I'm in the market to replace my mid-2014 model and like the specs-to-cost for the i9 15". However, I've heard plenty of horror stories from PC laptop users about heat issues with the i9 chip. Given that heat has always been a concern for MacBook Pros, is this an accident waiting to happen? Are there any design changes to improve heat handling? Should I stick with the i7 6-core instead?
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.
i9 Thermal Issues on New MacBook Pros?
- Thread starter Blublub
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wait and see, the sensible reviews will be out shortly for the 2019 MBP. You will then see if Apple has reworked the cooling to accommodate the new octa core i9's, equally don't expect miracles in such a thin & light chassis. At worst same as the 2018 MBP's, at best a moderate increase in performance.
Q-6
Q-6
the best option until today was to go for the i7+Vega, but now, thanks to Apple that option is gone
^ TDP of 45W is rated for base clocks. 2019 base clock is 2.3-2.4 whereas 2018 was 2.9 for the i9.
However, the 9th gen Intel chips went back to STIM which we know improved the 2019 iMac thermals significantly without any other change in cooling design by Apple.
I'm cautiously optimistic, it won't be the coolest laptop ever, but I don't think it'll be half as bad as most speculate.
However, the 9th gen Intel chips went back to STIM which we know improved the 2019 iMac thermals significantly without any other change in cooling design by Apple.
I'm cautiously optimistic, it won't be the coolest laptop ever, but I don't think it'll be half as bad as most speculate.
God only knows how they rate TDP, 8th gen 6 core mobiles were reaching 45W at around 3.1 ~3.2 GHz. And STIM won't help MPB, does not apply to mobile SKUs, the die is already exposed and directly contacts heatplate.
Yeah I was about to chime in with this as well regarding STIM.
Also you cannot trust Intel’s TDP ratings nowadays. They’re trying to make the CPUs look more heat efficient than they actually are. At least part of the blame regarding the throttling on the 2018 MBPs falls on Intel woefully understating the chips TDP.
9th Gen CPU are a little more power efficient, equally no die shrink and two additional cores, most importantly the laws of physics have not changed
More cores with lower base clocks, the fun will really start once the octa core CPU's dig deep into Turbo.My 8th gen hex core 8750H has a rated TDP of 45W, it can pull a clean 90W at full bore and sustain 70W. One suspects i9-9980H & HK octa core's will be a tad more power hungry to say the very least
If Apple hasn't bolstered the cooling solution the results will be blatantly obvious...Q-6
Last edited:
That is what I got, i7 6 core with Vega 20. Then a week after it arrived the 8 core becomes available. A little annoying but not the end of the world. I love my MacBook Pro.
9th Gen CPU are a little more power efficient, equally no die shrink and two additional cores, most importantly the laws of physics have not changed
A year ago at this time we had 4 core CPUs now we have 8 having just skimmed over 6 core, all in the same chassis. And in some magical way with the same TDP. It's too fast for me, I'd like a dinner first, maybe movies, instead of going straight to swinger's club dressed in My Little Pony costume on second date (don't ask, was just looking for some movies for my 5 year old and that came up).
The only review of the 9th gen I could find is the MSI GE75, unfortunately notebookcheck was running tests of the predecessor with 8750H probably in power save mode so there is not much to compare to, and honestly - there wouldn't be much because the chassis could run the 6 core all day long at max turbo with fairly low temps, so there was room to spare. In MBP there is none, so I'm really curious how the additional cores will scale while confined to the same power limit. I bet the multi core performance increase will be below 20%, maybe even below 10%. They have one screenshot, with CPU at 35W, clock around 2.3GHz. My 8750H with small UV gets 35W@3Ghz - do the math, it is almost linear scaling, virtually the same.
That was my thinking exactly. The 560 seems underpowered and the i9 overpowered for what I need in a laptop. The i7+Vega would have hit my sweet spot.
Yes it’s based on a newer architecture than the RX Series used in the MacBooks. Made me a bit mad when it dropped just months after I bought my i7+560 but what was I going to do? Plus the 560 is more than antiquate for 4K editing in FCPX.
No it is not, come on. It would be cooler if you could limit it to 30~35W. Otherwise it needs 50W that need to be dissipated through the same heatsink as the 30/35W RX.
Edit - I meant if you could run it below 30W, it would be as fast or faster than RX while consuming less power.
I think he means that he doesn’t need the CPU performance. As to Vega, it seems to run a bit cooler at idle, which might (or not) be relevant if you use external displays a lot.
It certainly doesnt run cooler under load since it’s a 50W GPU as opposed to 35Watts of the RX series
I think they fixed this issue on RX, with single display connected it consumes 5W only, when the internal+ external is on it jumps to 10W, fans at idle position. I'm sure it was much higher couple of months ago, I didn't write down the numbers but the fans were revving up.
CPU is hitting the usual limiters power/thermal, not a bad score on Cinebench R20, likely due to the two additional cores as the CPU is maxing out at around 2.8GHz. There's improvement, equally likely down to Intel, doubt Apple has done little if anything to the cooling solution, again...
The CPU's are far more capable and to me a fair number should be 3.8GHz/4GHz sustained, which is entirely possible. CPU at 100C is fine, however depending on design the surrounding components that are in close proximity are the weaker link.
8th Gen base 2.2GHz 8750H at it's best, as I've stated i9 with Apple is simply sales & marketing tactic, little else...
Q-6
Last edited:
Either people complain cuz they only update every 1-2 years, or people complain cuz they update a few times a year. They really can't win, you're rubbing someone the wrong way no matter what you do. I try not to sweat it, I update every 2-3 years for hardware upgrades cuz work, but if you don't upgrade a lot it's still probably more than enough for what you're doing since you don't "need" the upgrade for work stuff. Honestly even 4 cores is probably still more than 80-90% of people really need lol
Thermal issues? I hope so. I plan to use mine for double duty as a camp stove. If I bring a generator for power I can leave the dedicated camp stove at home. Plus, then I can watch movies off the grid. I’m a maximizing minimalist.
99% of my needs are photoshop. I recently found out that Puget Systems have a photoshop benchmark. I ran it on my 2018 MacBook Pro with i7 2.6 6 core with 32GB of ram and Vega 20. I got a score in the 780’s overall. Puget Systems said that that was really good for a laptop compared to the high spec desktop machine they used as a baseline.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Puget-Systems-Adobe-Photoshop-CC-Benchmark-1132/