base 2018 Macbook Pro 15" i7 2.2ghz 6 Core Throttling?

[Rasta4i]

We have a thread dedicated to the i9 throttling and also about i7's in general but based off the information it seems the base i7 for the 15 inch throttles the least. I would like to hear from people that have information about the 2.2ghz 6 core only as right now I'm trying to decide between 13 inch i5 and 15 inch base for video editing work.

Obviously the 15" would be better for video work but I have a desktop and if the 15 throttles heavily I'd prefer just picking up the 13" for light work on the go and then sell it when the redesign that provides better thermals and also cooler chips eventually come out then I will fully commit to the ££££ for the 15" if the current 2.2ghz has severe throttling issues...

This machine will be used for 90% video editing with 4K and frequently Multicam

Thanks in advance

 

[uecker87]

We have a thread dedicated to the i9 throttling and also about i7's in general but based off the information it seems the base i7 for the 15 inch throttles the least. I would like to hear from people that have information about the 2.2ghz 6 core only as right now I'm trying to decide between 13 inch i5 and 15 inch base for video editing work.

Obviously the 15" would be better for video work but I have a desktop and if the 15 throttles heavily I'd prefer just picking up the 13" for light work on the go and then sell it when the redesign that provides better thermals and also cooler chips eventually come out then I will fully commit to the ££££ for the 15" if the current 2.2ghz has severe throttling issues...

This machine will be used for 90% video editing with 4K and frequently Multicam

Thanks in advance

I have it. I have made several posts about it (feel free to check my post history). The frequencies spike and fall due to some throttling, but even during the "throttle" it still maintains at least it's 2.2 base clock 95+% of the time. After comparing my Cinebench scores with some on here with the 2.6 and the i9, mine seem to be just as good when run numerous times in a row.

I am definitely glad I didn't spend extra $ on one of the "better" processors in this MBP.

I also installed bootcamp on here and got even higher Cinebench scores on Windows (upper 900s).

 

[Mockletoy]

The 2.6Ghz i7 and especially the i9 seem pretty well wasted in this chassis. On 9To5Mac this morning there was an article where the guy used Xcode to disable 2 of the 6 cores in his CPU and his render went faster with only 4 because there was less throttling.

Even the 2.2Ghz i7 is somewhat wasted in the current chassis since it struggles just to perform at its rated base clock, let alone make any use of its (squandered) turbo potential.

That said, you can go to Apple's website and configure the 2.2Ghz model with the 560X GPU for only a $100 upcharge, and your performance with the CPU under extreme load is probably going to be about the same as the folks buying the 2.6Ghz i7 and the i9.

 

[btt8]

I have it. I have made several posts about it (feel free to check my post history). The frequencies spike and fall due to some throttling, but even during the "throttle" it still maintains at least it's 2.2 base clock 95+% of the time. After comparing my Cinebench scores with some on here with the 2.6 and the i9, mine seem to be just as good when run numerous times in a row.

I am definitely glad I didn't spend extra $ on one of the "better" processors in this MBP.

I also installed bootcamp on here and got even higher Cinebench scores on Windows (upper 900s).

So if one were to buy a either a 13' or 15', its best to get the base processor is what you're saying.

 

[Mockletoy]

So if one were to buy a either a 13' or 15', its best to get the base processor is what you're saying.

It's hard to answer that in a general sense. In short bursts, the higher-end CPUs are faster, but what use is that really? To the end user, that sort of "speed" is probably not perceptible. Sit me in front of a 2.2Ghz i7 or a 2.9Ghz i9 to surf the web or whatever and I don't imagine I'd be able to tell them apart even though one was much faster.

But under extreme, sustained load, such as video rendering, they all appear to throttle back to about the same level of performance. The i9 upgrade seems like money especially poorly spent, to my mind. Someone else might be able to come up with a reason why I'm wrong, and I'd love to hear it if that's the case.

I have it. I have made several posts about it (feel free to check my post history). The frequencies spike and fall due to some throttling, but even during the "throttle" it still maintains at least it's 2.2 base clock 95+% of the time. After comparing my Cinebench scores with some on here with the 2.6 and the i9, mine seem to be just as good when run numerous times in a row.

I am definitely glad I didn't spend extra $ on one of the "better" processors in this MBP.

I also installed bootcamp on here and got even higher Cinebench scores on Windows (upper 900s).

Running Windows you should be able to use something like Intel XTU or Throttlestop to undervolt the CPU and knock 5C or so off of average temps and a good 10C off the spikes. It's not complicated to do and can deliver a huge return.

 

[uecker87]

Running Windows you should be able to use something like Intel XTU or Throttlestop to undervolt the CPU and knock 5C or so off of average temps and a good 10C off the spikes. It's not complicated to do and can deliver a huge return.

Yeah - I actually have a Dell XPS 15 coming tomorrow (from Dell Outlet - so a 9560 7700HQ/16GB/512GB/4K for $1,149 and 16% cashback through ebates). Then going to decide which one to keep. I still want to keep the Mac, but I just don't know if I can justify over 2x the price for not much performance gain - basically just for OSX...

But yeah I know all about undervolting. I plan on doing that to the Dell XPS to see what type of results I get - maybe even repasting the Dell too. Then seeing which performs better for my use cases and deciding what to do. But now that you mention it, I might as well give it a go on the MBP too. If I remember and do this after work, I'll post what results I get.

 

[fokmik]

Yeah - I actually have a Dell XPS 15 coming tomorrow (from Dell Outlet - so a 9560 7700HQ/16GB/512GB/4K for $1,149 and 16% cashback through ebates). Then going to decide which one to keep. I still want to keep the Mac, but I just don't know if I can justify over 2x the price for not much performance gain - basically just for OSX...

But yeah I know all about undervolting. I plan on doing that to the Dell XPS to see what type of results I get - maybe even repasting the Dell too. Then seeing which performs better for my use cases and deciding what to do. But now that you mention it, I might as well give it a go on the MBP too. If I remember and do this after work, I'll post what results I get.

keep us posted with the differences

 

[TheTuesdaydude]

So you can get the base model that seems to at least hold the CPU base frequency under load, but does not really boost in this situation at all. Or you go with the i9 that apparently doesn't even hold the CPU base under load.
So does that make the i7 8850h the worst of both options?

 

[macpcf]

My 2015 macbook pro processor (base 2,2hz) holds around 3Hz under constant load. Even if the 2018 models base model holds at the base speed, i don't know whether it's a good deal because why you spend all this money on a machine just to get the base performance. I am interested in seeing more results, just to convince me that this processor is a good investment.
[doublepost=1532444284][/doublepost]Found a good detailed review on the i7 2.6 model
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2018-2-6-GHz-560X-Laptop-Review.317358.0.html

 

[fokmik]

even at the 2.4 ghz that mine is holding up...you still get perf boost in a lot of tasks thanks to 6 cores...
6 cores at 2.4 ghz > 4 cores at 3ghz. And that from cpu perspective
The ssd are a lost faster than your 2015 model
The gpu also
The display is better
The speakers
The ports are faster but usb/C only
SO you will feel the difference no matter what. Just try it for 1 week

 

[macpcf]

even at the 2.4 ghz that mine is holding up...you still get perf boost in a lot of tasks thanks to 6 cores...
6 cores at 2.4 ghz > 4 cores at 3ghz. And that from cpu perspective
The ssd are a lost faster than your 2015 model
The gpu also
The display is better
The speakers
The ports are faster but usb/C only
SO you will feel the difference no matter what. Just try it for 1 week

Thanks for the review. I am glad to hear that. Do you hear any coil whine? Because some users are complaining about it in the new macbook pros

 

[fokmik]

on mine, no...i have the 2.2ghz

 

[macpcf]

on mine, no...i have the 2.2ghz

No throttling? Did you run the cinebench test under maximum load? Can you post the results. My macbook pro 2015 runs at 3Ghz under maximum load. If the 2018 model can maintain that I am sold

 

[fokmik]

i have some throttling...i get a stable 2.4ghz, and under heavy load 2ghz -2.2

 

[Huddy]

I just got my 2.2ghz today and installed WoW to check performance with the 560X.

It's a hot mess, constant throttling spikes from 2.2 to 1.0 repeating every couple of seconds, which produces playable 40-45fps to 5-10fps in time with the throttling.

 

[sennomulo]

I just got my 2.2ghz today and installed WoW to check performance with the 560X.

It's a hot mess, constant throttling spikes from 2.2 to 1.0 repeating every couple of seconds, which produces playable 40-45fps to 5-10fps in time with the throttling.

Try installing the new macOS update that supposedly fixes the throttling issue. I'd be interested to know if gaming performance is significantly better now.

 

[macpcf]

Try installing the new macOS update that supposedly fixes the throttling issue. I'd be interested to know if gaming performance is significantly better now.

Did they address that issue at all? Are you sure about the new update? Is there an official announcement regarding the throttling issue?

 

[Feenician]

Did they address that issue at all? Are you sure about the new update? Is there an official announcement regarding the throttling issue?

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ix-available-now-in-new-macos-update.2129223/

 

[macpcf]

I just got my 2.2ghz today and installed WoW to check performance with the 560X.

It's a hot mess, constant throttling spikes from 2.2 to 1.0 repeating every couple of seconds, which produces playable 40-45fps to 5-10fps in time with the throttling.

Maybe this trick will work for you

If it can't even play a basic game that is a significant issue. I know macs are not meant for gaming but still the previous versions were able to play some basic games with decent framerates
[doublepost=1532464358][/doublepost]

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ix-available-now-in-new-macos-update.2129223/

Thanks for the link. Let's hope this will fix it. I will probably wait before considering purchasing one

 

[Cryates]

Ignore this post.

 

[Feenician]

Thanks for the link. Let's hope this will fix it. I will probably wait before considering purchasing one

I planned from the start on waiting on 2.2Ghz or 2.6Ghz 32Gb refurbs. Even if I was planning on buying new though, I'd wait for the dust to settle a little first. All the benchmarks and real world usage we've seen prior to this patch are not accurate reflections now.

 

[dof250]

I just got my 2.2ghz today and installed WoW to check performance with the 560X.

It's a hot mess, constant throttling spikes from 2.2 to 1.0 repeating every couple of seconds, which produces playable 40-45fps to 5-10fps in time with the throttling.

After the update of today WoW will run just fine

 

[macpcf]

Anbody tested the 2.2ghz model after the patch? Is there a significant improvement?

 

[stylinexpat]

I just got mine yesterday. Do not know about throttling but there are some heat issue as mine does run hot even when just connected to a LG Ultrawide monitor that just has some basic windows open on it in 3 columns. Will wait and test further these few days

 

[Jorg1312]

Anbody tested the 2.2ghz model after the patch? Is there a significant improvement?

+1 would be great to see some before and after with the 2.2 and 2.6