an expensive design.

Just to give an example of how much confusion Intel is causing, today there are rumours that Microsoft are fed up waiting for Intel 10nm to show up and are considering AMD chips for the next Surface line. Read the first two paragraphs here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-surface-laptop-amd-cpu,38176.html

That won’t be possible for MacBook Pro’s though. AMD’s offering is not suitable for this line.

 

[Ploki]

There’s no B like variant for these mobile chips otherwise all computer makers would ask for them.

Judging from your reply you’re not versed in this topic. When someone is trying to give you knowledge you should at least take your time to absorb it, fact check it, before you hit the reply button.

Intel promised 10nm (not 7nm) by 2018. They failed and nobody would have known in 2017 or 2016 that would have happened.

A chassis redesign and supply chain update takes 2 years. Every product you see in electronic stores today was in design and planning 2-3 years ago. Following Intel’s roadmap there was no reason to do an expensive design.

Just to give an example of how much confusion Intel is causing, today there are rumours that Microsoft are fed up waiting for Intel 10nm to show up and are considering AMD chips for the next Surface line. Read the first two paragraphs here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-surface-laptop-amd-cpu,38176.html

That won’t be possible for MacBook Pro’s though. AMD’s offering is not suitable for this line.

7nm/10nm was a typo sorry.

There's no B variant for the iMac Pro chip either, only iMac Pro uses it as far as i know, you can't buy it off the shelf.
It's not like this is the first time Apple has an exclusive something - the Vega 20 is exclusive to the MBP.
2.7GHz i9 that has better thermals and doesn't throttle as much? yes please.

I'm not disagreeing that Intel screwed up, but sticking a power hungry hot chip inside the chassis that wasn't designed for it isn't a great plan either. Everything about 2018 mbp screams "rushed release", the delayed GPU chip (560x is 3y old), the severe throttling issue on release, the kernel panics, audio crackles...
And nevertheless, apple willing to accept 2mo units as returns.

 

[maflynn]

I'm glad I have a 2017 MacBook Pro on order because I don't need the increased performance and I like my laptop to run cooler.

Same here, but I wanted an improved keyboard, and the 3rd generation of the butterfly keyboard promised me this.

 

[Appledoesnotlisten]

Just to give an example of how much confusion Intel is causing, today there are rumours that Microsoft are fed up waiting for Intel 10nm.

If Intel knows that they have been so bad and cause us suffer, why don't they offer to supply an under clocked version (or provide an ability to put 1-2 cores to sleep) to ALL manufacturers until they catch up?

 

[deadworlds]

Remove

 

[Matty_TypeR]

Under load, yes. But definitely not in idle.
[doublepost=1543478408][/doublepost]

Oh please. The MBP has excellent airflow for its form factor. And how are extra vents supposed to help anyway unless you run fans full speed all the time?

WOW thermal dynamics of the Macbook pro are poor, and to say it has excellent airflow is just hog wash, if apple put as much effort into cooling as they do aesthetics then they would all get a longer life span. apples criteria is simple if it fits inside Intels thermal envelope and lasts 3 years plus that's all they want.

Any electronics engineer will tell you that components stretched back and forth in a thermal min and max delta will not last as long as the same component kept at a smaller delta. some already complain of fans running high speed to try and cool these overheating parts, if they can't cool efficiently the part will throttle and not give its full performance.

Considering these Macbook PRO, high lighting the PRO part, costing thousands of $ each, these machines are supposed to be the pinnacle of high tech, the thermal design sucks! wait until all those little fans revving away clog up with dust and fibres, I wonder how the thermal performance will be then.

we will see soon enough

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

If Intel knows that they have been so bad and cause us suffer, why don't they offer to supply an under clocked version (or provide an ability to put 1-2 cores to sleep) to ALL manufacturers until they catch up?

It doesn't work work that way. An underclocked processor would anger fanboys and result in slower performance than previous generations. An underclocked processor with would also overheat under load and throttle down. The throttling would be the same or worse than if it wasn't underclocked depending on the base clock speed.

Intel already attracted complaints when the top Skylake in 2016 MBP was a little slower than the Haswell from 2014.

The fact is the x86 design is reaching its limits and is making it hard for computer makers to design around. Desktop processors need hefty cooling systems and notebook processors aren't running as cool as they can. Throwing more cores into a CPU package is creating a big challenge for computer designers. This is all down to AMD and Intel having a 'more cores' war.

The biggest progress is being seen in Apple's ARM chips. Custom chips are designed from the ground up to be efficient for mobile computing.

Intel says it will present a new breakthroughs this month but they are for desktop and servers. It doesn't help mobile users.

https://wccftech.com/intel-architecture-day-2018-announcement/