thermal throttling More details about the throttling issues of the 15" core i9 MacBook Pro, this time with Final Cut Pro X

[D13H4RD]

3 minutes ago, Swatson said:

If you consume 100w of power you need to dissipate 100w of heat

I think I recall seeing a Core i9-powered Zenbook consume 90-120W of power total, although that's with the i9 and 1050 Ti at load. I think the i9 in that model also wasn't at peak performance but Notebookcheck had irregularities with that unit.

 

I think that's about what we'll see with the MBP, and I don't think the single shared heatpipe can cut it.

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-ZenBook-Pro-15-UX580GE-i9-8950HK-GTX-1050-Ti-4K-UHD-Laptop-Review.310036.0.html

[S w a t s o n]

9 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

I think I recall seeing a Core i9-powered Zenbook consume 90-120W of power, although that's with the i9 and 1050 Ti at load.

I think that's about what we'll see with the MBP, and I don't think the single shared heatpipe can cut it

For sure I believe it can meet and exceed 100w but it would need to be running at the all core turbo of 4GHz across all cores without throttling, might be possible in a desktop replacement but at that point you can overclock it anyways and you'll go way past TDP

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, Swatson said:

For sure I believe it can meet and exceed 100w but it would need to be running at the 4.6ghz across all cores without throttling, might be possible in a desktop replacement but at that point you can overclock it anyways and you'll go way past TDP

Yeah, 100W is possible in a desktop replacement like the G703.

 

I think the most this one will consume as of now is around 60-70W? (Remember that it is already thermal throttling)

[schwellmo92]

TDP is power draw at base clocks (so 2.9GHz for the i9). There are laptops that dissipate 150w+ from a GTX 1080, it can be done with the CPU as well, just not in a thin and light.

[schwellmo92]

The 8950HK can be configured for up to 200W as can be seen in this photo http://forum.notebookreview.com/attachments/xtu_-140mv_vcore_offset_throttlestop-png.158514/

[schwellmo92]

If you look at this video and pause at 11 seconds you can see an 8750H can draw up to 90w at stock and is configurable up to 110w.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFPoJMTP_vE

[exetras]

From this TDP discussion, It sounds like someone should really be testing these out.

 

Is Intel really basing their TDP off of base clock?

What does Intel consider normal load?

Is the thermal going beyond what is advertised?

According to Wiki TDP is the Wattage generated in heat under normal load. how high does it go beyond when under max load?

Should Manufacturers advertise maximum TDP?

Should Manufacturers advertise Power draw?

 

This discussion is generating a bunch of questions that need answers.

 

[Brooksie359]

4 hours ago, Trixanity said:

If others can make it not throttle then Apple is to blame but the new processors seem significantly harder to cool which would be Intel's fault. So both it is.

 

And moving to ARM doesn't really solve much. It reduces heat and power consumption but you lose performance. And good luck without QuickSync; it'll make FCP look so much less impressive and I'm sure it'll cause a shit storm in Apple land.

It's the top of the line mobile cpu. It wasn't designed for thin and lights.... it was designed for power hungry laptops with the cooling to back it up. It's like complaining that the 1080ti put out alot of heat compared to a 1070. It's pretty obvious it puts out alot of heat which is why it's not a u series chip. If you don't want a cpu that outputs alot of heat then you shouldn't go for the top tier mobile cpu that is high performance and not power efficiency. 

[XenosTech]

People on this thread have me confused... Don't the processors apple use on their logicboards in laptops usually soldered to the board which means they do direct die cooling ? If that's the case how is it intel's fault again ??? At that point intel just gave them the package to be soldered on, with the die exposed, so there wouldn't be any ISH nor intel toothpaste. Even so the poor thing can't even maintain base clock so again this is all apple's fault (If things are the way I think they are.)

[schwellmo92]

20 minutes ago, exetras said:

From this TDP discussion, It sounds like someone should really be testing these out.

 

Is Intel really basing their TDP off of base clock?

What does Intel consider normal load?

Is the thermal going beyond what is advertised?

According to Wiki TDP is the Wattage generated in heat under normal load. how high does it go beyond when under max load?

Should Manufacturers advertise maximum TDP?

Should Manufacturers advertise Power draw?

 

This discussion is generating a bunch of questions that need answers.

 

Yes Intel is basing TDP of base speed load, it says it on their bloody website right next to the TDP statistic for tb CPU...

[schwellmo92]

9 minutes ago, XenosTech said:

People on this thread have me confused... Don't the processors apple use on their logicboards in laptops usually soldered to the board which means they do direct die cooling ? If that's the case how is it intel's fault again ??? At that point intel just gave them the package to be soldered on, with the die exposed, so there wouldn't be any ISH nor intel toothpaste. Even so the poor thing can't even maintain base clock so again this is all apple's fault (If things are the way I think they are.)

Every laptop I’ve seen uses direct die cooling (minus that laptop with the ryzen 1700). The MBP uses direct die cooling, you can see it in tear down photos.

[S w a t s o n]

49 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

If you look at this video and pause at 11 seconds you can see an 8750H can draw up to 90w at stock and is configurable up to 110w.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFPoJMTP_vE

So 90w is the short turbo boost max limit, the power draw is 46W the video is the guy undervolting lmao. Aka that 150w peak you spoke of is set to 90W by default and is able to be configured to a max of 110W

[XenosTech]

21 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

Every laptop I’ve seen uses direct die cooling (minus that laptop with the ryzen 1700). The MBP uses direct die cooling, you can see it in tear down photos.

I know hence my confusion about this being intel's fault

[S w a t s o n]

54 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

The 8950HK can be configured for up to 200W as can be seen in this photo http://forum.notebookreview.com/attachments/xtu_-140mv_vcore_offset_throttlestop-png.158514/

Package power is only 106w and that's with a decent overclock over 300MHz on every core. The power slider often goes higher than reality when it comes to cpu and gpu, especially in constrained applications like laptops

[asus killer]

it in no way throttles the status symbol of the buyers so i can't see any issue here. What matters is intact, they will get all the ladys an all.

[laminutederire]

5 hours ago, captain_to_fire said:

That's why any attempt of shifting the blame towards Intel is nothing but blind fanaticism imo

If it's not going to be Intel to be blamed.. then what about AMD? They're to blame for not have made Apple choose their better performing thermally cpus in their MacBook Pro. Shame on them.

[S w a t s o n]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

If it's not going to be Intel to be blamed.. then what about AMD? They're to blame for not have made Apple choose their better performing thermally cpus in their MacBook Pro. Shame on them.

A switch to AMD would require more work than just slapping the chips in. AMD is x86-64 but you still need the OS to have the right instructions for the CPU, aka parts of the OS would be rewritten

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, Swatson said:

A switch to AMD would require more work than just slapping the chips in. AMD is x86-64 but you still need the OS to have the right instructions for the CPU, aka parts of the OS would be rewritten

I know it was a joke. Because Apple fans would blame literally anyone before Apple, which is what was said in the post I quoted

[captain_to_fire]

13 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

If it's not going to be Intel to be blamed.. then what about AMD? They're to blame for not have made Apple choose their better performing thermally cpus in their MacBook Pro. Shame on them.

I don’t think App,e has the patience to rewrite some of macOS code not just to be compatible but to perform well. Also, it is all Apple’s fault since they’re aware that they’re aware of what they’re getting into with a freaking core i9 but decided to put a shitty cooling solution. If Apple is going to make their desktop OS compatible with another CPU other than Intel it would be their rumored in-house ARM chips that will compete with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 1000. 

Edited July 19, 2018 by captain_to_fire

[C2HWarrior]

From what angle are they trying to pin this on Intel?!?!? They provide lower power chips for a reason. This is a fucking i9 ofc it's going to be power hungry it's about performance. How apple plans to implement one of their CPUs is none of their concern.

[D13H4RD]

I'm interested in the GPU though.

 

When it's fired up, there's 2 questions on my mind.

 

1) How much would the CPU's throttling be affected?

2) How much power would it consume in total and would it be too much for the 87W power brick? The aforementioned Zenbook with a similar processor and 65W GTX 1050 Ti had a max power consumption of around 90-120W of power although NBCheck didn't tell us much about the state of the i9 during the test due to anomalies. So I'm curious to see how much a throttled MBP with a 75W 560X consumes

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, Trixanity said:

The first paragraph is categorically false. It's designed for laptops. Primarily gaming/VR/content creation. It's in the damn marketing. All the pictures are of people on laptops too.

 

The TDP is rated the same but the TDP is useless for Intel chips. How Intel managed to come up with the idea that 4 cores at some 3 GHz runs the same as 6 cores with a maximum of 4.8 is beyond me but Apple should have caught that early on even if Intel sugar-coated it in their meetings.

 

Apple didn't really do much of anything quickly. Their refresh was late. Which this is: a refresh. The new Intel chips required a complete product redesign. That's why it's Intel's fault. They need to cater to their customers. They don't just blindly push out products in a vacuum and expect customers to adapt. Some of Intel's biggest customers are Apple and Dell: both have issues with throttling. Because they want chips that work with their existing designs. It's as much Intel's problem they can't deliver a compelling product as it is that partners don't redesign it when a bump in the road comes along which CFL is. They don't redesign every year. That's costly.

Somehow they've overshot each other.

 

I'm quite confident Intel pushed the i9 to Apple just much as Apple wanted to parade the i9 around in their laptop. Because everyone should know by now that the i9 runs rampant on power. And that's Intel's fault. 4.8 GHz in a laptop is stupid when it's past the efficiency curve. What Apple should have done was mess with the frequency curve and the fan speed curve to make it work if they didn't want another hardware redesign so early. Or just abandoned the idea of an i9 all together.

I find you reasoning quite ignorant. Intel made a cpu that is meant for laptops but it was never meant for thin and lights. It would be like people blaming nvidia for the 1080 not being able to be in small for factor laptops. It isn't meant for that use case and companies who try and force it to be end up with these results. I mean the thing boosts higher than a stock 8700k and you think it's meant to be in a laptop the size of a MacBook pro? It doesn't take an engineer to realize how ridiculous that is.

[Morgan MLGman]

To people talking about Intel TDP ratings - Apple isn't making laptops since yesterday and they aren't using Intel CPUs since yesterday too. They've been doing that for years.

They can't look at the TDP and say "hey, let's make a cooler for just that specific TDP number and slap it onto the CPU, that will suffice and we don't need any testing".
They obviously tested the CPU in many different ways and they could measure how much heat it puts out at different clock speeds, after all they had to create a motherboard for it (mainly the power-delivery section) so they HAD to know what this CPU is capable of. Designing an inferior cooling solution is solely on them and has nothing to do with skewed TDP ratings from Intel, as much as I dislike them for their business practices.

Seeing an issue like that in a laptop costing that much is concerning, to say the least.

[D13H4RD]

32 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Designing an inferior cooling solution is solely on them and has nothing to do with skewed TDP ratings from Intel, as much as I dislike them for their business practices.

It's why their decision to utilize the same cooling system baffles me.

[Trixanity]

31 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I find you reasoning quite ignorant. Intel made a cpu that is meant for laptops but it was never meant for thin and lights. It would be like people blaming nvidia for the 1080 not being able to be in small for factor laptops. It isn't meant for that use case and companies who try and force it to be end up with these results. I mean the thing boosts higher than a stock 8700k and you think it's meant to be in a laptop the size of a MacBook pro? It doesn't take an engineer to realize how ridiculous that is.

I think you're projecting that ignorance.

 

Intel works with its partners and have a vested interest in a high profile client succeeding. That they didn't work with Apple or Apple on its own accord didn't work the frequency and fan curve is a testimony to shoddy QA.

 

You like to mention Nvidia but they invented Max-Q SKUs for a reason. The boost frequency may be higher on the i9 but the performance isn't because it can't sustain it. That's why you tune the CPU to work if you insist on working with a power hungry SKU in such a product. The 4.8 GHz is for single core bursts anyway. It'll only do it for seconds at a time.

 

The i9, as it is right now, needs an insane amount of cooling that few laptops have.

 

But this isn't just about the i9. The 28W processor in the 13" throttles as well. Since Apple is the sole customer one would imagine Intel knows its audience yet we see the same problem. And the design hasn't changed either. So there is a common denominator but it's convenient to ignore and focus on the obvious things right in front of your face instead of taking a step back and looking at the big picture.

Apple isn't the only one experiencing issues with Intel's processors either.