I don't believe I'm missing the point because the different design is the exact point of the video and issue that LTT is raising. Why is apple using such a thin enclosure with a fan profile that will guarantee a slower running machine that easily tops off at 90c at the slightest bump in utilization.
Look, I am not trying to argue that the MBP is the fastest laptop around. And its an irrefutable fact that there are laptops in the similar weight/size class that perform better than the MBP. Again, no argument about this.
However, people who bring the Razer, MSI etc. argument usually ignore the other part of the laptop design equation. You can make a reasonably fast thin gaming laptop, but you need to sacrifice other things in order to get there. Which brings us to this:
The issue is that Apple is promoting the MBP as a performance powerhouse, so your argument of the MBP being designed with a long lasting batter in lieu of performance flies in the face of apple's own marketing.
I think you are over-dramatising this a bit. The MBP is indeed a very fast laptop — in CPU workflows for example, it's performance is within 10% (single core) and 30% (multicore) of the fastest laptops on the market. But the basic design equation of the MBP has been constant since the first MBP was released in 2006. The MBP is not about absolute performance (get a gaming machine if that is what you need). The MBP is about balance of features: it is still a very fast laptop, but its also very light, has excellent battery life, has excellent storage speed, has excellent display, can be used on the desk, on the go, on the lap, in bed, on a cat (I tried), it has the fastest WiFi of any laptop on the market, and it has full array of TB3 ports which allow it to fill a multitude of roles. And it's this balance that has been its selling point for the last 12 years.
Ultimately, my point is: I understand that some people are looking for the fastest laptop possible and that some people are looking for a fast laptop cheap. But I do not understand why these people are even considering a MBP. No Apple laptop ever gave you this (maybe except some very early models when the fastest GPUs existing were 20Watt units and the concept of the laptop was still fresh).
[doublepost=1556642348][/doublepost]
That's like arguing that you're only allowed to compare panel color accuracy at factory calibration. Besides, I wouldn't call changing two parameters in BIOS 'modding'. And no, you wouldn't see comparable performance, on MBP I'm getting over 90C at 45W already with both fans set to max (does it count as 'modding'?).
Well, what score do you get with the MSI65 before undervolting? That is my biggest gripe with these kind of comparisons. Undervolting is individual and it can be hit and miss depending on your luck of the draw.
[doublepost=1556642567][/doublepost]
It shouldn't be a delusion to expect an expensive, premium desktop to perform well and not throttle. That is why threads like these keep popping up and why I haven't purchased a Macbook Pro since early 2013.
The reason why these threads keep popping up is because people's expectations are messed up. And they also don't understand the dynamic power scaling of modern CPUs. By the way, what exactly constitutes throttling for you?
I really like my early 2013 Macbook Pro. It is high quality and the keyboard works well but gets really hot and throttles under load. I'll continue to use it but won't purchase another until they fix the design.
They could "fix" it by dropping the CPU to a 15W part — like majority of PC makers do these days. As to "runs hot" — you re aware of the fact that most of these laptops that are mentioned in this thread as positive examples actually have higher external temperatures compared to the MBP?
