Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
OK let me get this straight. You should not buy a top spec computer and expect it to run at it's full potential, and you should not expect to run a top spec computer at it's full potential if software is not optimized for Mac. You should pay thousands on a top of the line computer because it looks gorgeous? Got it.

I see it as more of being aware of the strengths and limitations of said product, so you can make an informed purchase. The MacBook Pro is what it is, and at the end of the day, you have to make the call as to which product is the most suitable for you, cons and all.

Apple will always be seeking to make their products thinner and lighter. I guess it’s just something we have to get used to.
 
Hasn't this been an age-old problem? I've seen YouTubers show how to redo the thermal paste on other MacBooks to get better cooling/performance.

Edit: I use iStat Menus to permanently keep my late 2013 13" rMBP at max fan speed, and doing light activities I frequently see core CPU temps up to 187. Have seen it go up to 212 F.

I actually used an infrared thermometer on my powerbrick the other day that gets super hot. It was 169 F.

I am still running a Late 2008 Unibody MBP (trying to get it to 10 years before I buy this new version.

I've re-done the thermal paste about 3-4 times over the years. It get's to a point where iStat says the CPU is running at around 80-90c with normal use and can top 105c under extreme load. I take the thing apart, look at the thermal paste and it's all dry and cracked. Clean, re-apply and re-assemble, normal use speed drops to around 40c and high load up to around 80-90c.

I suppose the problem is, these new MBP are not as accessible to do maintenance like this.


Also, regarding temp issues, I also have a late 2013 iMac and during the summer months when ambient temp is higher, the BLC proximity temp is noticeably higher and I get image retention/ghosting. Not a new theme that apple devices have thermal issues due to their form. I'd rather have a chunkier device with better cooling than an overheating super slim design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eulslix
I guess you could say it’s throttled due to extremely poorly designed software that behaves like one of the worst flash sites
[doublepost=1531904777][/doublepost]
Well Duh. It's in the specs. What macbook ever runs below 50c?

The Intel Core i9-8950HK is a high-end processor for laptops with six cores based on the Coffee Lake architecture and was announced early 2018. The processor clocks at between 2.9- 4.8 GHz (4.3 GHz with 6 cores) and can execute up to twelve threads simultaneously thanks to Hyper-Threading. The 4.8 GHz can only be reached using the "Thermal Velocity Boost" which allows one core to boost to 4.8 GHz (+200 MHz) as long as the CPU temperature is below 50°C. Multiple cores can be boosted +100 MHz below 50°C.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-8950HK-SoC.279270.0.html
Well go figure! You mean the highly respected YouTuber didn’t know this? If he did, why then was this not shared. Oh, let me guess...it would have meant less views.
 
That would be 86, 100, 76 degrees Celsius respectively. Hot for light work, even in those real units :cool:

Unfortunately the throttling was already expected/feared already for tbe i9 if one wasn‘t a true believer. Sad if it turned out to be true now, anyway.

He might just be located in the wrong country/state, though, living it wrong.
I wish I could think in real units. My brain is too used to the fake ones.
I am still running a Late 2008 Unibody MBP (trying to get it to 10 years before I buy this new version.

I've re-done the thermal paste about 3-4 times over the years. It get's to a point where iStat says the CPU is running at around 80-90c with normal use and can top 105c under extreme load. I take the thing apart, look at the thermal paste and it's all dry and cracked. Clean, re-apply and re-assemble, normal use speed drops to around 40c and high load up to around 80-90c.

I suppose the problem is, these new MBP are not as accessible to do maintenance like this.


Also, regarding temp issues, I also have a late 2013 iMac and during the summer months when ambient temp is higher, the BLC proximity temp is noticeably higher and I get image retention/ghosting. Not a new theme that apple devices have thermal issues due to their form. I'd rather have a chunkier device with better cooling than an overheating super slim design.
Do you have a guide you follow for doing this? I checked iFixit for my model and didn't see anything regarding thermal paste.
 
Since software and hardware should be designed to balance the intent of the design with drawbacks. Heat and battery usage are both factors when building a laptop. Running at full capacity for extended periods can create other issues requiring loud fan usage of shortened chip life. Keep in mind Apple computers are generally supported by new OS upgrades for 5 or so. My first Mac from 2001 is still working flawlessly I also have a MacBook Air and Pro from 2010 that I use daily, so they clearly know something about building computers that last.
Everybody agrees that the old Apple machines were fantastic and long lasting. But that doesn't mean that the new ones will hold up so well. All the recent outrage at Apple is precisely because the new machines are explicitly made NOT made to last, which feels like a major let down to the faithful user base.
 
Isn't Premier a lot slower on the Mac compared to the Windows version to begin with? I watched a couple of comparison videos of FCP and Premier when deciding which to get and Premier was extremely much slower in rendering times than FCP. And on Windows Premier was much faster than on the Mac.
 
45 Watt TDP that is... The machine should be able to handle that. Back in the days we had the Core i7-3720QM in the 2012 MBP with the exact same TDP.
Above 27°C (81°F) I'd expect throttling in most laptop, but at normal room temperature on a hard surface (like glass) cooling 45W should be no issue given short heatpipes and a large enough cooler. Since the heatpipe on the 15" is rather fat and extends to both coolers it should be easy to keep the CPU cool. Once the GPU joins things may be different though, as the GPU is using the same heatpipe causing the GPU to heat up the CPU. I doubt the system is thermally stable with simultaneus CPU+GPU load...

Image by iFixit.
snip_20180718111633.png
 
I guess you could say it’s throttled due to extremely poorly designed software that behaves like one of the worst flash sites
[doublepost=1531904777][/doublepost]
Well go figure! You mean the highly respected YouTuber didn’t know this? If he did, why then was this not shared. Oh, let me guess...it would have meant less views.

This particular YouTuber, who puts a lot of effort into the research of his videos, doesn't criticize the boost. The CPU doesn't even manage keeping it's base clock... and as I've already quoted, even notebookcheck writes, that even the 13" has severe problems with throttling

https://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-2018-Touch-Bar-i5-Laptop.316002.0.html
 
Google Hangouts and Xcode both used to melt my 2012 MBP, so I used to unironically use an ice pack under it, making direct and high-surface-area contact with the metal underside conducting all the heat. Kept it below 50˚C at minimum fan speed!

I'm using cold accumulator from the freezer for this purpose. It speeds up my MBP (the real one, 17" unibody) a lot during hot summer :)
 
This does seem more intels fault than Apple’s, the cooling solution on the 2016-17s is probably the most capable they’ve ever put on the MBP line and handled the quad core chips fine - if intel are promising this chip fits inside the same thermal envelope and it doesn’t there’s not a lot Apple can do other than not offer it, though if it still outperforms the i7 then it will still be useful to some people
 
Seems like apple’s fault, not intel’s, if it’s true. Apple designed the thermal solution for the MBP.

Could be a little of both, more so on Apple than Intel. Intel likely provided thermal guidelines to Apple. Maybe the info was incorrect and Apple didn't thoroughly test it
 
Testing it with Premiere is a joke, this app is not properly optimised.
[doublepost=1531902985][/doublepost]
Really? and why people respect him? Also since when number of subscribers means anything at all huh?

Well CPU usage is CPU usage. THe machine doesn't differ from Premiere to FCPX when it comes to CPU usage and overheat and the only way program can use the machine badly is to not utilize the full power of it..... So, your comment is a joke. In fact, if the Macbook with i9 throttles with Premiere which doesn't even utilize the full power of all the cores, do you think it throttles less in a program that actually takes full advantage? No! Harder usage means more heat, if you don't get that then you need to educate yourself.
 
Definitely stick with my 15" mid-2015 Macbook Pro, only officially discontinued a week ago. All the great ports. The solid keyboard. No switchable graphics. Why does Apple mess with perfection...
 
This is the primary reason I’m holding out for the new Mac Pro. As great as the 2018 MacBook Pro looks and feels, its internals are laden with glue that prevents or complicates basic thermal optimization, not to mention upgrades.

Like the iMac Pro, the new MacBook Pro was a step in the right. direction, but for most of us who demand performance, all these steps lead to the new Mac Pro with a modular design and more opportunities for tuning performance.

As of now, the only real improvements readily available for Mac’s high-end desktop machines is adding more CPU cores. And you can already get a 12-core CPU. Unfortunately, there aren’t mass market 7 GHz chips and probably won't be for some time.

You can already add 64GB of RAM to the Mac Pro, the GPU has 12 GB of GDDR5 VRAM, and there is a max of 12-cores for the high-end model.

Adding additional RAM allows you to keep more applications available in memory. Since RAM is faster than an SSD, you can utilize the swap for holding applications or temporary files. 64GB of RAM is like having an ultra-fast 64GB SSD for writing files to and from for application's internal use, which is why it improves the Mac's speed.

GPU RAM works the same way. Since the GPU uses many processor cores to run low-level tasks, like rendering a texture on a polygon, having more GPU RAM lets you keep those textures available for use without having to constantly discard it. 12 GB of VRAM is like having a 12GB SSD for storing rendered graphics specific to your application. This is why high-end games need high-end GPUs. The HD and 4K textures take up a lot of space and the SSD is too slow to swap back and forth from.

Unfortunately, adding more Cores, whether to the GPU or CPU, may not actually improve app performance. Each application has a main thread that utilizes 1 core. The main thread is responsible for anything you interact with on the screen. When you click a button on an app, you are calling the main thread. When you scroll a website, you are calling the main thread to display the HTML.

Background threads utilize additional available CPU cores to process tasks that aren't related to the main thread. The background threads do things like save images, download files, and check for new or available data. A programmer has to manually utilize additional cores when writing their applications.

Popular macOS apps are optimized for multiple core usage, which is why Safari may run faster or smoother than Firefox. But multiple cores have their limits, since not everything can be run in the background. You'll end up with an issue called race conditions, where the background and main thread compete for who should run first. It causes the app to crash.

So, if you purchase a 2018 high-end Macbook Pro, and you max the ram, max the CPU, get the largest SSD, and select the best GPU, the next step in performance is a faster CPU. Since we’re a while away from 7 GHz chips, the existing technology for the other components hasn’t fully been realized by application developers.

In short, the modular upgrades would only apply to the RAM and your SSD, but those are purely based on size at purchase, not speed increases in the near future. If you max out the RAM and SSD, there isn’t a need for modular components. It’s only necessary if you buy the 8GB RAM and 256GB SSDs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bwintx
Ey! But it has TouchBar!!! Who cares about performance?

TouchBar!! The most impresive feature since the soldered RAM!!

Sometimes I woke up in the middle of the night, dreaming that TouchBar never existed, and man! Thats scary!!!
It's true. It's a sad situation that for love or money you really can't get fully tricked out legitimate hardware that runs MacOS.

I bought a 13in MBP but got a mid-range spec on it for exactly these reasons and am happy so far (no glaring defects). I have already learnt that with Apple if you get the top-tier processor all you do is shoot yourself in the foot with battery life and find that performance is never quite what you expected. Better to save those dollars and get some other thing that can improve your output. If real number crunching is your thing (say for example you want to do statistics) then outsource those tasks to a workstation of a competing brand. Aside from Apple's own video editing offerings, most other seriously power hungry software is cross-platform. Just my two cents.
 
Late to the thread, but I really enjoy Dave2D's videos. He's often quite balanced and while a Apple fan, he will call them out.

Anyways, I can't say that I'm surprised by the results, there are other videos out there that show similar issues, and the problem is the i9 is so powerful and hot, the enclosure cannot cool it adequately. What is very disappointing is that apple had to know this, and yet rolled out a product that was failed to live up to apple's premium pricing.
 
These machines are ridiculously expensive, have a **** keyboard which Apple just doesn't care about, throttle to hell so that the fancy super expensive i9 is slower than last year's i7 - for what? So we can run MacOS? Have we all forgotten how bad High Sierra has been and how little Apple has cared about MacOS and the Mac since the iPhone took off making all the money?
Time to move on. Sadly. It is time.
 
LOL...the unproven keyboard "crisis" is starting to fade, so this is the next one? Everyone is going to pretend Apple isn't aware of thermal testing for laptops? You guys are really desperate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heineken
Well CPU usage is CPU usage. THe machine doesn't differ from Premiere to FCPX when it comes to CPU usage and overheat and the only way program can use the machine badly is to not utilize the full power of it..... So, your comment is a joke. In fact, if the Macbook with i9 throttles with Premiere which doesn't even utilize the full power of all the cores, do you think it throttles less in a program that actually takes full advantage? No! Harder usage means more heat, if you don't get that then you need to educate yourself.
But it’s not how it works. Sadly.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.