Apple is not at fault, it's your fault for not holding the phone correctly on your fucking face!!!Ĩ20-2915 board comes out. $600 phone that you could not hold in your hand without dropping a call. End result: Computers falling apart everywhere.Ī1286 model with the 2850 board, which was failing because the sensors would keep the fans at 1000 RPM when FinalCut Pro was rendering and running a video for 20 minutes straight. Not only that, it was so well designed with such build quality, the fan exhausting the heat these MacTurd Pros built up, was positioned to exhaust into the adhesive directly. Except it was made out of 2 pieces stuck together with adhesive. Of course, it can't work if you don't have a functional graphics chip. How that worked? They put an Apple diagnostic disc into your computer to decide whether they may or may not help you, based on whether the test passes. Apple was forced to help by a class action lawsuit. When the graphics chips were dying on all the Apple computers. When the 15" MacBook Pro had a frame with hinges attached to it instead of them sensibly being attached to a backplate, so they constantly broke like paperclips. There is no doubt that Apple could have delivered a better thermal solution, a better keyboard, more ports, lower engineering costs, lower assembly cost, a more competitive supply chain, (and probably a lot of other better t hings) if they were not after the eternal conquest to build something that is so stupidly thin for a group of users who are asking for the opposite. The only other thing he benchmarks is eGPU workloads which is not relevant to the issue at hand.
He kind of gives this a pass since is comparable to their previous (equally shit) design, but this is due to thermal throttling. Lee ran the same test again with the 2018 MacBook Pro in the freezer, and in cooler temperatures, the i9 chip was able to offer outstanding performance, cutting that render time down to 27 minutes and beating out the 2017 MacBook Pro.Īustin Mann didn't do any real performance tests at all beyond some HEVC video conversion that on the latest hardware is done almost entirely on the GPU (and doesnt take that long)Ĭraig Hunter's review quite clearly shows once there is a CPU bound task working on >= 3-5 cores in his particular workload the expected per-core performance scaling demonstrated on comparable CPUs in the iMacs is not achieved. Premiere Pro is not well-optimized for macOS, but the difference between the two MacBook Pro models is notable. It took 39 minutes for the 2018 MacBook Pro to render a video that the older model was able to render in 35 minutes.
He goes on to share some Premiere Pro render times that suggest the new 2018 MacBook Pro with Core i9 chip underperforms compared to a 2017 model with a Core i7 chip. "This CPU is an unlocked, overclockable chip but all of that CPU potential is wasted inside this chassis - or more so the thermal solution that's inside here," says Lee. 9to5Mac reports: Dave Lee this afternoon shared a new video on the Core i9 MacBook Pro he purchased, and according to his testing, the new machine is unable to maintain even its base clock speed after just a short time doing processor intensive work like video editing. YouTube Dave Lee managed to get his hands on this top-of-the-line device early and run some tests, revealing that the laptop gets severely throttled due to thermal issues. Last week, Apple announced new MacBook Pros, including a 15-inch model that supports Intel's 6-core 2.9GHz i9 processor.
0 kommentar(er)
