New MacBook Pro

I agree. For certain workflows - like .r3ds in Premiere - this laptop is not ideal. But for a sidekick to a bigger system it's great, which is what I'm using it for.

The benchmarks I'm seeing over at Mac Rumors and across Youtube are indeed true, but Cinebench and Resolve both work great when running off of wall power. Apple advertises the i9 at 2.9ghz with turbo to 4.8ghz which has absolutely been my experience so far using it in an actual production pipeline and not just running Geekbench or doing something idiotic like converting an .r3d directly to h.264 ( especially via Premiere ). Also couldn't care less about gaming performance.

It seems like a lot of these benchmarks don't follow the generally good rules of using intermediate codecs like DNx or ProRes. I've always converted to some flavor of ProRes when shooting Red, Sony f55 Raw, or with the Ursa Mini Pro. I just assumed that most Pros do the same since it totally removes the unnecessary and time consuming overhead of live raw rasterization while editing.

After seeing the i9 throttling video I downloaded the Intel Gadget and watched it as Resolve rendered a timeline. The i9 frequency hovered between 3.3 and 4.1ghz the whole time and leaned toward 4ghz while the Vega FE as being maxed out. This is obviously the exact opposite of the results in the video.

I was using an eGPU and wasn’t using battery so they weren’t contributing to the internal heat, allowing the cpu to run hotter for longer. The benchmark in the video was with .r3ds in Premiere which has never been a good combo on a Mac.

If you want to do rendering in the field on battery, probably go with a bigger PC or older MBP. If you want something smaller to dock at your desk with an eGPU then a MBP works great. TB3 is nice, but I still miss built in USBa and HDMI ports.

Interesting, but what about your CPU load? Was it closed to 100%?

I agree. For certain workflows - like .r3ds in Premiere - this laptop is not ideal. But for a sidekick to a bigger system it's great, which is what I'm using it for.

The benchmarks I'm seeing over at Mac Rumors and across Youtube are indeed true, but Cinebench and Resolve both work great when running off of wall power. Apple advertises the i9 at 2.9ghz with turbo to 4.8ghz which has absolutely been my experience so far using it in an actual production pipeline and not just running Geekbench or doing something idiotic like converting an .r3d directly to h.264 ( especially via Premiere ). Also couldn't care less about gaming performance.

It seems like a lot of these benchmarks don't follow the generally good rules of using intermediate codecs like DNx or ProRes. I've always converted to some flavor of ProRes when shooting Red, Sony f55 Raw, or with the Ursa Mini Pro. I just assumed that most Pros do the same since it totally removes the unnecessary and time consuming overhead of live raw rasterization while editing.

You can't use those excuses, sorry. Software is relevant in these tests. Is it Premiere, Resolve, Prime95, gaming benchmark, etc. it's totally irrelevant.
If these machine were amazingly designed (this is what I expect from Apple when paying this money!) then they could run at least at base clock for 5 hours at 100% CPU load. Using your machine in the way that it maxes CPU or/and GPU is exactly what you want! If Macs with i9 go below base clock then this is poor design with insufficient cooling- there is nothing more to it.

Try doing your test again with internal GPU. Most likely when CPU+GPU are stressed (this is exactly what Resolve does) cooling simply can't cope and both components are throttled. If they would drop to base clock then this is ok, but when dropping way below then this is not what you expect from Apple product.
Notebookcheck also complains about significant throttling:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-Mac ... 648.0.html
so this is not a story from 1 guy.

Just ran a quick test by rendering a timeline using only the internal GPU. It definitely throttles, hovering around 2.5ghz. All threads maxed out for both internal and external GPU tests. I guess it doesn't bother me since I'd never do any real rendering without the eGPU, which I assume is exactly why Apple partnered with Blackmagic for the officially supported model.

For a sidekick machine that can open and play a Resolve project without a problem, I'm pretty happy with it. But it's not my only machine. Would do the real heavy lifting of C4D / Resolve rendering on an actual workstation. But that's always been true. Yeah you can get a better laptop that acts as a portable workstation. Just not worth the trade offs for me. But I could easily see how it wouldn't be for someone else.

Grant, you’re right to point out those things that may have skewed the results and I’m not doubting your findings. I’m just getting tired of the hype from Apple that each iteration of their products is “the most powerful” ever. I also don’t pay too much attention to standard tests such as Geekbench but they do provide a yardstick over the years in comparing one generation to another. All testers are becoming better at using real production applications to validate performance. An example being Barefeats that includes Resolve performance tests. It’s pleasantly refreshing to see these YouTube professional reviewers relying on real programs although as you point out they may not be duplicating what a seasoned pro editor actually requires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just ran a quick test by rendering a timeline using only the internal GPU. It definitely throttles, hovering around 2.5ghz. All threads maxed out for both internal and external GPU tests. I guess it doesn't bother me since I'd never do any real rendering without the eGPU, which I assume is exactly why Apple partnered with Blackmagic for the officially supported model.

For a sidekick machine that can open and play a Resolve project without a problem, I'm pretty happy with it. But it's not my only machine. Would do the real heavy lifting of C4D / Resolve rendering on an actual workstation. But that's always been true. Yeah you can get a better laptop that acts as a portable workstation. Just not worth the trade offs for me. But I could easily see how it wouldn't be for someone else.

Well- point is that maybe you could save 1K$ and have same rendering/working results
Not saying it's not a fast machine as for laptop. It just "lies" quite a bit.

I'm a big fan of Barefeats. After their recent OpenCL vs Metal test in Resolve I was surprised to see OpenCL win out over Metal as I was getting the opposite results. Eventually narrowed it down to the Barefeats test focusing on Resolve's noise reduction in 14, which looks like it hasn't been optimized for Metal yet. My stuff was simple blend modes and standard color correction.

A friend got a chance to talk to a Resolve developer at the most recent NAB and he said they're actively updating all of Resolve's tools to Metal 2. I assume this means Resolve 15 will be a big step forward in that regard. I'm still running 14.3 so I'm excited to see the progress once v15 is officially released.

Totally agree with Andrew about the depth of the real complaint clearly being the inability to run at base clock speeds. The entire design goal of these multi-core processors that include hyper threading and ‘turbo boost’ is that a hex-core machine can provide twelve threads running roughly at the base clock speed and if you require fewer cores, the clock can safely increase with a maximum boost running a single core.

It’s not going over well for Apple to say they’re using the latest and greatest processor when they cripple it severely. We are used to some degradation, but there’s no denying this is beyond what their alleged market expects.

People will learn to workaround what they’ve purchased. Resolve also makes some of the workarounds easy like allowing the user to set their own frame rate for renders. Even better is the way Resolve appears to generate optimized media; if I select one or a few clips, my iMac starts out gangbusters but shortly afterwards does this pseudo shutdown until things cool off. That’s a pain as I have to babysit it. But when I select all clips, Resolve finds a happy medium and the whole film can be optimized without me there.

Grant, good to know about Resolve 15 and Metal 2. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. Judging the performance of a laptop based on how it performs with an eGpu is almost useless.
We need to keep that eGPU out of the loop to be able to properly judge if and if so exactly how big of an issue this is.
Specialy interesting is how the macbooks with the lesser cpu’s react to find the optimum config. It might be that these can better perform due to no or less throttling.
Way more proper tests are needed after these initial very worrying reports.

You know I’m such an elitist that I always want to feel that I have the biggest badass gear on the street (not as difficult as it sounds since I live on a short street) so I tend to max out whatever computer I have and I’m quick to dismiss the entry-level offerings as consistently and woefully inadequate enticements for people that just don’t have a clue. You know what I mean.

But I need to thank Apple for humbling me and freeing me from that obsessive and ultimately self-destructive syndrome before it’s too late and I find myself alone at the top of the pyramid with the slim and sexy computer that ultimately only looks good while hearing the clatter of keys and the brilliant flashes of graphics below from a well-armed army of content creators using those entry-level offerings that I had foolishly rebuffed.

I’ve got to let you know that I’m done with that attitude. I feel liberated and just had to share.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The force is strong in this one.........
First step to healing is admitting you have a problem. That is as true today as it was yesterday.
Just treat this forum as your regular equivalent of an AA meeting and you will be fine. We are here for you

First step in your proposed treatment program: Buy a raspberry pi

First step in your proposed treatment program: Buy a raspberry pi

I have heard this one has no throttling and overheating, so good start

I have heard this one has no throttling and overheating, so good start

You'd be surprised. You can overclock them and they can get pretty hot as well if you just kill them. You can buy nice sweet little baby cooling fins for them even. But i have yet to see it actually throttle or die on me. Even after a 36 hours straight software compilation run on overclock on the little box (was an old model A that i used to compile/build a custom ffmpeg/x264 encoder . Cross compiling on another computer never gave me the results i needed so i just ran it on the pi hahaha. Loads of fun)

And the sweetest is that it has hardware accelerated h264 decoding . One of the reasons for its succes as a media streamer outperforming lots of large bulky and expensive devices with ease.

Can imagine- my post was more of a joke

Thanks, Glenn. I feel we’ve just launched the first online meetup of AA (Apple Anonymous) and being able to share the vision that there is an alternative available (AA’) is simply inspirational.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cool i am up for it, and then we can get together at regular times and hold throttle parties. The lowest achieved down-throttled clock frequency wins a free compliment from Siri.

Has anyone ever tried the beta of Resolve 15 with an EGPU? Wondering about the Metal 2 performance.

Has anyone ever tried the beta of Resolve 15 with an EGPU? Wondering about the Metal 2 performance.

Logic would lead one to expect that Apple being the exclusive source for the BMD eGPU box indicates that Apple knew full well that its latest laptop was severely crippled when using the internal GPU... and that Resolve is being optimized around working with an eGPU.

If Apple retained any integrity, it would just include the eGPU with every i9 model purchase...

I'm about to try with last years 13" MBP.

Looking forward to your findings, Uli.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

More tests (this time for i7) and things don't look very good for Apple. All this CPU power seems to be "wasted" due to heat problems. Not the best Apple release.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-Mac ... 358.0.html

I’m still feeling skeptical in spite of your findings. For one thing, nearly everyone buying these new MacBook Pros will not be buying the eGPU. I’m concluding the eGPU and the 13” i5 may be a reasonably good value among generally bad values solely due to inadequate cooling. And I’m very Pro Apple and macOS!

If Apple was smart it would throw in a BMD eGPU with the i9 upgrades.

Wouldn't help much, I'm afraid. For serious work with Resolve both the CPU and the GPU are stressed and the eGPU will not help with the throttling. But the eGPU will stay very quiet, as opposed to the MBP

IMHO, the eGPU is great to do some limited work with a 13" that doesn't have any decent GPU or to speed up an iMac (non Pro). But a new MBP 15" with the eGPU is still a crippled system for a very high price. If you desperately need a laptop, go PC. I say that having favored Macs for the last 15 years!

Do you know why my iMac (see below) has only an i5? I live in a hot country and the i7 would be throttling down most of the time anyway.

https://hothardware.com/news/2018-macbook-pro-core-i9-thermal-issue

Hot hardware indeed

Uli, subject to the load on the CPU, the eGPU could be a benefit in Resolve if only the eGPU was being used. It seems the high end internal GPU will be wasted for the most demanding video work such as renders and effects and noise reduction. Generating Optimized Media may only use the CPU, so that really needs a cooler central processor to be effective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing is going to change at Apple sadly. They’ll dispute these findings recommending FCP X and ProRes that demonstrate better results. BMD has effectively recommended the eGPU for Resolve.

The only thing that will make a difference is sales and margins that ultimately drive share values.

But you know we are a very small fraction of a per cent of sales and that may not dent overall numbers. How many ‘normal’ Mac users (not gamers or YouTube professional reviewers) run the Intel utility that demonstrates throttling? And of course people running that have already made a purchase!

It takes a long time and a lot of miles for a modern oil tanker that’s underway to come about. That’s a piece of cake compared to changing the modus operandi of the world’s largest company by market value where clearly design form trumps engineering function. The “intersection of liberal arts and technology” has become an overpass of a paved highway for the arts crossing above a dirt road for technology. Not what Steve Jobs may have intended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, having only an iMac and my wife's 13" MBP around, I can only speculate on the throttling of the 15".
But it is not impossible that an eGPU with it's 8 GB VRAM being solely used by Resolve will take some GPU heat out of the laptop and allow the CPU to run faster.

But with our two machines the advantages are very clear: the iMac becomes close to twice as fast with many tasks in Resolve and the MBP becomes capable of doing a decent job in Resolve.

Thanks, Uli. That supports the dramatic performance improvements for the 13” MacBook Pro when the eGPU is added since the Intel internal graphics processors are no match for the eGPU.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And you can add a large monitor via HDMI on the eGPU. Resolve (or the firmware?) does some clever things there: when I'm running some demanding rendering in Resolve, the external display is throttled down nearly to a halt (I had a 4K video playing in a loop there by QT Player), reserving bandwidth for GPU traffic.
Once the rendering is done and I go back to editing, the external screen on the eGPU is running full speed again.

Now, I'd rather have a proper I/O device added to the eGPU, but that might come in a future model. OTOH, since we can switch to using the Mac Display Color Profiles for Viewers, it should be acceptable for pre-grading on site or for those only producing for the Internet.

https://hothardware.com/news/intel-power-gadget-utility-mac-macbook-pro-throttling

From the discussion on reddit:

“There is no conspiracy. It's buggy (most likely because it's been optimized for 7th gen CPUs). In extreme cases it even prevented the machine to boot. There should be a lot of people who recently installed it because of this ******** about throttling and "experts" linking to it. Intel got more reports about broken machines, so they took it down.”

That post sounds credible but when the individual describes the apparent throttling issue as BS, it casts some doubt on the veracity of the rest of that post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There may be a workaround to ameliorate the throttling of the CPU below the base rate. Based on recent testing of the iMac Pro, it appears Apple macOS tries to keep the fan speed low to enhance quiet operation of the machine. On the iMac Pro, the default setting for fan speed is 1000/2500 which means the normal fan speed is set to 1000 rpm presumably. In that situation the iMac Pro quickly runs the processor slower under load in an attempt to preserve the slow fan speed. If the user selects to operate the fan with a higher minimum setting, such as 2100/2500 then macOS can better maintain the processor frequency.

Can anyone verify this solution (that I know applies to the 10 core iMac Pro) on the 6 core MacBook Pro 15”?

I can only say that manual control of the fan in my iMac (non Pro) only goes from a tad over 2700 rpm (under System control) to a tad over 2800, which keeps the CPU marginally colder. When all cores run at full load (rendering in Resolve) they are still close to or even at 100 degrees (Celsius). Ouch!

Maybe a cooler under the MBP could help a bit.

That iMac Pro 10 core I referred to was running smoothly at 84 degrees Celsius with that higher fan setting. With the default fan setting, it quickly rose to about 100 degrees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can anyone verify this solution (that I know applies to the 10 core iMac Pro) on the 6 core MacBook Pro 15”?

Hi.

I am sorry but I don't think your suggesten will work. The problems with the 6 core Intel mobile CPU's have been known for Tiny Windows laptops for 1-2 months now. I have lately several time recommended members of this forum to buy medium to large sized laptops to get rid of the generated heat.

I beleave it is all about the next die shrink. Intel has recently delayed their next die shrink an another year. I don't know if it is correct, but some on the internet beleave that the Intel 6 core mobile CPU was planed for the 10nm node process?
Going from 14nm++ to 10 nm will give faster, cheaper and cooler CPU's using less power.

But the solution is coming at the end of this year or the beginning of next year. Both AMD and nVidea are using independent wafer factories and they have what they call a die shrink to 7 nm on schedule. This 7nm is very similar to what Intel call 10 nm.

I don't know AMD and nVidea's priorities. But I am sure if you wait one more year will both AMD and nVidea bring new lower power mobile graphics cards based on the 7nm node to the market.
That will give faster, cheaper and cooler GPU's

The job for both Apple and the manufacturers of the Windows laptops will then be the remove some cooling from the GPU and then add some more cooling to the CPU.
I am sure nearly all of them can manage that.

So my recommendation must be, just wait one more year.

Regards Carsten.

It may work for the iMacPro, since that needs to have the overhead for cooling 18 cores, so 10 cores might stay cooler if you turn up the fans. I doubt they'd build the box with different fans.

But in the crammed space of a laptop?

Carsten, that makes sense. For those who can wait, the next generation usually is worth waiting for.

There’s always the question of when Apple will put their own processors in their Macs. If you know the answer to that question, you’ll know a good time to sell Intel stocks and buy Apple. It always seemed a tortuous and hopeless path for AMD to supplant Intel but I think their purchase of ATI (Canadian, eh?) greatly enhanced their future prospects. Apple is one company that could be considered unrestrained by financial limitations if they decide to put their own processor in Macs. Intel may have saved Apple when IBM PowerPC lagged; but with Intel’s roadmap slipping more often than not in the last few years beginning perhaps with the huge delays for Broadwell, Apple may have already decided its time to do their own desktop/laptop processors based on what they have in their iDevices. Tepid sales of the high end MacBook Pro could seal Intel’s fate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There’s always the question of when Apple will put their own processors in their Macs.

I'm rather doubtful of that happening anytime soon, or with success... unless it's only for the lowest end.

Intel may have saved Apple when IBM PowerPC lagged; but with Intel’s roadmap slipping more often than not in the last few years beginning perhaps with the huge delays for Broadwell, Apple may have already decided its time to do their own desktop/laptop processors based on what they have in their iDevices. Tepid sales of the high end MacBook Pro could seal Intel’s fate.

The only loss for Intel will be prestige, and even there not that much. The largest driver of high end processor sales is still gaming, and Intel and AMD are vying for that market heavily. ARM's not even in the ballpark yet, though Fujitsu's SPARC replacement might be competitive.

Tepid sales of the high end MacBook Pro might, however, seal the fate of the upcoming MacPro.

Sometimes I wonder if the whole point in ignoring those lines is to justify no longer spending the money and effort on engineering a new "pro" machine since not enough pros buy machines to justify them.

Apple “talks the talk” but this last effort reinforces their lack of “walk the walk” in the last five years! The new Mac Pro has so much buildup to that late December 2013 release. Lots of myopic thinking put into that. Almost five years and not even a decent tease or what might or might not come in 2019. And if history repeats... forget about it.

So much effort into ‘appearances’ of all kinds without a lot of ‘substance.’ So little truly productive innovation. Apple has often said or implied that they don’t do things first, but they do them best. Well now that is even coming into question.

Still they do a lot of good things. Not too late to turn things around. So much money and so little interest in reinvesting that into the technology that creates tools to do work. Their priorities appear to be human rights and ecology... I mean their priorities after high share prices, margins, and profits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With current paste of technology if you spent 5 years designing something you may already forget about it and start again With Apple's money and resources they should be able to design new MacPro within at most year. A lot of bulsxxx coming from them about MacPro, but that's about it.

Man with their gazillion trillion billion dollars they could have pooped out a new macpro every week.
Its pure marketing talk to keep us trapped in their web of ever forward shifting promises.

Apple will have their own processors for much of their devices. However, their processors don't come close to the power of Intel (or AMD) chips. Apple has said they will not be replacing Intel for real Pro computers.

The problem is that Apple will ALWAYS put form over function. 5 years ago, I moved from a MacBook Pro Retina to an HP ZBook 15 G2. For the same money, I had a real desktop class processor. A real GPU. 32 GB of RAM. I had a PC that could be used. It was twice as heavy and twice as thick. (But I had space for an M.2 and 2x SSD 2.5" drives.)

The new MacBook Pros are a complete joke. The i7 is actually faster than the i9. The i9 is faster if you disable 2 of the cores and make it an i9. My day job is designing hardware. I can't imagine not running this thing at max power and looking at the thermal profile. To not be able to constantly turbo could be acceptable for the size. To have to drop down to the idle frequency to keep die temps under control is a complete failure. There is no other way to explain it. An utter failure.

Some new info that shines a new light on the source of the issue.

Here the tech link on reddit

And here Louis Rossmann's (king of apple 3rd party repairs) comments on this

So it is thermals on the VRMs. Wow.

So it is thermals on the VRMs. Wow.

Hi.

I don't think it is as simple as that. Yes the link say it is is thermals on the VRMs. And I believe them.

But the Power chain consist of several parts. The link say that the VRM is the weakest part. And I am surprised that Apple did not add some more VRM's to the motherboard for the 2018 MBP's. But what will then be the next weakest part?

The power chain begin with the power supply. I will here call it the power brick. Has Apple increased the Watt of it?
What about the battery. A more power full CPU will drain the battery quicker. Have Apple increased the size of it?

A CPU that uses more power will generate more excess heat. Have Apple improved the cooling design?
May be they accepted faster running fans. But if they still use the original fans will they the same fan waer faster running at higher speed, than when running at the previous normal speed.

I wonder if the decisions to use the new 6 core Intel mobile CPU's just was for marketing purpose.


As I see it is it a questen of bad management. They decided to use some of the new more power full Intel 6 core mobile CPU's with out changing the basic design. I am afraid that none of the people making the actually decisions have any technical background. But i am sure the have high degree's in management.

Regards Carsten.

I wonder if the decisions to use the new 6 core Intel mobile CPU's just was for marketing purpose.

Yep.

That's it exactly. Apple's not the only one company that did that, just the company with the highest profile.

I think the fact that the guy was able to increase performance with no cpu temp throttle by hacking the related power limit (actualy reducing its value to prevent vrm power throttling due to too much power draw from the cpu for too long), makes for a strong case that that is indeed the main source of the issue.
But lets see how this evolves.

But like before also this could have been found by proper quality control and testing.

Whatever it turns out to be, they must have known about it . Good indication for that is that according to same article the limits set are not intels default and hence specificaly set by apple.

“Following extensive performance testing under numerous workloads, we've identified that there is a missing digital key in the firmware that impacts the thermal management system and could drive clock speeds down under heavy thermal loads on the new MacBook Pro.

A bug fix is included in today's macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 Supplemental Update and is recommended. We apologize to any customer who has experienced less than optimal performance on their new systems.

Customers can expect the new 15-inch MacBook Pro to be up to 70% faster, and the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar to be up to 2X faster, as shown in the performance results on our website.”

source: https://sixcolors.com/post/2018/07/appl ... -slowdown/

Shame they didn't test it so intensively before the release. Somehow I don't trust today any company. Overall all of them are simply poor for what they charge/how much resources/money they have.
Apple seems to be on the very poor trend recent years. Probably one of the worse trends for most tech companies.