Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

mr_roboto

macrumors 6502a
Sep 30, 2020
856
1,866
Vapor chambers and heatpipes are different shapes of the same thing. They're both phase-change liquid/gas cooling systems where the "pump" has no moving parts and is powered by extracting a little energy from the temperature gradient across the device. A working fluid gets boiled in the hot area (whatever's connected to the chip being cooled), the resulting vapor spreads out and recondenses in cold areas (the coldest being whatever is connected to a heatsink), and capillary action and other effects pump condensed fluid from cold back to hot to continue the cycle.

Heat pipes are used to move heat from point A to point B. Vapor chambers are used to spread heat out in a plane.

For what Apple's doing, they don't want a vapor chamber. The reason to spread heat out in a plane is that either you have enough volume for a giant internal heatsink, or you're trying to use the bottom surface of the laptop as a heatsink. They don't have the former, and the latter is undesirable because 100W going out through the bottom skin would be a very painful and even dangerous thing in your lap. Apple wants to move most of the heat into radiators, which are used to transfer it to air that's being pumped out vents placed where users won't feel the hot exhaust.

I can see gamer laptops using vapor chambers, though. Using the bottom skin of the laptop as a giant heatsink is fine if you assume the machine will almost always be used on a desk, particularly while under high load. (This may be another reason why it's so common to severely restrict performance while on battery - you don't want to burn users' laps.)
 

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
Some more interesting stuff here:

That’s another downvote for the 14” M1 Max, but I’d still like to see a comparison with the same RAM. Most of the M1Pro tests are with 16 GB
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
I can see gamer laptops using vapor chambers, though.

It is my understanding that gaming laptops use vapor chambers to quickly move the heat away from the hot components (usually the GPU) — the heatsink itself is a vapor chamber. But none of this has any relevance to Apple, you don't need a vapor chamber to deal with 30-90W of power... it's like insisting to wear alpine gear every time you go for a walk, because you know, its OUTDOORS
 

vigilant

macrumors 6502a
Aug 7, 2007
715
288
Nashville, TN
I initially had my heart set on a MBP 14 with 32GB RAM and the M1 Max with 24-cores. I had decided that my normal usage consistenlty uses 25-30GB RAM so would need the 32GB. Considering the switch from M1 Pro to M1 Max is only $200 beyond this point, it sounded like a good deal.

However, recent videos from MaxTech (
), The Tech Chap (
), and another guy using his MBP14 for music (
), plus reviews from The Verge, Wall Street Journal and Mobile Tech Review, have shown that the MBP14 with M1 Max seems to consistently have higher temperature, high fan speeds (& noise) and poor battery life (maybe only 6-8 hours of "web + youtube + video conferencing" and maybe only 3-4 hours under heavy load.

It does look like Apple has taken the approach of making the 14" M1 Max almost equal to the 16" M1 Max in peformance (which is good if you need it) but at the cost of really high temperatures (MaxTech measured 106C processor cores), fan noise and a subsequent hit on the battery, maybe losing 2-3 hours to the 16" model.

I'm now wondering whether running the M1 Max in the 14" is turning the computer into a niche model for people who want the power, and the small form-factor, but don't need to do much work unplugged. It looks like that they sacrified the "general purpose small laptop" approach of the MBA and MBP13 and have gone for brute power, by compromising on qualities that distinguish Macs for their competitors (i.e. quiet with good battery life).

One of the main reasons for wanting to move from my current MBP16 would be to get better battery life (I often only get 5-6 hours and much less when editing video) and to have something that runs cooler and quieter. It doesn't look like the MBP 14 with M1 Max would really be that much of an improvement, apart from being smaller and faster. Perhaps I'm just being greedy!

Do you think apple went too far by cramming the M1 Max into a 14" body?

I have a 24 Core MBO 14 with 32 GB of RAM.

I’ll tell you that in the close to a week I’ve had it, I haven’t heard the fans go on once.

I haven’t felt uncomfortable touching it.

Why did I go Max? I occasionally can make a MBP 13 Pro with M1 and 16GB stall. It doesn’t happen often.

I wanted the headroom. Plus the M1 Max has faster memory speeds than the M1 Pro, and considering I’m thinking about getting the Pro XDR I figured the extra GPU cores would come in handy.

I can’t speak to the others specifically, but I’ll tell you that Max Tech does things to test limits that most people don’t do every day.

I’ve never heard the fans on my M1 MBP 13 that I’m selling to Apple, even when I stressed it.

The M1 Pro Max (24 core GPU) with 32GB of memory so far seems to have no thermal wall as far as I can tell. I haven’t “tested” it by playing a movie over and over again, or running high stress tests that leaves an NVIDIA laptop with 20% batter life after 5 runs (or whatever Max Tech does this time) but it’s been better than literally better than any Intel device in terms of thermal headroom and fan noise.

I sold my Intel MBP 16 in less than a year because there was a very sharp drop off in performance after like a minute or two. Simply starting a Microsoft Teams call would sound like the Intel MBP 16 was trying to take off for San Fran.

The MacBook Air M1 has more thermal headroom than the MBP 16. I know because while my BTO MBP 13 M1 was being built I used my wife’s base level MacBook Air M1. You can run it for I’d say 45 min to 1 hour of “heavy” Intel MBP 16 use with 20 people on a call with Microsoft Teams and there isn’t a perceivable drop in performance.

Sure, we can make arguments over “well thats a Proton app, that doesn’t count”. But I’m telling you that simply joining a meeting would slow everything down and the MacBook Air with no fan just smiled and kept working.

If you are thinking these new M1 variants are going to be loud like the Intel versions, I can tell you they aren’t.

But lets be real real here. Unless I’ve missed something, at least on the thorough review with Max Tech, which in my opinion was pretty extreme, unless you are doing something that takes a long extended amount of time the difference between the 14 and 16 inch model is negligible. The primary difference I saw can be accounted for by battery life considerations given the advertised rate, or minor thermal throttling over long periods of time.

The “stress tests” done by many of these sites if done over multiple hours would probably show a rough ~10% difference between the two. I’m happy to be wrong, but heat needs to go somewhere, and over a long timeline but ~10% difference when there’s two different sized chassis is in a margin of error.

If you bought the 14 MBP with an M1 Max (24 core) you did it for specific reasons. For me, I wanted something closer to a larger laptop with room to grow.

Get your order in, and test it out.

If you don’t like it, Apple has a great return policy last I checked.

I’ll be keeping mine. During my crazy days at work (more than meetings) I’ve haven’t really had very many slowdowns that drive me crazy.

The extra channels of memory, extra media block for encode/decode, 50% more GPUs for when you need it. If you don’t need it, this isn’t a personal dig by any means, but don’t get it.

My wife tried to talk me into getting the 32 GPU core and 64 GB model for $400 more. The UMA on the M1 very rarely saw me hitting memory walls. The M1 had issues, but nothing that having 3x more GPU cores and extra thunderbolt controllers, vs having 4x more GPU cores would really benefit me.

I hope you are happy with whatever it is you decide on.
 

Hakiroto

macrumors 6502a
Jul 8, 2011
641
221
I don't think it's a bad idea at all. These benchmarks and the other million YouTube videos comparing the 14" to the 16" are good for some things — and the creators have done an incredible job getting so much stuff out in such a short amount of time — but they can be terribly misleading. I've come across people in comments saying they're going to use those videos to justify their 16" over the 14" that their friends bought. It's ridiculous and, sadly, something you see all too often these days. Mine is better because this, yours is worse because that, etc.

Sure, the 14" won't dissipate as much heat at the same fan speed as the 16" but that's just physics and should come as no surprise. What ends up happening is that some catchy YouTube video title is all that's taken away when in reality, most of these videos are showing — for the very first time — equal performance between the two sizes for everyday tasks but with the 14" having higher fan speed and temperatures in some cases as well as reduced battery life. Remember, too, that the tests in these videos are the best people can come up with to hammer the computers as hard as possible and are almost certainly not comparable to a typical workflow. How many people do you know who export 8K video while also exporting photos and running Windows 11? This is a great benchmark but not indicative of typical use.

It's also funny to see how a few months ago, the M1 Air was enough for everything and now, it's not worth anything other than the fully loaded 16". Not even the 14" is enough apparently as in some cases it doesn't cool as well, has slightly worse speakers, etc. It's unfortunate to see so many reviewers summarise their findings by saying that if you can, you should definitely get the 16" because of extra thermal headroom when in reality, it'll likely make no difference to most people. There's little consideration for size, weight, or portability (the main job of a laptop). This just fuels the bigger is better argument and seems somewhat shortsighted.

Most people in the market for the new MacBook Pro aren't getting it for gaming — they're getting it for professional tasks and from the many videos I've seen, Apple have done a great job keeping performance the same between the computers.

A 14" isn't going to set on fire, wake up the neighbours, or lose any performance compared to the 16" for pretty much anything that 99% of people do so be sure to make the decision based on what's best for you and not what some reviewer said just before releasing another video saying the contrary.

It's okay to be anxious about which model to get or feel a little overwhelmed with the choice but the main takeaway should be that you're getting incredible performance from every single model and, for the most part, it's not worth worrying about performance.
 

petardosh

macrumors member
Oct 21, 2021
36
7
localhost
I’ll tell you that in the close to a week I’ve had it, I haven’t heard the fans go on once.
That is really good to hear. I have the 14 Max with 32GB on order and will be using it mainly as desktop replacement for office stuff and occasional dev / design work with an XDR display.

Battery life isn't an issue for me but fan noise is, and I've been going back and forth whether to cancel the order and get the Pro. My reason for choosing the Max is the small price difference to the Pro and future proofing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hakiroto

vigilant

macrumors 6502a
Aug 7, 2007
715
288
Nashville, TN
That is really good to hear. I have the 14 Max with 32GB on order and will be using it mainly as desktop replacement for office stuff and occasional dev / design work with an XDR display.

Battery life isn't an issue for me but fan noise is, and I've been going back and forth whether to cancel the order and get the Pro. My reason for choosing the Max is the small price difference to the Pro and future proofing.
Don't take that as 100% conclusive, the last thing I want to be is an Apple apologist.

I can tell you that on the M1 MacBook Pro, and so far on the M1 Max (24 Core) I haven't heard it. On the M1 MBP, with everything off if you put your head close to the laptop after an hours long Teams call, you can faintly hear it. Thats strained.

I think is worth noting is Steve Jobs notoriously hated fan noise. The impression I get from the way M1 was built is it was built with the machine disappearing to focus. Thats what I've noticed.

One last thing, if you think of it as a nicer 13 MBP you are doing yourself a slight disservice. There was always a big difference between the 13 MBP and 16 MBP. Large parts of it was performance, due to the discreet GPU. The other part of it is screen real estate. The 14 almost feels like a 16 MBP Mini in my opinion. Fantastic display, more screen space, and comparable power to the 16 MBP. I'm sure if you are rendering 3D images and building games the 16 MBP has a higher thermal ceiling, but this seems to be a great mix of everything.
 

bill-p

macrumors 68030
Jul 23, 2011
2,929
1,589
But I haven't jumped in yet! My informed decision is still being formed :)

There are still relatively few actual reports from "real world" users rather than YouTube reviews, so I will be lurking on forums to get a better picture before making a decision. In any case, I'm travelling and won't be able to buy a new machine until early next year. By that time I'm hoping any "gotchas" will be discovered and Monterey will have had a couple of upgrades to fix the inevitable bugs that emerge.

I am leaning more towards a 14" M1 Pro now and your (very useful) data also confirms that there is unlikely to be a huge difference between a 14" M1 Pro 10/16 with 32GB and a 24-core M1 Max. I see the M1 Max as giving diminishing returns that are probably only going to give me marginal improvements on my usual work and hobbies. Apart from saving $200, I would probably get a cooler machine with slightly better battery life.

I think it's been proven that less powerful chips tend to run cooler and more efficient overall, especially under full load. So really, if you're aiming for an efficient machine, there was never a need to consider the Max at all.

Personally, I wouldn't have any issue going with the Max now, especially as it comes with 32GB RAM by default. But I don't need more power than the Pro. I'm mainly just looking for more CPU performance rather than more GPU performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

Apple Knowledge Navigator

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2010
3,692
12,912
I wouldn't read too much into the temps.

It's already been confirmed that the app used to measure them wasn't updated for the Monterey/M1 Pro-Max, and was therefore around 10 Celsius out.
 

Thysanoptera

macrumors 6502a
Jun 12, 2018
910
873
Pittsburgh, PA
I think it's been proven that less powerful chips tend to run cooler and more efficient overall, especially under full load.
That's true if by more 'powerful' you take same chip but clocked higher. 14'' will be limited by TDP. At full load, at the same wattage, Pro and Max will consume exactly the same amount of power. But Max, having more cores and running at lower clocks will be more power efficient - will have higher performance/watt.
 

petardosh

macrumors member
Oct 21, 2021
36
7
localhost
I can tell you that on the M1 MacBook Pro, and so far on the M1 Max (24 Core) I haven't heard it.
FWIW I cancelled my Max order yesterday and went with the Pro 10/16 with 32GB RAM. The Apple buying guide mentions "M1 Max is designed for graphics-intensive workflows like multicam video editing or rendering complex 3D scenes. Its powerful media engine lets you play back up to 5 streams of 8K ProRes 422 video.".

My workflow is CPU- rather than GPU-bound (no gaming or video editing) and I think the Max is like buying an extra powerful graphics cards. So it would likely sit there boring itself while increasing idle heat / temp footprint due the much larger die. Comparing my existing iMac to the Pro / Max on Geekbench, the Pro will be more than enough for the next 5ish years.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
FWIW I cancelled my Max order yesterday and went with the Pro 10/16 with 32GB RAM. The Apple buying guide mentions "M1 Max is designed for graphics-intensive workflows like multicam video editing or rendering complex 3D scenes. Its powerful media engine lets you play back up to 5 streams of 8K ProRes 422 video.".

My workflow is CPU- rather than GPU-bound (no gaming or video editing) and I think the Max is like buying an extra powerful graphics cards. So it would likely sit there boring itself while increasing idle heat / temp footprint due the much larger die. Comparing my existing iMac to the Pro / Max on Geekbench, the Pro will be more than enough for the next 5ish years.
That sounds like the right move and exactly what I am considering too. I will use 32GB, and the $200 upgrade sounds tempting...but...like you, I can't really see my applications actually needing the power of the M1 Max, and I there is at least growing evidence that it has at least some negative impact on battery life and higher temperatures, even when not being used. Alexander Ziskind's YouTube series for developers is interesting because he doesn't do reviews of photo and video editing apps! His latest videos do show a small battery life penalty for the M1 Max vs the M1 Pro, but also noticeable performance improvements.

That said, other reviewers (Max Tech, The Tech Chap, Constant Geekery) show more significant battery differences. It's hard to predict what it would actually be like for my own use.
 

Rashy

Suspended
Jan 7, 2020
186
372
Since the CPU is equally strong in both variants and I don't need that crazy 10,4TFLOPs GPU power, I am going for the M1 Pro. A cooler, quieter machine, running longer and saving me some bucks? All the yes. Apple has confirmed that the Max chip chews more power even at idle. So unless you really require its power (or 64GB RAM) just go for the M1 Pro. The 16" is better dimensioned for the beefier chip, yet, if you really need an ultraportable device with maximum power it's nice to have the option. Even more considering how notoriously underpowered the older 13" Intel Macbooks had been.
 

petardosh

macrumors member
Oct 21, 2021
36
7
localhost
His latest videos do show a small battery life penalty for the M1 Max vs the M1 Pro, but also noticeable performance improvements.

even such way m1 max show itself better than m1 pro. Here is different rust build stuff.

These benchmarks are for M1 Pro 8 CPU vs M1 Max 10 CPU, with two more cores the Max is naturally faster. If you compare the same spec'd 14 Pro and Mac (same CPU, only 16 vs 24 GPU) the performance is the same. The only areas where the Max beats a same spec'd Pro is graphics benchmarks like Blender etc which is to be expected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

bill-p

macrumors 68030
Jul 23, 2011
2,929
1,589
That's true if by more 'powerful' you take same chip but clocked higher. 14'' will be limited by TDP. At full load, at the same wattage, Pro and Max will consume exactly the same amount of power. But Max, having more cores and running at lower clocks will be more power efficient - will have higher performance/watt.

This is not quite true. You are again forgetting that the Max has extra RAM bandwidth. That bandwidth is due to having more memory channels, which means it requires more active memory modules, and more active memory modules use more power.

So Pro and Max do not consume the same amount of power. Max will always consume more. Even at idle.

Also Max doesn't run at lower clocks than Pro. Both Max and Pro run at the same 3.2GHz. If Max is more efficient running at lower clocks, then Pro is also more efficient running at lower clocks. There is, again, no efficiency advantage.

You really do have to pay a price for the extra performance. There is no free lunch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

Thysanoptera

macrumors 6502a
Jun 12, 2018
910
873
Pittsburgh, PA
This is not quite true. You are again forgetting that the Max has extra RAM bandwidth. That bandwidth is due to having more memory channels, which means it requires more active memory modules, and more active memory modules use more power.

So Pro and Max do not consume the same amount of power. Max will always consume more. Even at idle.

Also Max doesn't run at lower clocks than Pro. Both Max and Pro run at the same 3.2GHz. If Max is more efficient running at lower clocks, then Pro is also more efficient running at lower clocks. There is, again, no efficiency advantage.

You really do have to pay a price for the extra performance. There is no free lunch.
Number of channels doesn't change ddr power consumption, you can't just turn ddr off, again - if the bandwidth was due to clock - yes, it would consume more. If channels - no. And since the difference is 2x it's channels most likely. Now the memory controller will be loaded more due to higher ACTUAL bandwidth (not just the one that's possible) but so far I haven't seen anybody reaching the 400 number Apple promised and maybe doing 10% more on Max than on Pro. From memory power consumption perspective they're the same.

They're also the same when it comes to CPU cores in general, I thought it was obvious I was talking about GPU since GPU cores are really the only difference between Max and Pro. Max consumes more power because of extra GPU cores, that are powered on even on idle. At load however, to be clear - in GPU bound task - at the same power level (which will most likely be defined by thermals), Max will run at lower clocks and will be more power efficient.
 

bill-p

macrumors 68030
Jul 23, 2011
2,929
1,589
Number of channels doesn't change ddr power consumption, you can't just turn ddr off, again - if the bandwidth was due to clock - yes, it would consume more. If channels - no. And since the difference is 2x it's channels most likely. Now the memory controller will be loaded more due to higher ACTUAL bandwidth (not just the one that's possible) but so far I haven't seen anybody reaching the 400 number Apple promised and maybe doing 10% more on Max than on Pro. From memory power consumption perspective they're the same.

They're also the same when it comes to CPU cores in general, I thought it was obvious I was talking about GPU since GPU cores are really the only difference between Max and Pro. Max consumes more power because of extra GPU cores, that are powered on even on idle. At load however, to be clear - in GPU bound task - at the same power level (which will most likely be defined by thermals), Max will run at lower clocks and will be more power efficient.

No, bandwidth is due to channels. And more channels do increase power consumption because you have more RAM chips in active use now.

Don't take my words for it. Look at what people are saying in reviews. Look at what Anandtech found. The M1 Max power consumption is through the roof when memory is utilized. It's up to 20W difference:

In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W. 503.bwaves stands out as having a larger difference between wall power and reported package power – although Apple’s powermetrics showcases a “DRAM” power figure, I think this is just the memory controllers, and that the actual DRAM is not accounted for in the package power figure – the extra wattage that we’re measuring here, because it’s a massive DRAM workload, would be the memory of the M1 Max package.


It's not the GPU. Again, there are evidence pointing to the M1 Max having this much extra power consumption due to the memory system that it has. Even if it's not using the full bandwidth, the fact is it still has to keep powering its memory system at all times. And seemingly, that number is not factored into SoC package power.

Also as you can see with Anandtech's analysis, the Max does NOT drop clocks under max CPU + GPU load, at least not in the 16" MacBook, which leads to almost 120W power draw from the wall. In the 14", the chip may thermal-throttle, but that's not because it's trying to be more efficient.
 

brydav

macrumors newbie
Apr 11, 2011
3
1
Arkansas, USA
Here is my experience. I couldn’t trade in my old 16 inch Intel based MacBook Pro fast enough. It was bulky, heavy, hot and loud. I wanted portability and power so my focus was always on the 14 inch.

When I am docked at my desk I use the Macbook as my primary display and connect two LG 4K monitors. I use multiple virtual desktops to separate my personal and work flows so there is a lot of stuff active and open at all times.

On launch day, I went with the base model 14 MacBook Pro with my only upgrade being the M1 Max 32GB with the 10-core CPU and 24-core GPU. I wanted mobility, RAM, and robust external display support so I felt this spec would be the best for me. My local storage requirements are low.

During the time I had to wait for the M1 Max to be built and shipped, a M1 Pro 16GB with the 10-core CPU and 16-core CPU became available at BestBuy so I picked it up thinking it might work for me as well. I’ve had the opportunity to use them side by side for a week. I’ve also read and watched many of the reviews that became available as well.

The GPU performance of the M1 Pro proved to be enough for me but not the 16GB of RAM. I consistently experienced memory pressure with 16GB. I'm keeping the M1 Max but if I had launch day to do over I would go with the the M1 Pro 16GB with the 10-core CPU and 16-core CPU and upgrade it to 32GB. That would have saved me $200 and add a bit of battery life when I am on the go since the M1 Pro is a less demanding chip.
 

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
Number of channels doesn't change ddr power consumption, you can't just turn ddr off, again - if the bandwidth was due to clock - yes, it would consume more. If channels - no. And since the difference is 2x it's channels most likely. Now the memory controller will be loaded more due to higher ACTUAL bandwidth (not just the one that's possible) but so far I haven't seen anybody reaching the 400 number Apple promised and maybe doing 10% more on Max than on Pro. From memory power consumption perspective they're the same.

They're also the same when it comes to CPU cores in general, I thought it was obvious I was talking about GPU since GPU cores are really the only difference between Max and Pro. Max consumes more power because of extra GPU cores, that are powered on even on idle. At load however, to be clear - in GPU bound task - at the same power level (which will most likely be defined by thermals), Max will run at lower clocks and will be more power efficient.
But the M1 Max has 4 RAM modules (4 x 8MB or 4 x 16MB) and M1 Pro only has 2 (2 x 8MB or 2 x 16MB).

The doubled memory bandwidth is possible because it has 4 RAM modules and 4 controllers. These must take additional power on the M1 Max compared to the Pro.

I would be interested to see if there is any measurable difference between a 32GB Max and 64GB Max, but I expect that this is only small.
 

Thysanoptera

macrumors 6502a
Jun 12, 2018
910
873
Pittsburgh, PA
Don't take my words for it. Look at what people are saying in reviews. Look at what Anandtech found. The M1 Max power consumption is through the roof when memory is utilized. It's up to 20W difference
AnandTech didn't compare Max to Pro unfortunately, they run all tests on Max only, so I wouldn't really count that as evidence of any difference between those two. Besides, the author himself says that he doesn't really know what is actually going on and what reading exposed by Apple to believe and what does it include. He makes assumptions how to account for difference between wall reading and sensors. And this thread is specifically about 14'' which will run into thermal wall and throttle.

But the M1 Max has 4 RAM modules (4 x 8MB or 4 x 16MB) and M1 Pro only has 2 (2 x 8MB or 2 x 16MB).

The doubled memory bandwidth is possible because it has 4 RAM modules and 4 controllers. These must take additional power on the M1 Max compared to the Pro.

I would be interested to see if there is any measurable difference between a 32GB Max and 64GB Max, but I expect that this is only small.
Rule of thumb always was power ~ memory size, regardless of packaging. So 4x8 should have similar power requirements as 2x16. And the 64GB should consume twice as 32GB.

Overall I don't really care that much, just got my maxed out 14'', with 64GB and 32 GPU cores. Plus 8TB ssd. Wife didn't kill me. I've set low power mode on battery and have been installing software for the last hour and lost 10% of battery. Chassis got slightly warm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
AnandTech didn't compare Max to Pro unfortunately, they run all tests on Max only, so I wouldn't really count that as evidence of any difference between those two. Besides, the author himself says that he doesn't really know what is actually going on and what reading exposed by Apple to believe and what does it include. He makes assumptions how to account for difference between wall reading and sensors. And this thread is specifically about 14'' which will run into thermal wall and throttle.


Rule of thumb always was power ~ memory size, regardless of packaging. So 4x8 should have similar power requirements as 2x16. And the 64GB should consume twice as 32GB.

Overall I don't really care that much, just got my maxed out 14'', with 64GB and 32 GPU cores. Plus 8TB ssd. Wife didn't kill me. I've set low power mode on battery and have been installing software for the last hour and lost 10% of battery. Chassis got slightly warm.
Sounds nice! Please let us know your experience with performance, temperatures/fan and battery life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thysanoptera

akrabatic

macrumors newbie
Apr 21, 2020
6
8
I have the 14" Max as I wanted 64GB RAM to give me some headroom. Absolute best sustained performance and absolute best battery life were not criteria for my purchase.

On top of all that, it's such a quiet computer! I'm very content with my purchase.
 

Saturnine

macrumors 65816
Oct 23, 2005
1,493
2,477
Manchester, UK
Nope, I'm still happy with my choice.

I don't care what temperature it runs at as long as it is not uncomfortably hot on the rare occasions I use it on my lap. I do care about fan noise but, having put mine under some pretty heavy loads, I can confirm that on the rare occasions the fans do run, it's pretty much inaudible.

I haven't stress tested the battery. I've just used the laptop as normal and found that I'm always able to do what I need to do with plenty of juice remaining before putting it back on charge.

I wanted a laptop that was portable and it cannot be argued that the 16" is less portable than the 14". Having previously owned the 2016 15" I know for a fact that the 16" is too large to use on some of the trains here in the UK. There isn't enough room on the seat-back fold-out tables to open the screen beyond 70-80 degrees - so that was important to me.

Getting the Max was important to me as I do drive multiple monitors and I can certainly take advantage of the added GPU cores. I can't speak for the results of testing in some of the YouTube videos but, with regards to the MaxTech videos, in my opinion their results are mostly fine but the conclusions they draw based on those results are laughable.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.