New MacBook Pro i9 Slower than the old MacBook Pro i7

SCSI-Terminator said:
I smell a lawsuit coming, since it can't realistically operate anywhere near its advertised specs.
Click to expand...

Oh it can, but you'll need to cough up another $550 for the iFreezer cold plate option. ;)

cold_plate_cp30.jpg
 
I’m pretty sure all thin and lights throttle, so long as it’s above it’s base clock you can’t really hold anything against them.

But to go below rated speed is a non starter.

I just bought an open box Dell Inspiron 15 7000 Special Edition for 750 + tax.

4K, MX130, i7 8550U, 16GB DDR4 (single channel) and M.2 250GB SATA drive (I bought a 970 EVO).

AIDA64 showed 99c across all cores after 3 seconds at 3.7Ghz. It dropped to 2 GHz which is 100 MHz over base in 10 minutes.

I opened it up and used MX4 and now it goes to 99c after 5 secs but stays at 2.4Ghz after 10 mins at 70c.

I don’t think any thin and light could sustain the max boost clocks across all cores with the crap heatsinks they have to use.

I thought about liquid metal but honestly I don’t think I’ll ever need to have sustained 3.9 so o don’t really care but the MacBook Pro should at the least stay above base.

* Yes I believe I got an awesome deal on the laptop given its specs.
 
djoye said:
Form over function.
Click to expand...

^^ this has been apple for the last several years. They are no longer a computer company. They are a devices company that happens to also make a matching computer.
 
Elios said:
the laws of thermodynamics dont change for anyone not even apple you what a fast CPU and more cores your going to have make a bigger cooling solution for it you cant keep making it smaller
Click to expand...

Well yeah, they took advantage of Kaby Lakes "not really 45w" quad core and shoved it into a space as tiny as it could go. Then they put an actual 45w i9 in the same package, an suddenly can't understand why it's falling short.
 
next-Jin said:
AIDA64 showed 99c across all cores after 3 seconds at 3.7Ghz
Click to expand...

99C in 3-5 seconds? Wow, that's some shitty fucking cooling system on that machine, good lord. I have an older Core i7-2820qm laptop and it idles at 50C but if I hit it with wPrime32 for 1 million places it takes 20+ seconds to get to 96C. I would think modern machines were far more capable and ran cooler, guess I was wrong.
 
Isn't this just another iteration of bad internal TIM on the CPU? Intel is known for this. Apple should have planned accordingly for Intel's poor internal TIM application.
 
Tiberian said:
Wow, that's some shitty fucking cooling system on that machine, good lord.
Click to expand...
Nope.
Take a look at the inspiron 7000 15, it has all the cooling it can have for that size and weight. Even Dell has to abide by the laws of thermodynamics.
 
Jim Kim said:
Nope. Take a look at the inspiron 7000 15, it has all the cooling it can have for that size and weight. Even Dell has to abide by the laws of thermodynamics.
Click to expand...

My point is I've never heard of a processor heating up practically to Tjmax in 3 seconds and having the actual heatsink/heatpipe assembly attached to it. Typically you'd only see that kind of spike if there was absolutely no heatsink or heatpipe attached to the CPU assembly. If it's heating up that fast then it's a shitty cooling system, in my opinion.

There's no way the HSF/HP is preventing it from going above 99C that fast so, it should be keeping the temps below that for a sustained period of time as it increases to something close to it, at least. 3 seconds, geez, that's horrible performance from the cooling system, almost non-existent.
 
This is the very reason why Apple ditched powerPC for Intel, and this is why Intel will be replaced for their in house A13X or what ever they are on at that point.
 
Lakados said:
This is the very reason why Apple ditched powerPC for Intel
Click to expand...

Apple switched to Intel because Motorola told them they (meaning Motorola) was getting out of the PowerPC CPU production game in favor of doing the mobile thing as their focus, and when IBM took over the manufacturing process they weren't willing to do business with Apple for obvious reasons. In that instance, IBM did something it never had done before: it let the personal side of Apple always giving IBM the finger interfere with actual business.

Apple had no choice but to switch to Intel but that wasn't a problem because they had been developing an x86-based version of their desktop OS for 7 years prior to the first Intel Developer Kit being produced.

As for Apple creating their own desktop/laptop x86/x64 processors, we'll see what happens. So far I'm not convinced they're going to do that, it would require a pretty significant alteration to macOS itself but who knows, they love giving the world the finger and doing whatever they want anyway, it might just happen.
 
Tiberian said:
99C in 3-5 seconds? Wow, that's some shitty fucking cooling system on that machine, good lord. I have an older Core i7-2820qm laptop and it idles at 50C but if I hit it with wPrime32 for 1 million places it takes 20+ seconds to get to 96C. I would think modern machines were far more capable and ran cooler, guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...

No, you were correct. Modern well designed machines will perform as well or better with as good or better thermal management. This is an Apple product, however.
 
SCSI-Terminator said:
I smell a lawsuit coming, since it can't realistically operate anywhere near its advertised specs.
Click to expand...

I doubt it, their old models throttle too.

Axiomatic said:
Isn't this just another iteration of bad internal TIM on the CPU? Intel is known for this. Apple should have planned accordingly for Intel's poor internal TIM application.
Click to expand...

No, pretty much all modern laptops CPUs are "delidded" from factory. The heatsinks mount right to the die.
 
I haven't followed closely, but apparently there are plenty of PC OEMs struggling with this on the same CPU.
 
I think the XPS line has the same issue. They even throttled with the 7th gen i7. That is a lot of cores and heat for a machine that isn't several inches thick.... And as much as I hate the thin and lite movement nobody wants that again. My back still hurts from the 12lb Thinkpad W510 I had. But yes there should be a middle ground.
 
brentsg said:
I haven't followed closely, but apparently there are plenty of PC OEMs struggling with this on the same CPU.
Click to expand...

Yeah, adding an extra half an inch, some fins attached to the heatsink and a little blower is such a complex process...

What they are struggling with is deciding if they want to sacrifice aesthetics and the "OMG SO THINZZ" marketing for a properly functioning product. Apple obviously didn't struggle with this problem for too long...

Or they could just downclock it or use a smaller CPU that won't throttle after 3 seconds of 100% load. But then the marketing guys would cry.

This is the kind of B.S. that happens when the Sales/Marketing people are allowed to tell the Engineering wing what to do instead of the Engineering team building the best possible product and the Sales/Marketing team having to come up with how to present it.
 
Last edited:
Tiberian said:
Apple switched to Intel because Motorola told them they (meaning Motorola) was getting out of the PowerPC CPU production game in favor of doing the mobile thing as their focus, and when IBM took over the manufacturing process they weren't willing to do business with Apple for obvious reasons. In that instance, IBM did something it never had done before: it let the personal side of Apple always giving IBM the finger interfere with actual business.

Apple had no choice but to switch to Intel but that wasn't a problem because they had been developing an x86-based version of their desktop OS for 7 years prior to the first Intel Developer Kit being produced.

As for Apple creating their own desktop/laptop x86/x64 processors, we'll see what happens. So far I'm not convinced they're going to do that, it would require a pretty significant alteration to macOS itself but who knows, they love giving the world the finger and doing whatever they want anyway, it might just happen.
Click to expand...

There were a lot of reasons a big one being they couldn't get the performance per watt they needed for their mobile line with the PowerPC, IBM wanted them to move to the cell chips so they could up their own economy to scale, they didn't want to loose their business entirely. As for the new chips they will very likely be based on the current AX chips Apple is already using for the iPad Pro's the A12X is a solid 30% better in every way than the current and already impressive A11X, and by the time they launch it for the desktop they will have the A13 or maybe even the A14 out the door, and they could probably scale those from 7w to 45w with relative ease. Adobe and a number of other developers have already stated that they plan to have full versions of their software available for the iPad Pro line for next year. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple already has a version if OSX done up for their AX chips and they are just polishing it. Or they may finally ditch OSX and just launch something new to go along with the new architecture. Apple has enough money at this point they can afford to play a long game and put significant resources into their projects.
 
Tiberian said:
My point is I've never heard of a processor heating up practically to Tjmax in 3 seconds and having the actual heatsink/heatpipe assembly attached to it. Typically you'd only see that kind of spike if there was absolutely no heatsink or heatpipe attached to the CPU assembly. If it's heating up that fast then it's a shitty cooling system, in my opinion.

There's no way the HSF/HP is preventing it from going above 99C that fast so, it should be keeping the temps below that for a sustained period of time as it increases to something close to it, at least. 3 seconds, geez, that's horrible performance from the cooling system, almost non-existent.
Click to expand...

I personally think it’s the BIOS fan settings, once it hits 99c it’s full blast and drops to 70cish with the frequency collapsing down until it can remain stable at 70c.

If I turn off AIDA64 then re-engage with the fan at 100% it’ll stay at 3.7 longer but eventually still drops to 2.4-2.6 GHz.

Mind you it’s still boosting above it’s rated 1.9 but it’s definitely not a sustained 3.7 GHz like we get in desktops.

You have to remember these thin and lights with dGPUs and quad core CPUs (even the U versions) have a good amount of heat even at 15w. You can YouTube a few videos of the Inspiron 13/15 7000 series being taken apart and see a ridiculously small HSF setup.

I believe Dell (among others) could put another fan in there with one more fin area towards the back (the Inspiron 15 has the vents already) without to much increase in cost but I’m not an engineer.
 
Grimlaking said:
I want to see someone like Dell come out with a aluminum shell laptop as thick as it needs to be to support a good 6 or 8 core processor with dedicated graphics and a display that rocks the world.

Oh wait.. that's called an Alienware laptop. (other than the astetics of the aluminum shell.) A solid business laptop as well would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

The new 17" Precision Laptops also meet that criteria (7730)

I didn't look at the 15" ones.
 
Most laptop HSFs I've seen (Dells mostly) are 2 to 4 square inches over the chip and two heatpipes to a fan thats maybe 1.5 inches in diameter and 1/3 inch thick.
Always wondered how such a dinky thing does any real cooling.
 
Grimlaking said:
I want to see someone like Dell come out with a aluminum shell laptop as thick as it needs to be to support a good 6 or 8 core processor with dedicated graphics and a display that rocks the world.

Oh wait.. that's called an Alienware laptop. (other than the astetics of the aluminum shell.) A solid business laptop as well would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

Honest question here, what kind of industry requires massive amounts of computational power and on-the-go mobility besides specific scientific and military applications?
 
Kind of funny, on apple websites, they (apple fanbois) are going to the "go to" defense, which is to attack the person and not the argument.
 
DNMock said:
Honest question here, what kind of industry requires massive amounts of computational power and on-the-go mobility besides specific scientific and military applications?
Click to expand...

For MacBook Pro owners? #1 reason?

4K or higher video rendering which is why every time you see them talking about performance on a MacBook Pro they show rendering times with either Final Cut or Adobe Premiere and hardly ever any other benchmark. Those are basically the two benchmarks that matter on the macOS platform which is exactly what the video in the OP does too because it really is the only performance metric that matters for most professionals on that platform.
 
It's surprising Apple has maintained such a presence without Steve Jobs for ~7 years now. Clearly the quality of their products and consumer relations is sinking quickly once again (*cough* spec of dust breaking keyboards *cough*)

They are however heading right back down the tubes. Just like in the 80s when they desperately clung to the Apple ][ until it was obsolete and forgotten.
 
DNMock said:
Yeah, adding an extra half an inch, some fins attached to the heatsink and a little blower is such a complex process...

What they are struggling with is deciding if they want to sacrifice aesthetics and the "OMG SO THINZZ" marketing for a properly functioning product. Apple obviously didn't struggle with this problem for too long...

Or they could just downclock it or use a smaller CPU that won't throttle after 3 seconds of 100% load. But then the marketing guys would cry.

This is the kind of B.S. that happens when the Sales/Marketing people are allowed to tell the Engineering wing what to do instead of the Engineering team building the best possible product and the Sales/Marketing team having to come up with how to present it.
Click to expand...

My point was that it's an issue larger in scope than just Apple.
 
auntjemima said:
Did they expect it to throttle less? It's a hotter chip.

Apple isn't the only one to blame here, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Whose fault is it that they put a cpu in there with more tdp than their cooling can handle if not theirs?
 
Tiberian said:
For MacBook Pro owners? #1 reason?

4K or higher video rendering which is why every time you see them talking about performance on a MacBook Pro they show rendering times with either Final Cut or Adobe Premiere and hardly ever any other benchmark. Those are basically the two benchmarks that matter on the macOS platform which is exactly what the video in the OP does too because it really is the only performance metric that matters for most professionals on that platform.
Click to expand...

Ok, but why would you want to do high resolution rendering on a laptop though? Not trying to argue or anything here, I honestly don't see what benefit the laptop mobility would give to someone who does high resolution rendering for a living would be. Maybe low resolution rendering on the fly would be good, but big 4k+ renders are brutal. Having a dedicated desktop rig for that kinda stuff would seem like the logical course there.
 
M76 said:
Whose fault is it that they put a cpu in there with more tdp than their cooling can handle if not theirs?
Click to expand...

Oh, don't worry, I won't live this one down. Really gotta stop replying to posts so earlier in the morning.
 
DNMock said:
Yeah, adding an extra half an inch, some fins attached to the heatsink and a little blower is such a complex process...

What they are struggling with is deciding if they want to sacrifice aesthetics and the "OMG SO THINZZ" marketing for a properly functioning product. Apple obviously didn't struggle with this problem for too long...

Or they could just downclock it or use a smaller CPU that won't throttle after 3 seconds of 100% load. But then the marketing guys would cry.

This is the kind of B.S. that happens when the Sales/Marketing people are allowed to tell the Engineering wing what to do instead of the Engineering team building the best possible product and the Sales/Marketing team having to come up with how to present it.
Click to expand...
I understand this is an Apple thread, but let's try and keep this in perspective:

The i7 completed the task in 35 minutes, the unfrozen laptop took an extra 4 minutes. the freezer cooled one did it in 27.
 
I mean it sucks to be one of the 10 or 12 people who bought an i9 laptop, but I mean, really, an i9 laptop? What is the expression? Something about a fool, his money and his hair?

Yeah, sure, apple did apple things, but someone had to buy an i9 laptop that's 15mm thick and expect that they're getting value out of the i9.
 
Concillian said:
I mean it sucks to be one of the 10 or 12 people who bought an i9 laptop, but I mean, really, an i9 laptop? What is the expression? Something about a fool, his money and his hair?

Yeah, sure, apple did apple things, but someone had to buy an i9 laptop that's 15mm thick and expect that they're getting value out of the i9.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much were I was on it.. regardless of who made the laptop. It sounds like the chip generally isn't working out well in notebooks.. shocker. Hopefully someday Intel will actually move forward with their node shrink, for everyone's sake.

I'm not familiar with the workload.. Is it using AVX instructions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top