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

[D13H4RD]

You can't be serious dude

 

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, TechGod said:

As to your last point I can say the same thing about Windows for so long. It doesn't just need to run well in a networked environment but in all cases. However, it was dogshit for so long as a consumer.

I was always extremely happy with Windows 2000 Professional, XP too but 99% same thing and Windows 7 was great (tired and aged now). After Windows 7 I have basically all the same complaints as Mac OS after 10.6 heh. Modern OS's are competing for the most terrible crown in my view.

[D13H4RD]

I don't get it. 

 

Quote

Other channels have already shown that it does not drop below its base frequency 

What about the ones where it showed the CPU dropping below its 2.9GHz base and maintaining between 2.3 and 2.6GHz? 

 

UPDATE: Cleared it up. Turned out he wasn't aware it was a thing. 

[mr moose]

28 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I was always extremely happy with Windows 2000 Professional, XP too but 99% same thing and Windows 7 was great (tired and aged now). After Windows 7 I have basically all the same complaints as Mac OS after 10.6 heh. Modern OS's are competing for the most terrible crown in my view.

For me XP was the pinnacle for easily networking pc's, since then it seems to have gotten to the stage where setting up a home network is now hours of sifting through irrelevant and non-intuitive settings in order to get a simple shared folder working properly.

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

10.6 was the only version I liked, it worked and worked well and was actually useful on a network and doesn't self destruct the OS in way that breaks it for proper network support.

macOS was at its peak for me when this was a thing. 

 

 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

macOS was at its peak for me when this was a thing. 

Good thing that is 10.6 

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Good thing that is 10.6 

Yep. 

 

Also the last version that actually had that 

[captain_to_fire]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

Windows 2000 Professional

Windows 2000 reminds me a lot of the days of dial up internet

 

[captain_to_fire]

17 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

macOS was at its peak for me when this was a thing. 

Apple killed a lot of Snow Leopard's features like cover flow in iTunes and Finder and cover flow back in the day also acts as quick look. 

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I was always extremely happy with Windows 2000 Professional, XP too but 99% same thing and Windows 7 was great (tired and aged now). After Windows 7 I have basically all the same complaints as Mac OS after 10.6 heh. Modern OS's are competing for the most terrible crown in my view.

They will never stop to amaze us ! I tried gaming on the MacBook pro of my ex: turned out mouse acceleration was ridiculous and there was absolutely nothing you could do to change that since even terminal command to that effect didn't change anything. Had to download a program from steelseries which effectively compensated MacOS mouse acceleration to make it behave almost like mouse acceleration was off. Browsing for answers I learned that such idiocy is considered to be a feature...

How stupid do they think we are?

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

Which is interesting in the fact that the defenders of the i9 model forget about the i7 model. The above would be kind of fine if it were for the i7 model and the i9 didn't exist but the fact that the i9 does exist and also the i7 model itself checks the boxes of the above statements while the i9 fails to be appreciably better performance for the upgrade cost.

 

There seems to be collective amnesia when talking about the new MacBook Pro, what i7 model?

Tbh, that's not really the problem imo -- most cpu upgrades have historically been pretty shitty in terms of gains/dollar (or just in terms of gains in general).

 

The problem to me is that the cooling isn't sufficient for the i7, so the i7 variant also throttles heavily (but still performs better than the i9 in certain cases).

2 hours ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

And no one asked for the MacBook Pro to be thinner. 

 

There was actual distinction between Mac laptops back then. If you wanted portability, you got a MacBook Air. If you wanted a standard MacBook that wasn't crushingly expensive, you had the MacBook and if you wanted power, you had the MacBook Pro. 

 

Now everything seems to become an ultraportable. My 2009 MacBook Pro still runs strong and I've never thought it was too thick. 

 

In fairness, I would prefer the Pro to be thinner and lighter; the Air never would have suited my needs as it was always under spec'd compared to the Pro. 

20 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

They will never stop to amaze us ! I tried gaming on the MacBook pro of my ex: turned out mouse acceleration was ridiculous and there was absolutely nothing you could do to change that since even terminal command to that effect didn't change anything. Had to download a program from steelseries which effectively compensated MacOS mouse acceleration to make it behave almost like mouse acceleration was off. Browsing for answers I learned that such idiocy is considered to be a feature...

How stupid do they think we are?

Mouse acceleration absolutely is a feature; it's just bad for things like gaming where you need to know, with absolute certainty, where the cursor is going to end up; in most other scenarios, it's useful to be able to shrink and grow the distance you have to move the mouse relative to the distance that the cursor moves.

[D13H4RD]

9 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

In fairness, I would prefer the Pro to be thinner and lighter; the Air never would have suited my needs as it was always under spec'd compared to the Pro. 

I wouldn't be opposed to a MBP variant that was more compact but still had power. 

 

I just wish it wasn't all of them 

[laminutederire]

17 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Tbh, that's not really the problem imo -- most cpu upgrades have historically been pretty shitty in terms of gains/dollar (or just in terms of gains in general).

 

The problem to me is that the cooling isn't sufficient for the i7, so the i7 variant also throttles heavily (but still performs better than the i9 in certain cases).

In fairness, I would prefer the Pro to be thinner and lighter; the Air never would have suited my needs as it was always under spec'd compared to the Pro. 

Mouse acceleration absolutely is a feature; it's just bad for things like gaming where you need to know, with absolute certainty, where the cursor is going to end up; in most other scenarios, it's useful to be able to shrink and grow the distance you have to move the mouse relative to the distance that the cursor moves.

They said it's a feature that can't disable it. Mouse acceleration should be something that you can disable, especially for a pro laptop. How are you going to make designs properly with precision with mouse acceleration? It's so much of a pain in CAD for instance...

[yian88]

5 hours ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

I think you're over-generalizing it. 

 

Many laptops have crap cooling systems, but there are some that are actually quite good. 

 

My ASUS GL502VM for instance is not known for good cooling. In fact, it's rather mediocre. However, it was able to largely maintain a 3.4GHz turbo during a P95 small FFT run, only throttling due to hitting a power limit presumably. Some laptops do much better still, and an Acer Helios 500 (a pretty large laptop but not 21X level large) was able to keep the same i9 at 4.89GHz stable. Not all laptops have bad cooling as some are quite decent. 

The Core i7 8850H?

Yes the laptops with good cooling are heavy rare, expensive and mostly geared towards gaming and use a crapton of power aswell very important.

 

On the other hand imagine having an Android laptop with keyboard support and with 8-12 ARM cores big.LITTLE with at least 4 cores Cortex A73/A75 2.5ghz and a decent GPU,  with passive radiator and 2x power banks 12.000+ mAh intergrated (which are really cheap like 15$ pop on shelves, bought wholesale without case or connectors just battery its probably like 5$) you could probably game and work on that bad boi for 2 days without recharge.

The only problem is that it wont run heavy x86 software, x86 is shit really, my phone 140$ runes better than 80% of the laptops 400$+ on market, and i have a shitty xiaomi mi4c.

 

I was really hoping for unification between platform at least for laptops from all parties, MacOS with iOS,  android both mobile and chrome OS replace,  windows mobile/laptops etc.

Instead we are stuck with highly inefficient laptops mac or windows doesnt matter.

[leadeater]

9 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Tbh, that's not really the problem imo -- most cpu upgrades have historically been pretty shitty in terms of gains/dollar (or just in terms of gains in general).

 

The problem to me is that the cooling isn't sufficient for the i7, so the i7 variant also throttles heavily (but still performs better than the i9 in certain cases).

Yep, but at least there is a performance gain for the i9 at the basic level but you can't actually get it in the MacBook Pro due to the cooling. The performance gain might not be a lot but it's still possible with proper cooling. But yea the cooling is not good enough for the i7 either but that still leads in to my point about ignoring the i7 model when trying to defend the i9 model.

[captain_to_fire]

11 hours ago, leadeater said:

Yep, but at least there is a performance gain for the i9 at the basic level but you can't actually get it in the MacBook Pro due to the cooling. The performance gain might not be a lot but it's still possible with proper cooling. But yea the cooling is not good enough for the i7 either but that still leads in to my point about ignoring the i7 model when trying to defend the i9 model.

Still waiting for Apple’s official response but it’ll probably be something along these lines:

 

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

Still waiting for Apple’s official response but it’ll probably be something along these lines:

 

 

Or they'll say it's a feature to save the battery.

[Stefan Payne]

On 21.7.2018 at 11:38 AM, TechGod said:

Why? macOS is superior in even simple ways.

Yeah, that's why there is the joke:
What does Windows have that OSX does not:
Maximize Button

And in older versions even RIGHT CLICK.

 

ANyway, I can't agree with that statement and I've used OSX for a while not soo long ago. While it kinda worked, if you have two (or more) screens and know a couple of the Windows Shortcuts, you find it superior to OSX.

While it has its plus sides (don't know what exactly right now) it also has a ton of flaws.

 

The biggest one that comes to mind is the sorting of files and folders.

On Win + Lin its Folders first (or last), then files.

 

OSX does not care about files and folders and only sorts them alphabetically *ARGH*

And that shit is the default, even on Windows Shares...

[captain_to_fire]

14 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

OSX does not care about files and folders and only sorts them alphabetically

About that ? 

http://osxdaily.com/2017/04/20/sort-files-by-date-mac/

Edited July 22, 2018 by captain_to_fire

[Stefan Payne]

2 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

About that ? 

http://osxdaily.com/2017/04/20/sort-files-by-date-mac/

Sorry, I misspoke.

I meant that it doesn't distinguish between files and folders. And to change that is pretty hard.

[captain_to_fire]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Sorry, I misspoke.

I meant that it doesn't distinguish between files and folders. And to change that is pretty hard.

No you did not. You’re making things up. ?

[Stefan Payne]

2 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

No you did not. You’re making things up. ?

I wish I would
https://www.macobserver.com/tips/quick-tip/macos-sierra-finder-folders-on-top/

 

And that's the default - and total bullshit.

[mrchow19910319]

10 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

What happened to @Not_Jony_Ive?

shhhhh!!! too god damn lazy! 

[captain_to_fire]

8 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

But I get those annoying updates almost monthly.

How I wish there's an Android phone that receives security patches and new Android versions for more than 36 months and doesn't require rooting. Tbh I prefer Samsung's hardware design than Apple or Google but those two offer better software experience imo.

[8uhbbhu8]

It is completely Apples fault.

#1 they decided to use a core i9 in a laptop

#2 They didn't even bother to engineer a proper cooling solution for a chip THEY KNOW is a heat magnet

#3 If they had bothered to test it properly and actually cared about what they make at all they would have never thought it a good idea to do this in the first place. All they want is money and if that means screwing over the user even more then normal, they'll stoop to it.