YouTuber Claims 15-Inch MacBook Pro With Upgraded Core i9 Chip is Severely Throttled Due to Thermal Issues

[PickUrPoison]

Time for a new CEO...late products, underperforming and defective

Yeah that’s not the way it works lol. If the board fired Cook, the shareholders would fire the board and the new board would re-hire him.

The board has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders; a board doesn’t fire a CEO who’s bringing in record-breaking revenues and profits, just because of the inevitable hiccups that running a huge company like Apple will encounter. 100% perfect minus 5% fail is still an excellent score of 95%.

 

[fairuz]

Neither are worse for wear? Wow, you clearly know nothing about the adverse effects of consistently high operating temperatures on CPU/silicon and overall component longevity. Also, no system is designed to sustain 100c operating temperatures - the fact that it does simply highlights the inadequacy of the cooling system. Also, throttling is not considered normal, as it prevents the CPU from operating at frequencies (e.g. turbo), which it otherwise would have been able to operate at, had the cooling system allowed it.

Anything I search gives me answers opposing what you said about high temperatures (100˚C) shortening the lifespan of the CPU, given that 100˚C is within the CPU's thermal limits. IDK about other components. Maybe the keyboard?

I don't know if the MBP runs at below max clock speed at 100˚C (I can check next time I have to use Google Hangouts on my MBP), but if it does, that's bad. But Turbo Boost is another thing. It's considered overclocking, and I doubt an average laptop can stay in the turbo state for long.
[doublepost=1532307672][/doublepost]

Good grief.. I don't even know why I bother to post here. I would assume that many people would be interested in the why of it.. aside from the surface analysis of "Apple screwed up".

Yes of course Apple is responsible, but it looks like we also have a CPU that's not behaving as Intel specs it. We may ultimately get a firmware update that doesn't provide power outside of a smaller envelope that's within spec, even if the processor asks for it.

Where do you see that the CPU isn't behaving the way Intel specs it?

 

[flat five]

But Turbo Boost is another thing. It's considered overclocking, and I doubt an average laptop can stay in the turbo state for long.

nah, a MBP can maintain turbo speeds indefinitely... or, at least as long as the processes i would use are.. about 10 minutes max..

pretty sure a single core running at turbo speed is less taxing on the system/cpu than running all cores 100%


[EDIT]
this is from a mid2014 MBP 2.5GHz i7 with 3.7GHz turbo

--------


the temp will go up to around 90ºC and stay there.. the frequency hovers around 3.6GHz and stays there.

idk, i've yet to see an example of a 2018 MBP being examined under these kind of conditions.. has anyone? if so, link?

 

[k4ever]

Don't get offended when I said 'haters'. Reading this thread and other reddit comments i felt like this macbook pro is the worst thing that apple build. Lots of negative stuff about touch bar, keyboard, processor etc. I currently own a 2015 macbook pro (given to me by the workplace) I have to return it soon and buy a new model. I use it for number crunching, running cpu intensive scripts, occasional graphics rendering, basically for scientific computing. I can't use a desktop right now because i have to travel frequently. What i noticed was current 16 GB ram is sometime not enough for me because I work with large datasets. I looked at other windows 32GB machines, such as dell xps15 and aero 15x, but there seems to be lots of issues with those laptops as well. I personally like the macos, but don't mind windows and especially ubuntu. I am wondering is there a good alternative for a 32GB laptop (not the gaming ones as they are too heavy for travel). The new macbook pro looks promising but the keyboard, processor and the price giving me second thoughts. Anyway, i am fine with an i7 processor as long as it gives me reasonable clock speed for some period of time.

You mentioned the two laptops that I would recommend, the Dell XPS 15 and the Aero 15. I would lean more towards the XPS 15 in your case, with a good service plan from Dell.

Here is the God's honest truth: All laptops from every manufacturer, to include Apple, has issues. There isn't anything made by man that won't eventually break on you. The difference is that Windows laptop owners are HONEST about flaws that they encounter with their machines. Apple owners, on average, seem to be very dishonest about flaws with their machines. Maybe it's because they spent a lot more money on these machines and are embarrassed when they find out Apple's machines break just like everyone else's. Maybe they succumb to the peer pressure to "blame everyone but Apple" that you see in threads like this one, or maybe they believe Apple's hype and choose to blame themselves when something goes wrong. Either way, Apple machines break just as often and have just as many problems as machines from other manufacturers. Apple also has a decent service plan. However, if you take your Apple machine into an Apple Store and they fixed an issue for you, or gave you a new one, it doesn't eliminate the fact that the machine HAD AN ISSUE. Apple owners also tend to write off issues that are fixed in the Apple Store under warranty as if they never happened.

Best thing to do is to get a computer with a good service plan from a trustworthy manufacturer -- in your case for what you need that would be Dell.

Be careful though, the XPS 15 doesn't have the same lightening fast SSD that you get with the MBP (or the 4TB option). However, you can buy that same SSD and have someone put it in for you for less than what you would pay for in the MBP. I believe it is the Samsung 970 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD. If you don't order the RAM from Dell, make sure you get the right type.

Herein lies the rub, you have so many options on peripherals like SSDs and RAM when it comes to Windows PC that it could be quite confusing at times. This is not the same as Apple, who usually only have ONE (very expensive) choice in what you can buy (and that choice is usually permanent). However, Dell and other manufacturers usually posts a compatibility list for peripherals on their website or you can find dozens of YouTube videos that will explain what you need. You will definitely appreciate having the ability to change out peripherals and having a wider selection when newer or faster peripherals comes out. Good luck!
[doublepost=1532309753][/doublepost]

Anything I search gives me answers opposing what you said about high temperatures (100˚C) shortening the lifespan of the CPU, given that 100˚C is within the CPU's thermal limits. IDK about other components. Maybe the keyboard?

I don't know if the MBP runs at below max clock speed at 100˚C (I can check next time I have to use Google Hangouts on my MBP), but if it does, that's bad. But Turbo Boost is another thing. It's considered overclocking, and I doubt an average laptop can stay in the turbo state for long.
[doublepost=1532307672][/doublepost]
Where do you see that the CPU isn't behaving the way Intel specs it?

I just want to clear the air on this. Turbo Boost is kind of like overclocking, but Turbo Boost is not overclocking. A CPU will only Turbo Boost to a higher clock speed when the conditions are right, and SHOULD throttle back to the base clock speed when it gets too hot, or the higher clock speed is no longer needed. I say SHOULD throttle back to the base clock speed because the Core i9 MBP does not do this -- it throttles way below base clock speed during normal operations, which is unacceptable.

Overclocking causes the CPU to run at a higher clock speed indefinitely. Unlike with Turbo Boost, an overclocked CPU will not throttle back to the normal base clock when it gets too hot -- it will throttle back to the overclock speed. This is dangerous if the CPU is not properly cooled when running at the overclock speed. This is why almost ALL overclocked machines have beefier cooling systems -- you shouldn't overclock without replacing the normal cooling system with a better one.

The scary part about all of this is the Core i9 CPU in the 2018 MBP is overclock-able, yet there is currently no way to upgrade the cooling system in the 2018 MBP!

 

[thepixelpusher]

Apple's new 15-inch MacBook Pro can be upgraded to include a 6-core 2.9GHz Intel Core i9 processor that has demonstrated impressive performance, but one YouTuber is warning customers away from purchasing it with claims that the MacBook Pro chassis can't provide sufficient cooling for it to run at full speed.

Dave Lee this afternoon shared a new video on the Core i9 MacBook Pro he purchased, and according to his testing, the new machine is unable to maintain even its base clock speed after just a short time doing processor intensive work like video editing.

"This CPU is an unlocked, overclockable chip but all of that CPU potential is wasted inside this chassis -- or more so the thermal solution that's inside here," says Lee.

He goes on to share some Premiere Pro render times that suggest the new 2018 MacBook Pro with Core i9 chip underperforms compared to a 2017 model with a Core i7 chip. It took 39 minutes for the 2018 MacBook Pro to render a video that the older model was able to render in 35 minutes. Premiere Pro is not well-optimized for macOS, but the difference between the two MacBook Pro models is notable.

Lee ran the same test again with the 2018 MacBook Pro in the freezer, and in cooler temperatures, the i9 chip was able to offer outstanding performance, cutting that render time down to 27 minutes and beating out the 2017 MacBook Pro.

As Lee points out, thermal throttling is in no way unusual and it's seen in all manner of laptops and mobile devices from a range of manufacturers, but he says that "this degree" of thermal throttling is "unacceptable."It's not clear if there's something wrong with the MacBook Pro with Core i9 chip that Lee received, because this kind of throttling is likely something Apple would have tested for and not something that other users have reported at this point.

Because this is just one data point, it's not enough information to reach a conclusion about the i9 chip available for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, but additional testing will certainly follow to shed more light on Lee's video. We have asked Apple for comment on Lee's findings, and will update this post if we hear back.

Update: Other reports of excessive i9 throttling have been trickling in from Reddit users who have purchased 15-inch MacBook Pros with the high-end chip. These threads are available here and here.

Article Link: YouTuber Claims 15-Inch MacBook Pro With Upgraded Core i9 Chip is Severely Throttled Due to Thermal Issues

Are there any Cooling Pads or stands that would let the new 2018 i9 Apple MacBooks laptop run at full speed all the time?
[doublepost=1532311499][/doublepost]

If you follow the gaming notebook forums much at all you'll see that the 6-core 8th gen chips are very difficult to cool properly even in much thicker frames than the MacBook Pro offers. Seriously, the Notebookreview forums are full of people upset that monstrous gaming notebooks aren't able to cool these chips properly, especially if there's a discrete GPU also pumping heat into the system.

As soon as I saw that these Macs had been released with these new CPUs I started wondering what kind of cooling magic Apple might have worked to make it possible. The answer seems to be: none. The laws of physics are the laws of physics and if these chips run hot in 1"+ thick systems with massive heatsinks and fans, what chance do they have in something as thin as a MacBook Pro?

Are there any Cooling Pads or stands that would let the new 2018 i9 Apple MacBooks laptop run at full speed all the time?

 

[Frank Dalton]

Yeah that’s not the way it works lol. If the board fired Cook, the shareholders would fire the board and the new board would re-hire him.

The board has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders; a board doesn’t fire a CEO who’s bringing in record-breaking revenues and profits, just because of the inevitable hiccups that running a huge company like Apple will encounter. 100% perfect minus 5% fail is still an excellent score of 95%.

The gravy train will come to an end under Cook's leadership, so failing to remove him before it's too late could also be construed as a breach of fiduciary duty. He has no vision and he is going to **** this up, sooner or later.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

The gravy train will come to an end under Cook's leadership, so failing to remove him before it's too late could also be construed as a breach of fiduciary duty. He has no vision and he is going to **** this up, sooner or later.

Oh, you mean the gravy train of profits that doubled under Cook? Which might have doubled because he focused too much on Apple's core business and most profitable business iOS devices... and may not have focused near as much on their "fringe" business interests macOS devices?

 

[antonis]

I missed the Schiller quote, was that at WWDC?

Last year's WWDC IIRC. He was replying to the "where is the mac pro" virtual question when he even showed a photo of a MacBook pro connected to 2 storage devices at once.

I wish I could find that photo, it was epic.

 

[thepixelpusher]

You’re not at 100% utilization.

Wonder if his heatsink had a poor amount of gel between processor chip and heatsink?

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Wonder if his heatsink had a poor amount of gel between processor chip and heatsink?

It looks more like that application may not be the most multi-core friendly application (at least in that test case).

 

[PickUrPoison]

Last year's WWDC IIRC. He was replying to the "where is the mac pro" virtual question when he even showed a photo of a MacBook pro connected to 2 storage devices at once.

I wish I could find that photo, it was epic.

The closest thing I have found to a quote where Schiller supposedly said the MBP can replace the Mac Pro is “The job of the notebook is to make it so you never need a desktop.”

Maybe that was it?

 

[Abazigal]

The gravy train will come to an end under Cook's leadership, so failing to remove him before it's too late could also be construed as a breach of fiduciary duty. He has no vision and he is going to **** this up, sooner or later.

I am of the opinion that Tim Cook remains the best person to run Apple, missteps and all. It’s future lies not in legacy products like the Mac but in areas such as mobile, wearables, health, self-driving cars and AR, and these are industries Apple looks well-poised to dominate.

I think Apple will continue to prosper. Of course, the price of that might be that Apple continues to neglect certain products that people here might be passionate about. I will lose no sleep over this.

And I guess that’s what rubs the haters the wrong way. That Apple continues to do well despite faring poorly in the areas they care about. Or perhaps, precisely Apple has chosen to neglect these areas like the Mac, which in turn frees up more resources to focus on technologies which will form the bedrock of the future.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

I am of the opinion that Tim Cook remains the best person to run Apple, missteps and all. It’s future lies not in legacy products like the Mac but in areas such as mobile, wearables, health, self-driving cars and AR, and these are industries Apple looks well-poised to dominate.

I think Apple will continue to prosper. Of course, the price of that might be that Apple continues to neglect certain products that people here might be passionate about. I will lose no sleep over this.

And I guess that’s what rubs the haters the wrong way. That Apple continues to do well despite faring poorly in the areas they care about. Or perhaps, precisely Apple has chosen to neglect these areas like the Mac, which in turn frees up more resources to focus on technologies which will form the bedrock of the future.

What people fail to realize is that at the time of OS X... the same time as the first iPod... that Apple pivoted from being a 'computer' business to an iDevices (and other consumer devices) business and the Mac... effectively transformed over time to being an accessory of the iDevices business. The Mac classic was nice -- but Apple almost went bankrupt... and the transition to macOS was not a smooth transition... It was the iDevices that made Apple financially secure, it was the iDevices that brought a large set of new customers to the Mac ecosystem, and it was the iDevices that became the central business of Apple. If it were not for the success of the iDevices... Apple might not be in business today. They effectively said as much in their trial with Samsung...

Even with Apple's lapses from time to time on the Mac environment and not necessarily having the exact model I would prefer (I don't generally like iMacs since I prefer my desktops to be headless)... it is still the best option for me.

 

[Frank Dalton]

Oh, you mean the gravy train of profits that doubled under Cook? Which might have doubled because he focused too much on Apple's core business and most profitable business iOS devices... and may not have focused near as much on their "fringe" business interests macOS devices?

I am well acquainted with Apple’s financials. Cook is a fine operational steward. But operational stewardship will not keep the candy store open forever. Some of you forgot that Apple was on top once before. Any company can lose its place and it will happen, sooner or later, to Apple as long as Tim Cook and Jony Ive are driving the train.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

I am well acquainted with Apple’s financials. Cook is a fine operational steward. But operational stewardship will not keep the candy store open forever. Some of you forgot that Apple was on top once before. Any company can lose its place and it will happen, sooner or later, to Apple as long as Tim Cook and Jony Ive are driving the train.

No Apple nearly went bankrupt before iDevices, (expanded on the post just above - posted at the same time as your response). A significant part of the growth in the Mac community was as a result of the iDevices. Apple was not on top, they struggled.

 

[Abazigal]

I am well acquainted with Apple’s financials. Cook is a fine operational steward. But operational stewardship will not keep the candy store open forever. Some of you forgot that Apple was on top once before. Any company can lose its place and it will happen, sooner or later, to Apple as long as Tim Cook and Jony Ive are driving the train.

Of course nothing lasts forever in the greater scheme of things.

However, if you want us to believe that you know why Apple will fail, then at least demonstrate that you understand how they grew to be so successful in the first place.

Apple is on an upward trajectory right now. We should be trying to explain their success, not explain it away.

Else, it’s like a broken clock. Yes, keep repeating the tired old “Apple is doomed” mantra day in and day out and one of these days, that just might come true (even if it’s many years in the future, for some completely unrelated reason). However, while waiting for the inevitable day when Apple does fail, you would also have missed the mark enough times that in the greater scheme of things, you would have been wrong.

 

[Frank Dalton]

No Apple nearly went bankrupt before iDevices, (expanded on the post just above - posted at the same time as your response). A significant part of the growth in the Mac community was as a result of the iDevices. Apple was not on top, they struggled.

Yes, thank you, I don’t need a history lesson, I was a Mac user through all those years. They were on top of the personal computer industry with the Apple II. Their massively successful IPO in 1980 made them an instant Wall Street darling. Yes, they were on top once before and stumbled massively after a string of mistakes.
[doublepost=1532343798][/doublepost]

However, if you want us to believe that you know why Apple will fail, then at least demonstrate that you understand how they grew to be so successful in the first place.

I don’t care what you believe. I have no need to “demonstrate” anything.

Apple is on an upward trajectory right now. We should be trying to explain their success, not explain it away.

Yes. They are riding a wave of success by following a successful model laid out by Steve Jobs.

Speaking of “demonstrating” things, I am still waiting for Tim Cook to demonstrate that he can do anything beyond “wash, rinse, repeat” of the same old operational sales model.

Else, it’s like a broken clock. Yes, keep repeating the tired old “Apple is doomed” mantra day in and day out and one of these days, that just might come true (even if it’s many years in the future, for some completely unrelated reason). However, while waiting for the inevitable day when Apple does fail, you would also have missed the mark enough times that in the greater scheme of things, you would have been wrong.

Wrong. I never announced that Apple is “doomed,” only that the gravy train will end. There’s a difference. Also, your tireless Tim Cook apologism can likewise be described as a broken clock, so let’s not throw stones in glass houses, shall we?

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Yes. They are riding a wave of success by following a successful model laid out by Steve Jobs.

They are riding a wave of success because of one hit - or one wave that has effectively been milked ... first an iPod, then an iPod that can work as a phone, then an iPod/Phone that can have apps and a useful internet connection, then a bigger iPod/iPhone which they call an iPad, all this driving some additional business for their computer business (which is effectively an accessory) and a few other accessories to round out the ecosystem.

They are still investing widely in many different projects that have yet to see the day - and have yet to prove themselves. I still don't think they have a good idea of how to marry the business model of the iPad and the Mac... whether it will become more complimentary, or whether there will eventually be a range of products with varying combinations of components (mouse vs touch vs voice etc.)

Steve Jobs had some up trajectories, some down ones, and the last one an up one... had he lived - we can only guess if it was really a one trick pony during this century or whether he would have had others (with Apple). If Apple replaced Tim Cook they would be as likely (maybe even more likely) to get another Scully as another 'Jobs'. So if not Tim Cook... who...??

The fact is that Apple is a large company and it now has the weight of that size and the fudiciary responsiblities to the shareholders. It is more likely that the next 'iPod/iPhone' success would come from outside as in. Large companies don't generally have one flash in the pan success after another, they have one, then they either manage it and grow it... or they fall into a pit and fade.

 

[Abazigal]

Wrong. I never announced that Apple is “doomed,” only that the gravy train will end. There’s a difference. Also, your tireless Tim Cook apologism can likewise be described as a broken clock, so let’s not throw stones in glass houses, shall we?

Isn’t that irresponsible? You have basically made a blanket prediction without any timeline to back it up. By your logic, Apple could go on to be extremely successful over the next twenty years and you could spend every waking second beating the same old tired horse and still claim to be right by virtue of not having been proven wrong. And you technically cannot be proven wrong because you can’t and won’t commit to a timeline. Just that the end will surely come some day and that’s supposed to somehow just negate all of Apple’s successes all this while?

 

[ipponrg]

However, if you want us to believe that you know why Apple will fail, then at least demonstrate that you understand how they grew to be so successful in the first place

Success can mean different things here. Many people prefer a more objective opinion than a biased one.

Can you explain your understanding of how they got so successful in the first place because your opinions contradict it?

 

[Abazigal]

Success can mean different things here. Many people prefer a more objective opinion than a biased one.

Can you explain your understanding of how they got so successful in the first place because your opinions contradict it?

I have already mentioned it a couple of times.

Apple is a design company, not a computer company. Apple became as successful as they are today because they put design first and design around the end user experience. As such, the reason why their products are so popular is precisely because Apple views technology as ingredients in a product, rather than chasing after raw capabilities afforded by technology.

And it is these unique user experiences which users value so much and more importantly, are willing to pay a premium for. As evidenced by Apple’s record earnings despite their minority market share in virtually every market they compete in.

As such, I am not worried when Apple products do not sport the absolute latest specs, or are perceived to be lagging behind in one area or another, because I am confident that the end user experience will likely still outweigh every other drawback combined.

For example, I would argue that one of the key reasons why the Apple Watch has been as popular as it is is due to the wide variety of Apple Watch bands available. While a source of mockery around here, one of the reasons why people are so eager to wear an Apple Watch is due to the customisation afforded by easily-swappable Watch bands. That’s why they are as frequently updated as they are. You can laugh at it. Mock it all you want. What you cannot do is deny the value it brings to the success of the Apple Watch.

And this is something a tech company who is obsessed with numerical specs and hardware will find hard to grasp because to them, the utility afforded by a band isn’t something you can quantify or distil into a benchmark figure the same way you compare 4gb ram with 8gb, or fewer cores vs more cores. But this doesn’t mean there isn’t any benefit.

And this is possible precisely because Apple has designers calling the shots, not the engineers. Because you need people who are able to see beyond hardware specs and focus on what matters the most ultimately - the end user experience. The engineers’ job would then be work backwards and see how they can best deliver that experience using the current technology at hand, but their influence on how the end experience ought of be like should be minimal at best.

The way I see it, Apple's largest risk isn't found in being a design company but rather, in becoming a tech company, because it means Apple may very well end up losing everything which made it unique in the first place.

 

[ipponrg]

Apple is a design company, not a computer company. Apple became as successful as they are today because they put design first and design around the end user experience. As such, the reason why their products are so popular is precisely because Apple views technology as ingredients in a product, rather than chasing after raw capabilities afforded by technology.

No, which is why I am convinced you don't even know how they became successful.

They are successful today because of the iPod and abandoning their PowerPC processors for x86. You don't need to read Above Avalon to be force fed this information. Just look at the graphs of the user base to see the largest deltas of growth percentages.

Had they stuck with PPC architectures, you wouldn't have the flourishing development community that it is today. The ecosystem was completely stagnant, but perhaps you weren't around and only got into the Apple ecosystem after Neil Cybart started writing. Had they not had the clickwheel on the iPod, we'd still be stuck with the Rio and/or Mini-discs.

The reasons you cite grew their success, but it wasn't what was core to their success.

 

[Abazigal]

No, which is why I am convinced you don't even know how they became successful.

They are successful today because of the iPod and abandoning their PowerPC processors for x86. You don't need to read Above Avalon to be force fed this information. Just look at the graphs of the user base to see the largest deltas of growth percentages.

Had they stuck with PPC architectures, you wouldn't have the flourishing development community that it is today. The ecosystem was completely stagnant, but perhaps you weren't around and only got into the Apple ecosystem after Neil Cybart started writing. Had they not had the clickwheel on the iPod, we'd still be stuck with the Rio and/or Mini-discs.

The reasons you cite grew their success, but it wasn't what was core to their success.

And what is the clickwheel, if not a product of design-led innovation? That so perfectly encapsulates the whole Apple experience. That one feature is the dealbreaker which is worth more than every other drawback of the iPod combined.

It’s not so much about the individual products themselves, but the mindset that went behind making them possible. What made products like the iPod so successfully wasn’t so much the raw technology behind them, but how the various components came together to create an experience greater than the individual parts. And you can’t have that with just an engineering mindset.

I got into the Apple ecosystem around 2011-2012. I would come to know about Aboveavalon around 2016-2017. I make no attempt to hide the fact that I am a huge fan of Neil Cybart’s work, but I was already a fan of Apple products long before then. His writings have helped me find the words I needed to to express my thoughts more cogently, but my opinions remain my own.

 

[macpcf]

You mentioned the two laptops that I would recommend, the Dell XPS 15 and the Aero 15. I would lean more towards the XPS 15 in your case, with a good service plan from Dell.

Here is the God's honest truth: All laptops from every manufacturer, to include Apple, has issues. There isn't anything made by man that won't eventually break on you. The difference is that Windows laptop owners are HONEST about flaws that they encounter with their machines. Apple owners, on average, seem to be very dishonest about flaws with their machines. Maybe it's because they spent a lot more money on these machines and are embarrassed when they find out Apple's machines break just like everyone else's. Maybe they succumb to the peer pressure to "blame everyone but Apple" that you see in threads like this one, or maybe they believe Apple's hype and choose to blame themselves when something goes wrong. Either way, Apple machines break just as often and have just as many problems as machines from other manufacturers. Apple also has a decent service plan. However, if you take your Apple machine into an Apple Store and they fixed an issue for you, or gave you a new one, it doesn't eliminate the fact that the machine HAD AN ISSUE. Apple owners also tend to write off issues that are fixed in the Apple Store under warranty as if they never happened.

Best thing to do is to get a computer with a good service plan from a trustworthy manufacturer -- in your case for what you need that would be Dell.

Be careful though, the XPS 15 doesn't have the same lightening fast SSD that you get with the MBP (or the 4TB option). However, you can buy that same SSD and have someone put it in for you for less than what you would pay for in the MBP. I believe it is the Samsung 970 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD. If you don't order the RAM from Dell, make sure you get the right type.

Herein lies the rub, you have so many options on peripherals like SSDs and RAM when it comes to Windows PC that it could be quite confusing at times. This is not the same as Apple, who usually only have ONE (very expensive) choice in what you can buy (and that choice is usually permanent). However, Dell and other manufacturers usually posts a compatibility list for peripherals on their website or you can find dozens of YouTube videos that will explain what you need. You will definitely appreciate having the ability to change out peripherals and having a wider selection when newer or faster peripherals comes out. Good luck!
[doublepost=1532309753][/doublepost]

I just want to clear the air on this. Turbo Boost is kind of like overclocking, but Turbo Boost is not overclocking. A CPU will only Turbo Boost to a higher clock speed when the conditions are right, and SHOULD throttle back to the base clock speed when it gets too hot, or the higher clock speed is no longer needed. I say SHOULD throttle back to the base clock speed because the Core i9 MBP does not do this -- it throttles way below base clock speed during normal operations, which is unacceptable.

Overclocking causes the CPU to run at a higher clock speed indefinitely. Unlike with Turbo Boost, an overclocked CPU will not throttle back to the normal base clock when it gets too hot -- it will throttle back to the overclock speed. This is dangerous if the CPU is not properly cooled when running at the overclock speed. This is why almost ALL overclocked machines have beefier cooling systems -- you shouldn't overclock without replacing the normal cooling system with a better one.

The scary part about all of this is the Core i9 CPU in the 2018 MBP is overclock-able, yet there is currently no way to upgrade the cooling system in the 2018 MBP!

Thanks for the detailed info. I am seriously considering a xps 15. Macs are really expensive.

 

[pier]

Limiting TDP would be reasonable for multi core chip and I really do not understand why Apple did not do it.

Because if the six core i7 and i9 are performing worse than they should at 100ºC, the throttling at 90ºC would be ridiculous.

I agree with you though, a computer should never reach 100ºC. Even 90ºC is dangerously high.

My PC desktop builds never reach above 70ºC when maxing the CPU. Heck, it has to be a really hot day to get above 60ºC. Usually the CPU idles around 35-40ºC, and rarely gets above 50ºC on normal usage.