Having seen all of this regarding the i9 throttling has confirmed I don’t want/need it. People forget that before the i9 the i7 was the only option in MBPs and it was always regarded well. It still is. I’m personally going for the 2.6ghz version. i9 isn’t worth it due to throttling.
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 vs i7
- Thread starter jonnysods
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having seen all of this regarding the i9 throttling has confirmed I don’t want/need it. People forget that before the i9 the i7 was the only option in MBPs and it was always regarded well. It still is. I’m personally going for the 2.6ghz version. i9 isn’t worth it due to throttling.
I can’t comment on those use cases specifically, but I think that the general consensus is this: the i9, whilst a powerful chip in its own right, just doesn’t have the necessary cooling in the MBP body to run at a level anywhere near its potential. So really, the performance will most likely be the same (some I think have said even lower than) the i7 option(s). But, if you’re unsure then it’d be wise to wait for a bit more data to come out - I’m sure others in the tech business will be quick onto that video from Dave Lee to test his results and see if they were accurate or just an anomaly with his machine.
Haha. Every thread? An exaggeration.
Have you read my other posts? Have you read the other posts with people first hand experiencing better performance compared to their older i7s and/or other 2018 i7s? My workflow works with multiple tests converting and processing my workflow. Does my i9 drop to 800Mhz? IDK BUT I was able to save a minute and a half compared to the 2018 i7 and at the same time save over half the time compared to my 2017 i7. So, I’m happy.
And if I were to be all honest, you seem to act like a 15 year old kid who wishes he had the money to buy the base model and is butt hurt but happy if he can find anything wrong...but you probably only have the mind of one. Hahaha.
Now, instead of posting crap on these forums, why don’t you go out and buy one and do some tests like most of us here, and see what else we can dig for regarding the issue. I’ve bought one, done tests that people are asking us to do...what have you done to contribute? I’ll let you answer that in your head.
All this discussion about i7 v. i9 - Honestly, we should be asking about 16GB of RAM v. 32GB. I do video and photography full-time and and still cutting it up nicely on my 2015 15' MBP - The slowdown I'm running into has to do with the graphics card. I'm going to be getting the 2018 15' BASE model. The 2.2 i7 with SIX cores will handle anything I throw at it for YEARS to come. The money I'm "saving" on the base model CPU will go toward more RAM (32GB) and a 512GB SSD.
But that's just me. Different strokes for different folks. I assume though the base 15' CPU will be just fine for 95% of the folks out there.
But that's just me. Different strokes for different folks. I assume though the base 15' CPU will be just fine for 95% of the folks out there.
Eh Dave 2D is probably one of the you tubers I would listen to. Wouldn't call him an Apple Fanboy but he clearly prefers Apple MacOS and he basically said it throttles a lot unless it was in the freezer.
i9 should be close to or exceed 1400CB, my W10 primary scores 1273CB with the 8750H.
Q-6
Last edited:
Definitely not the MBP as it stands. Saw one i9 pull over 1500CB, but that was an extreme test with the notebook basically pulled apart, LM and OC to 5GHz.
My 8750H
These new hex cores can really rip if the OEM gets the math right. Apple on the other hand is in the region of 25% slower, delighted to say the least...
Q-6
Last edited:
If you’re interested in bumping up to the 512GB SSD, it’s not much more to get the 2.6GHz mid-tier model which also comes with the (slightly?) better graphics card. I would be fine with the base model you chose, but I keep looking at the difference in price after the storage upgrade and get pulled in that direction. But I don’t need better graphics (Logic Pro X) and money is money, so upgrading the base with better storage and 32GB might be the best move. Convince me!
The simple argument is that the MBP is thermally limited. In plain words this probably means that for real world use, you're not getting any extra performance out of the (in theory) slightly faster CPU and the (in theory) slightly faster GPU. And you're paying far above market rates for those upgrades. The RAM upgrade should be your #1 priority, SSD second, and if you have any money left after that, put it towards ice cream.
I don't think a firmware update will fix this one....
Wonder if apple will kill the i9.
Why should they ? The consumer just doesn’t need to order it. Tbh the i9 is overkill for most people anyways. The top end i7 will do fine for most people
Why should they? Because it's slower than the 2017 model unless you operate it in a literal freezer.
They could but at the same time the consumer is at fault if they buy it knowing this
I agree. But a professional is going to be ripped off because it doesn't work as it should. I was going to buy the i9 for my work, but the i9 is DOA.
Didn't somebody also mentioned that even the 13" base model has throttling issue? Is 15" 2.6ghz less affected due to larger case?
Has there been any hard evidence of the 2.6GHz i7 excessively throttling vs the 2.2GHz i7? If you were already planning on a 560X & 512GB, then the cpu upgrade only amounts to a $100 increase - which is worth it to me if it runs better than the i9.
8 years? I mean Macs will get 4k or 5k by then. Better GPUs, possibly 64 gig ram option, DDR5, and most likely their own chips.
Ehhh, no. The video is more of a gpu performance test, the second link nothing is tested and the third confirms the issues, you can see the scaling issues using the 5'th and 6'th core in the graphs.
That video made me laugh!! OK, it's entertaining but that's not really why.
All those problems with Siri. I'm so glad I disable it on all my devices. Maybe other people do, but I really don't need to ask my computer to do stuff for me with my voice - that's why it has a keyboard. But then maybe that's why Apple's 2017 keyboard doesn't work so well (allegedly, mine is fine) - maybe Apple were too busy asking Siri to do stuff for them they forgot to test the keyboard.
And then the irony was not lost on me that the "pro" use of the laptop displayed in the video was essentially rendering video by someone that creates video talking about the performance of devices that create these videos. Isn't that a whole cottage industry born of itself??
No doubt there are plenty of perfectly valid 'pro' uses, but I'm not sure that video is one of them.
All those problems with Siri. I'm so glad I disable it on all my devices. Maybe other people do, but I really don't need to ask my computer to do stuff for me with my voice - that's why it has a keyboard. But then maybe that's why Apple's 2017 keyboard doesn't work so well (allegedly, mine is fine) - maybe Apple were too busy asking Siri to do stuff for them they forgot to test the keyboard.
And then the irony was not lost on me that the "pro" use of the laptop displayed in the video was essentially rendering video by someone that creates video talking about the performance of devices that create these videos. Isn't that a whole cottage industry born of itself??
No doubt there are plenty of perfectly valid 'pro' uses, but I'm not sure that video is one of them.
Depends what your usage is, if you're likely to be stressing the cpu under load for prolonged periods (rendering, video encoding etc) and can create an environment where you can provide adequate cooling (a laptop cooling pad but that's debatable) then go for the i9. In reality the difference in performance between the i7 and i9 is minimal and bear in mind if the i9 throttles more aggressively it won't be any quicker than the i7.
In daily usage I doubt you'll notice any difference between any 15" MBP from over the last five years. Storage performance improvements and then available RAM would have the single biggest impact on end user experiences. I have a 2013 & 2017 13" MBP and in day to day use there's very little difference (web browsing, office etc).
As my university lecturer used to say a computer's perceived speed is defined by it's slowest component.
Rolling forward into the future several years both the i7 & i9 will hold up well in day to day tasks. However they'll both be so much slower than CPU's available then that the relative gap between the i7 & i9 will be miniscule.