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

[captain_to_fire]

8 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

John's

I think you mean Jonathan  

 

But it does reek out the same argument Steve Jobs made about holding the iPhone 4 wrong but this time, you’re using the wrong program. And what’s disappointing is that he and his fans are in an echo chamber that the video presents full facts. 

[D13H4RD]

4 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

I think you mean Jonathan  

 

But it does reek out the same argument Steve Jobs made about holding the iPhone 4 wrong but this time, you’re using the wrong program. And what’s disappointing is that he and his fans are in an echo chamber that the video presents full facts. 

There are results for sure and it does paint a solid picture of what to expect when doing workloads. 

 

However, people aren't complaining much about render and export times. Most of the complaints stem towards temperature and clockspeed. 

 

Like shit, I'd be happy if Apple released a software update with a much more aggressive fan ramp-up and more conservative clockspeed profile to at the very least make it run a little longer before throttling. 

[captain_to_fire]

17 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

There are results for sure and it does paint a solid picture of what to expect when doing workloads. 

 

However, people aren't complaining much about render and export times. Most of the complaints stem towards temperature and clockspeed. 

 

Like shit, I'd be happy if Apple released a software update with a much more aggressive fan ramp-up and more conservative clockspeed profile to at the very least make it run a little longer before throttling. 

Do you think it's possible that Jonathan rigged his results because Jeff Benjamin's (9to5 Mac) results are different (OP)? I haven't watched Linus' take on the entire debacle.

[D13H4RD]

Erm.. 

[D13H4RD]

25 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

I haven't watched Linus' take on the entire debacle.

[yian88]

Laptops are crap, macs are crap, end of story.

 

I had an i7(full 4 core ivy) Hp laptop and it was shit, it would burn up even for 15-20% cpu usage, laptop cooling is garbage, or rather said we need ARM cortex CPU's and a new OS specially designed for laptops using ARM cpu's, only those can be kept under control with small cooling, x86 has nothing to do with mobile anything period.

 

 

[Arika]

16 hours ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

There are a couple with issues that have the same i9 8950HK

 

• Dell XPS15
• Alienware 15 R4
• Eurocom Q8

and all of them are too thin to house such a chip

[leadeater]

51 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Erm.. 

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?

Edited July 21, 2018 by leadeater

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, Arika S said:

and all of them are too thin to house such a chip

Of those 3 how many cannot maintain base clocks? How many have basically the same performance as the next CPU spec down from it?

 

I don't actually know but if other laptops are going to be brought in as examples of the same issues as the MacBook Pro they should be throttling in a similar way, not just throttling but not maintaining base clocks or have the usable performance to justify the cost increase for the CPU upgrade.

[captain_to_fire]

11 minutes 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 that 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?

Something defenders of the i9 MBP (like Jonathan Morrison) are living in an echo chamber while moving the goalposts like blaming Adobe

Edited July 21, 2018 by captain_to_fire

[D13H4RD]

14 minutes ago, yian88 said:

Laptops are crap, macs are crap, end of story.

 

I had an i7(full 4 core ivy) Hp laptop and it was shit, it would burn up even for 15-20% cpu usage, laptop cooling is garbage, or rather said we need ARM cortex CPU's and a new OS specially designed for laptops using ARM cpu's, only those can be kept under control with small cooling, x86 has nothing to do with mobile anything period.

 

 

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. 

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

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

The Core i7 8850H?

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

The Core i7 8850H?

Dunno what you're talking about, the i9 MacBook Pro is awesome though .

[D13H4RD]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Of those 3 how many cannot maintain base clocks? How many have basically the same performance as the next CPU spec down from it?

• XPS suffers from VRM issues. Not directly related to the i9 but the cooling solution doesn't seem to have been upgraded, so the hotter CPU may have made the problem worse 
• Alienware 15 managed to stay at base and sometimes turbo, but couldn't perform better than a 8750H, sometimes worse. 
• Eurocom fluctuated wildly between 1.8GHz and 4.4GHz during The Witcher 3.

[Arika]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Of those 3 how many cannot maintain base clocks? How many have basically the same performance as the next CPU spec down from it?

well even with that said, the Aorus X9 DT is able to utilize the full boost clocks of the i9.

 

So to the people that think it's intels fault. bam, Aorus proved you wrong

[D13H4RD]

8 minutes ago, Arika S said:

well even with that said, the Aorus X9 DT is able to utilize the full boost clocks of the i9.

 

So to the people that think it's intels fault. bam, Aorus proved you wrong

Acer Predator Helios 500

 

Maintained a 4.89GHz turbo in 3DMark 11

 

Yeah, it's kind of a big boi, but it's not bone-crushingly so. 

 

The fact that the X9 DT is thin AND can maintain turbo speeds of up to the 4.3GHz rated at stock settings when all cores are active makes it really impressive. 

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Arika S said:

well even with that said, the Aorus X9 DT is able to utilize the full boost clocks of the i9.

 

So to the people that think it's intels fault. bam, Aorus proved you wrong

MacBook Pro was better when it was thicker anyway, felt nicer to hold and carry. I don't actually like laptops that are too thin, plus my brain wants to kill itself when you get issues like poor battery life and all I can think of "Another 2mm and this wouldn't be a bloody problem, murder all the trendy designers, murder them all".

[D13H4RD]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

MacBook Pro was better when it was thicker anyway, felt nicer to hold and carry. 

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. 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Above image would look a lot nicer if it were running Windows 

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Above image would look a lot nicer if it were running Windows 

It used to run Windows 7, actually, and spent a majority of its time on it due to my workload at the time.

 

But since I moved over to a Windows gaming laptop as my main, I had the MacBook back at macOS. 

[captain_to_fire]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Above image would look a lot nicer if it were running Windows 

[TechGod]

13 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Above image would look a lot nicer if it were running Windows 

Why? macOS is superior in even simple ways.

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, TechGod said:

Why? macOS is superior in even simple ways.

[TechGod]

1 minute ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Ok maybe lol 

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, TechGod said:

Why? macOS is superior in even simple ways.

Only if you actually like or want to use Mac OS, there's nothing I want, like or need from that OS and it's brought me nothing but years of pain supporting it. 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.

 

Once Apple killed off Managed Preferences and moved to Profiles it's been nothing but years upon years of trash and reduced feature capability, none of the areas a standard Mac user cares about mind you but standalone usage is not the only way Mac needs to work.

Edited July 21, 2018 by leadeater

[TechGod]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Only if you actually like or want to use Mac OS, there's nothing I want, like or need from that OS and it's brought me nothing but years of pain supporting it. 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.

 

Once Apple killed off Managed Preferences and move to Profiles it's be nothing but years upon years of trash and reduce feature capability, none of the areas a standard Mac user cares about mind you but standalone usage is not the only way Mac needs to work.

You're right. A normal user won't give two flying shits. 

 

I vastly prefer the UI, how the virtual desktops were here in macOS way before Windows 10 did it, how I have tabs in my Finder or really any app which is super useful, how well it works with my Apple Watch and iPhone, how a lot of the software is better i.e. comparing the Spark email client to Windows alternatives and the UIs for most Windows clients are just plain ugly. I could keep going. 

 

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.