https://www.crystalidea.com/macs-fan-control works a treat, it's updated regularly. You kinda have to pay for it but you can get it for free from https://github.com/crystalidea/macs-fan-control/releases
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.
YouTuber Claims 15-Inch MacBook Pro With Upgraded Core i9 Chip is Severely Throttled Due to Thermal Issues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
https://www.crystalidea.com/macs-fan-control works a treat, it's updated regularly. You kinda have to pay for it but you can get it for free from https://github.com/crystalidea/macs-fan-control/releases
So you're saying your next computer won't be powerful because it will be a Mac? Sorry, couldn't resist since you clearly stated in your post that Apple cares less about properly cooling their machines than they do about making them look good. Until Apple changes this, by buying their computers you have doomed yourself to machines that will never reach their full potential and be less powerful than their Windows/Linux counterparts because they are too busy looking pretty.I'm not surprised at all. The ultra-thin chassis with mediocre cooling does what it can. Of course this chip would work better in some huge bulky gaming laptop chassis, but that's not Mac and never will be.
Part of the reason why my next computer will probably be an iMac
For reference, here is my 2015 MacBook Pro (2.8GHz with turbo up to 4GHz, 16GB, Radeon M370X). I used Prime95 to load the CPU.
Notice that the 2015 MBP sees similar throttling. When all 4 cores (8 threads) are maxed out, the CPU can only operate at between 2.5-2.6GHZ which is 200MHz below the advertised speed.
Notice that the 2015 MBP sees similar throttling. When all 4 cores (8 threads) are maxed out, the CPU can only operate at between 2.5-2.6GHZ which is 200MHz below the advertised speed.
Yes, obviously.
But even 60-70ºC is quite high and would affect battery if a machine was sustaining these temperatures frequently.
For reference, here is my 2015 MacBook Pro (2.8GHz with turbo up to 4GHz, 16GB, Radeon M370X). I used Prime95 to load the CPU.
Notice that the 2015 MBP sees similar throttling. When all 4 cores (8 threads) are maxed out, the CPU can only operate at between 2.5-2.6GHZ which is 200MHz below the advertised speed.
Looks very much like the 2018 i9. Today I learned not take the highest end CPU on an MBP, and am happy I cheaped out on my 2015, which is running perfectly stable base frequencies!
It seems to be a real issue, once again ...
It makes me more afraid because it comes from Dave. He's an apple fan himself but still he se
Throttling is normal to some extend. I mean throttling back to default stocks (3.4 to 3.6Ghz-ish speeds), but 2,4Ghz or even lower, this is simply unacceptable and disappointing!
I don't care if these chips are harder to cool or not. If it's 4 or 6 cores. I don't want to see a decrease in performance from a new model.
Go fix this apple, nobody cares about this 1mm more thickness..
When will they take macbook pro's serious again?!
I need an upgrade next year, but it seems it won't be a macbook this time after 10 solid years. They ****ed this up
It makes me more afraid because it comes from Dave. He's an apple fan himself but still he se
Throttling is normal to some extend. I mean throttling back to default stocks (3.4 to 3.6Ghz-ish speeds), but 2,4Ghz or even lower, this is simply unacceptable and disappointing!
I don't care if these chips are harder to cool or not. If it's 4 or 6 cores. I don't want to see a decrease in performance from a new model.
Go fix this apple, nobody cares about this 1mm more thickness..
When will they take macbook pro's serious again?!
I need an upgrade next year, but it seems it won't be a macbook this time after 10 solid years. They ****ed this up
I think this is where Apple's computers fall flat and are not worth the money versus similarly spec'd (and cheaper) Windows machines. Sure, if you optimize the software to run with the HARDWARE, it should run faster. That is a no-brainer. However, 90% of the software out there (probably a lot higher) is NOT optimized to run well on just one machine. There are literally thousands of computers (laptop/desktop/workstations) out there with thousands of configurations. Software companies would lose a ton of money if they needed to spend time optimizing their software for every single configuration --which would be nearly impossible to do. ..and they shouldn't have to! If a computer is truly powerful, which Apple wants you to believe that their computers are, and has the correct drivers on it, then un-optimized software should run extremely well on it. That (un-optimized software running well) is the true test of HARDWARE power, not running optimized software.
Prime95 is much harder than Adobe Premiere and you are just 200mhz behind stock speeds.
This i9 is over 500-600mhz behind stock speeds with a less taxing app running
Prime95 or type in Terminal:
yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &
assuming you have 4 cores = 8 threads
killall yes
to quit
You might have mixed up who you're replying to. I wasn't behind base clock at all. I was on or above base speed with the base spec 2015 i7
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-thermal-issues.2128055/page-32#post-26260682
@topgunn is a little below with the maxed out 2015
You're right about the bigger disparity from base in the OP though.
Well they are and always have been a model of transparen...
Sorry, couldn't finish it
2012 rMBP, 15", maxed out. 6 years old, i7 2.7GHz, never had thermal paste reapplied or anything.
I admit it, its a WHOPPING 3mm (0,1 inch) thicker...
been running for 10 minutes now, still going strong at roughly 90 degrees and 2,9GHz.
This pisses me off so much, the 2012 Retinas where so well done thermally compared to previous generation, WHILE BEING THINNER. How could they screw this up so bad?!
I admit it, its a WHOPPING 3mm (0,1 inch) thicker...
been running for 10 minutes now, still going strong at roughly 90 degrees and 2,9GHz.
This pisses me off so much, the 2012 Retinas where so well done thermally compared to previous generation, WHILE BEING THINNER. How could they screw this up so bad?!
Attachments
They’ll give some talking points to Rene Ritchie.
I'm saying that there are better cooling designs that can be implemented in a laptop, but that for various reasons, Apple will not employ these designs. For one, they're often just plain ugly: who wants a big heavy black bulky laptop in 2018? Only someone who really can't go without mobile gaming perhaps. My MBP's fans go nuts every time I watch a 1080p YouTube video or use StreetView. That's fine, but that's not the kind of thing I want to deal with anymore. I never have that issue on an iMac. iMacs have always had better cooling and been more powerful simply because they're desktops. And so for my personal needs, an iMac will be a better choice.
An MBP is still a powerful laptop. I'm just saying that I guess I'm not too interested in laptops anymore.
This isn't new. Apple is somewhat notorious for cooling issues and its been going on for many years in everything from laptops to desktops and even Airport base stations. I don't recall them acknowledging it all those years ago, I doubt they will now.
But then you have other issues. My friend (Window Dev) is constantly fighting with his Windows and Microsoft. In fact, he got so fed up Windows update that for work (not gaming) he runs his Windows with everything installed on VMWare on a bare-bones Windows so that every time Microsoft bricks his computer he can just roll back and continue. Then the last update Microsoft caught on (1803) and made it so that he was no longer able to log in. Then, of course, there is just plain the inattention to detail and they are constantly using different standards (different font sizes in sidebar, slightly different shade to certain standard elements, changing standards but never fixing to make sure you change things to that new standard in a consistent way, hiding things in plain odd places (and sometimes moving them around between minor updates)... all of which might seem minor but once someone points it out to you your (or my) OCD side takes over and it becomes very irritating. I have worked in software development long enough that you sometimes are so focused on making the hard bits work perfectly, that you sometimes forget to go back and focus on the small bits... that combined with compressed schedules because someone in marketing thinks that the date should be some random date for no reason without consulting development and give assurances to customers that it will be out on that date (which often will freeze the date because now they are making dependencies on it).
If it turns out to be a teething problem, I will be happy. Luckily I am sort of waiting on everything for my current refresh... though I suspect by the end of August I will have what my next Linux build will be (I have not decided if it will be a Threadripper or the 9900K; the motherboard; or how much graphics performance I will install)... then I will just be waiting on hopefully learning more on the next Mac Pro this Fall or early Winter so I can make a decision on my next Mac.
[doublepost=1531945693][/doublepost]
If you do test it, and it throttles even slightly... try installing a fan controller (it might not be customized exactly - but usually it will work even if it just throws the fans into permanent high mode until you reboot it
Holy **** I was just making a joke.
This is good information. It's obvious Apple did all kind of basic testing and determined the thermal throttling was reasonable.For reference, here is my 2015 MacBook Pro (2.8GHz with turbo up to 4GHz, 16GB, Radeon M370X). I used Prime95 to load the CPU.
Notice that the 2015 MBP sees similar throttling. When all 4 cores (8 threads) are maxed out, the CPU can only operate at between 2.5-2.6GHZ which is 200MHz below the advertised speed.
Pretty much this, except I would modify your second sentence to say "Apple cares less about properly cooling their machines than they do about making a profit and keeping their stockholders happy." And at present, that's exactly what they're doing.
It's pretty much guaranteed that until the whiners start backing up their complaints in droves by NOT buying Apple products, nothing's going to change. Complaining while still giving money to Apple achieves nothing. And if you're one of those people who's butt hurt because others are still buying Apple products that aren't an ideal fit for YOUR needs, too bad - obviously you're in the minority.
2018 2.6 GHz 15 inch
ran this in my terminal
yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &
PowerGadget reported around 2.6 GHz
HAd a 2016 MBP 15 2.7 & my new one is WAYYYYYY faster for everything. So if it throttles, it is doing what it is designed for.
Was thinking I should return it and get the 2.2, but not so sure now.
ran this in my terminal
yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &
PowerGadget reported around 2.6 GHz
HAd a 2016 MBP 15 2.7 & my new one is WAYYYYYY faster for everything. So if it throttles, it is doing what it is designed for.
Was thinking I should return it and get the 2.2, but not so sure now.
Hmmm. Actually i am agreeing
My response was to the person claiming its is made up issue.
They put the i9 in because they were receiving so much crap for not improving the MBP in a couple years. The chassis has barely been able support base i7's and graphics cards for a few generations now. To expect a single heatsink on both units with a tiny fan to keep them at operating temp is insane. They need to add thickness to their design for more cooling, and separate the damn heatsinks. Also, we should probably stop expecting a 1/2"+- laptop to run 18 cores and a graphics card.