Can't Decide Between 14" and 16"

[Fomalhaut]

This pretty much confirmed my suspicions. Avoid the 14” M1 Max

We're still missing the M1 Max 24-core comparisons to get the full picture. I suspect that it will be closer to the 14" 32-core than the 33% increase from 24 to 32 would suggest. It may be the sweet spot.

I would like to see a 14" Pro 16-core to Max 24-core comparison with everything else equal (e.g. 32GB RAM/ 1TB SSD).

I think the 24-core models are somewhat rarer than the 32-core variants at the moment, with longer delivery times, which makes sense if they are binned chips.

 

[Jl006p]

Nah, these are very minor differences. For plenty a 14" with better graphics still will make sense even if it is like 10% slower than a 16". Totally to be expected. M1 chips are not magic compared to intel processors - they just run a bit cooler on average.

I’m just going to leave this here

 

[Fomalhaut]

I’m just going to leave this here

...and this is the problem. Reviewers seem to have quite different experiences, which makes it very confusing for the poor suckers (us) trying to make an informed decision.

My current take is that:

1) Of the options available, the 14" with M1 Max is going to offer the worst battery life, and highest temperatures / fan noise when pushed hard.

2) The 14" M1 Max will be quite a lot faster in some tasks (that make use of more GPUs & hardware codecs), but not in proportion to the increase (i.e. some tasks are 30-70% faster than the M1 Pro, not 100% faster if the increase was linear 16->32 cores, 1->2 prores codecs).

2(b)In many other tasks, there will be little to no difference between Pro and Max, but still some battery life penalty in running the larger SoC.

3) Low-Power mode may mitigate the poorer battery life to still allow up to 12 hours of moderate use

4) The M1 Pro will probably do everything the M1 Max can, but a bit slower. I haven't seen any use cases where the M1 Pro simply didn't work, where the M1 Max did

I was initially thinking that if I am going to choose 32GB RAM in any case, that it would be "a good deal" to upgrade to the 24-core M1 Max to have the extra power if I ever needed it.

I'm now thinking that buying the M1 Max "just in case" doesn't come without penalty (apart from the extra $200 cost, which was a minor consideration). I would be trading the potential to use the extra power - which I might never use - against the apparent certainly of thermal limitations and possible battery / heat penalties.

I will await further 14" 16-core vs 24-core vs 32-core comparisons to see if there is a sweet spot.

 

[badsimian]

Finally went to see both in person at the Apple store. Sticking with my 14” order. There’s quite a bit more screen real estate over a MBA but still fairly portable. The 16” screen size is nice but it’s too big a footprint. Even placing it down somewhere is harder as it takes up so much room. Almost impossible to use on a train as well. I had the old 16” for a bit before selling and getting an M1 MBA and 16” still isn’t big enough not to be cramped IMO so you are still shuffling windows about etc and are still better off with an external monitor. At which point you might as well have the portability of the 14”.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Finally went to see both in person at the Apple store. Sticking with my 14” order. There’s quite a bit more screen real estate over a MBA but still fairly portable. The 16” screen size is nice but it’s too big a footprint. Even placing it down somewhere is harder as it takes up so much room. Almost impossible to use on a train as well. I had the old 16” for a bit before selling and getting an M1 MBA and 16” still isn’t big enough not to be cramped IMO so you are still shuffling windows about etc and are still better off with an external monitor. At which point you might as well have the portability of the 14”.

If you're going to use the MBP connected to an external monitor most of the time, then the decision of 14" vs 16" mostly comes down to the degree of portability you want, traded off against better thermals and battery life on the 16" when you're using it unplugged.

I can see that the 16" could be a better choice if you mostly use the machine without an external screen, but it's still not going to give you the benefits of a much larger external screen.

I think I'll have to see both machines in person before making a decision. I've generally used 15-16" laptops in the past (have 2 on my desk at the moment) and like the bigger screen, but dislike the size and weight when carried in a shoulder bag for hours (a backpack is better) or when used in a small space (public transport, economy class airline seats etc.).

 

[Grolubao]

I'm currently on a 15" 2016 model and just ordered the 16" M1. Granted it's an inch larger and 0.5lb(8oz) heavier than the current, but I don't know why it is considered too heavy to handle. It's slightly heavier - yes - but not impossible to carry. Prior to COVID, I travelled with this laptop every week and had no issues on flights or anywhere else. For what it offers and considering I use this as my primary machine for tech work, I'll take a 16".

I hear you, on paper it seems it's just slightly heavier, but go and try one, it really felt like a behemoth compared to my 15"

 

[Realityck]

So you think the 14" M1 Max MacBook Pro gets the same performance as the 16" M1 Max model? We put them both to the test, including battery life, wattage and thermal throttling!

Some more insight into how the 14" vs 16" M1 Max laptops compare.

 

[Jl006p]

...and this is the problem. Reviewers seem to have quite different experiences, which makes it very confusing for the poor suckers (us) trying to make an informed decision.

My current take is that:

1) Of the options available, the 14" with M1 Max is going to offer the worst battery life, and highest temperatures / fan noise when pushed hard.

2) The 14" M1 Max will be quite a lot faster in some tasks (that make use of more GPUs & hardware codecs), but not in proportion to the increase (i.e. some tasks are 30-70% faster than the M1 Pro, not 100% faster if the increase was linear 16->32 cores, 1->2 prores codecs).

2(b)In many other tasks, there will be little to no difference between Pro and Max, but still some battery life penalty in running the larger SoC.

3) Low-Power mode may mitigate the poorer battery life to still allow up to 12 hours of moderate use

4) The M1 Pro will probably do everything the M1 Max can, but a bit slower. I haven't seen any use cases where the M1 Pro simply didn't work, where the M1 Max did

I was initially thinking that if I am going to choose 32GB RAM in any case, that it would be "a good deal" to upgrade to the 24-core M1 Max to have the extra power if I ever needed it.

I'm now thinking that buying the M1 Max "just in case" doesn't come without penalty (apart from the extra $200 cost, which was a minor consideration). I would be trading the potential to use the extra power - which I might never use - against the apparent certainly of thermal limitations and possible battery / heat penalties.

I will await further 14" 16-core vs 24-core vs 32-core comparisons to see if there is a sweet spot.

Have you seen this video?

It’s not even worth upgrading to 32gb of ram (apart from a few exceptions).

We’re so used to snubbing the base models but in all honesty they can easily handle everything we throw at them. I’m probably going to go with the 14” M1 pro with 2/4tb of SSD.

Just imagine how a M1 Max would perform on a redesigned 27” iMac… Or if they brought back the trash can design. That chip was meant for a desktop imo

 

[Fomalhaut]

Have you seen this video?

It’s not even worth upgrading to 32gb of ram (apart from a few exceptions).

We’re so used to snubbing the base models but in all honesty they can easily handle everything we throw at them. I’m probably going to go with the 14” M1 pro with 2/4tb of SSD.

Just imagine how a M1 Max would perform on a redesigned 27” iMac… Or if they brought back the trash can design. That chip was meant for a desktop imo

This is my typical usage on my current 32GB MBP16 - tending on the low side because I don't have any heavy-weight apps open (like FCP, Resolve, Photos). Yes, memory pressure is green (with 32GB), but I doubt it would be with only 16GB.

I'm pretty consistently using 25-30GB of memory (yes, I know I have nearly 5GB cached files above). I think I know that I can use 32GB. I have an M1 Mini with 16GB, and am constantly having to "house-keep", to keep the swap usage below 10GB...so yeah, 32GB will make my life easier.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[ice29]

So I bought a leather Piquadro big-backpack (link) since I had the smaller version with M1 Air and I loved it (the 16" just barely does not fit into the smaller one, well it fits but you can't close the zipper ). Today I took it to the office (30 min commute which includes a bit of walk and then city-train) but my god was it uncomfortable I could feel the 16" as a big brick with every step and every movement of my body.. I could not imagine carrying this combo (backpack+laptop) while riding a bike, with a bit bent back it feels even worse... So with the 16" the backpack is extremely important... (the Deuter Stockholm backpack I have as well has much better cushioning and straps). Now I need to sell this expensive leather backpack and find one that is more comfy with that size (so it fits my bike-bag)

 

[Appltsla]

Actually, I might go and try a 16” in store and see how’s the weight and size. It’s actually slightly smaller and slight heavier than my 15” 2013 mbp which is not too bad. I am now considering a M1 max with 64 gb (wife don’t really care about price of the machine, but I can’t request to buy a new machine every 2 years or something, so might as well max it out. Looking from another perspective, maxed out machine is only around twice the price of base model), so not sure if a 14” might be limiting it in terms of thermals.

 

[Beau10]

I am now considering a M1 max with 64 gb (wife don’t really care about price of the machine, but I can’t request to buy a new machine every 2 years or something, so might as well max it out.

It's a better economic decision to go with something that is closer to base, take advantage of Apple's wonderful resale, and get another in 2-3 years than it is to max it out like that. Even just relinquishing the machine to Apple you should get about 50%, take that and get equivalent... rinse/repeat 2x you'll come out so much further ahead, get to enjoy the latest and greatest, etc, than to spend the cost of 2 machines when you simply don't need it.

It's already been shown adding more RAM has very little performance benefit unless you absolutely know you need it:

If you're fine with a 9 year old machine, you're probably fine w/ a base offering for the next 9 years, for real.

 

[Appltsla]

It's a better economic decision to go with something that is closer to base, take advantage of Apple's wonderful resale, and get another in 2-3 years than it is to max it out like that. Even just relinquishing the machine to Apple you should get about 50%, take that and get equivalent... rinse/repeat 2x you'll come out so much further ahead, get to enjoy the latest and greatest, etc, than to spend the cost of 2 machines when you simply don't need it.

It's already been shown adding more RAM has very little performance benefit unless you absolutely know you need it:

If you're fine with a 9 year old machine, you're probably fine w/ a base offering for the next 9 years, for real.

My day job actually benefits quite a bit from 64gb, if there's a 128gb option pretty sure it's going to get grabbed up right away too. Ram does affect performance by quite a lot for software compilation.

For my personal use, yeah it probably won't matter much if a 2 minute compile time gets reduced to 1.5 minutes or something, it's definitely a nice to have. On the other hand, I'm not too bothered by 2000 bucks that much either, changing laptop is quite a pain so there's some value in not having to do that every 2 years as well. I'm not actually using my personal laptop much nowadays mainly because it's so slow. Been trying to get into a habit of doing some software development after work to build a side business, maybe I could even claim it as a business expensive if I make some profits.

 

[tekksan]

I hear you, on paper it seems it's just slightly heavier, but go and try one, it really felt like a behemoth compared to my 15"

This was my experience as well coming from a 15". Also the 16" seems like it would take up a lot of desk space. I went from a 15" MBP + 27" external monitor to a 14" MBP + 32" external monitor. To me that's the best of both worlds, highly portable laptop you can undock and take with you and comparable performance/ports to a 16" while docked to an external monitor.

 

[Beau10]

My day job actually benefits quite a bit from 64gb, if there's a 128gb option pretty sure it's going to get grabbed up right away too. Ram does affect performance by quite a lot for software compilation.

For my personal use, yeah it probably won't matter much if a 2 minute compile time gets reduced to 1.5 minutes or something, it's definitely a nice to have. On the other hand, I'm not too bothered by 2000 bucks that much either, changing laptop is quite a pain so there's some value in not having to do that every 2 years as well. I'm not actually using my personal laptop much nowadays mainly because it's so slow. Been trying to get into a habit of doing some software development after work to build a side business, maybe I could even claim it as a business expensive if I make some profits.

I'm a dev as well (an architect at a medical device company)... WTF are you doing that could even make a tiny difference above 64 gb ?!

Watch the linked video, it's likely to make hardly any difference at all to compile times - more like 2-3 vs. 30 seconds for a 2 minute compile. The incredibly fast bus coupled w/ SSD speeds means we have a fairly efficient additional memory subsystem. If you're paging super hard sure the extra RAM is not a bad idea, but as someone with a 64 gb i9 I don't really see a use in day-to-day above 32 gb in reality (React/.NET/C++).

As a dev I prefer spending on things that do make a difference. For instance in 2 gens when we move to a 3nm process and have a 40 core SOC - now *that* will be a solid improvement. Takes 4 hours to setup a new laptop every 2-3 years, even less if you're fine just doing a migration.

 

[Appltsla]

I'm a dev as well (an architect at a medical device company)... WTF are you doing that could even make a tiny difference above 64 gb ?!

Watch the linked video, it's likely to make hardly any difference at all to compile times - more like 2-3 vs. 30 seconds for a 2 minute compile. The incredibly fast bus coupled w/ SSD speeds means we have a fairly efficient additional memory subsystem. If you're paging super hard sure the extra RAM is not a bad idea, but as someone with a 64 gb i9 I don't really see a use in day-to-day above 32 gb in reality (React/.NET/C++).

As a dev I prefer spending on things that do make a difference. For instance in 2 gens when we move to a 3nm process and have a 40 core SOC - now *that* will be a solid improvement in day to day tasks. Takes 4 hours to setup a new laptop every 2-3 years, even less if you're fine just doing a migration.

I'm at a big silicon valley tech company. We have over 400 iOS engineers working on the same code base (monorepo), code base is around 20 gb in file size. Currently my work laptop is a 6 core i7 with 32gb ram, and it takes 1hr for a fresh non-cached compile, with git taking 10 seconds to poll status. We are upgrading to m1 max 64gb because from tests it cuts down compile time by 50%.

 

[Beau10]

I'm at a big silicon valley tech company. We have over 400 iOS engineers working on the same code base (monorepo), code base is around 20 gb in file size. Currently my work laptop is a 6 core i7 with 32gb ram, and it takes 1hr for a fresh non-cached compile, with git taking 10 seconds to poll status. We are upgrading to m1 max 64gb because from tests it cuts down compile time by 50%.

Oh nice... Twitter? Just saw the reports about that.

Still I'm confused though, it sounds this is for personal use, no? What you describe is a pretty extreme use case.

 

[Appltsla]

Oh nice... Twitter? Just saw the reports about that.

Still I'm confused though, it sounds this is for personal use, no? What you describe is a pretty extreme use case.

Close but not Twitter. Almost every silicon valley company is replacing their mobile engineer's laptops with m1 max 64gb due to the speed improvements. Probably why the m1 max model is out of stock everywhere.

Yeah, it's probably not needed for personal use, but a very nice to have. Shaving 5-10 seconds off compiles are nice but not deal breakers. Still it's a nice luxury I'm considering.

 

[Beau10]

Close but not Twitter. Almost every silicon valley company is replacing their mobile engineer's laptops with m1 max 64gb due to the speed improvements.

Yeah, it's probably not needed for personal use, but a very nice to have. Shaving 5-10 seconds off compiles are nice but not deal breakers. Still it's a nice luxury I'm considering.

Understood, but again, RAM means much less w/ these machines than it ever has before. My company has this policy as well (most companies I've worked at have), but I don't think it's a good policy. It's so much better to spec closer to actual needs and to upgrade more often if we're talking about maxxing out performance per $ spent.

I actually balked at getting a maxxed out 16 i9. Now we've floated the idea of possibly upgrading to the new 16" and the director of our department pushed back because they just spent $5k each on a bunch of < 2 year old machines.

 

[Appltsla]

Understood, but again, RAM means much less w/ these machines than it ever has before. My company has this policy as well (most companies I've worked at have), but I don't think it's a good policy. It's so much better to spec closer to actual needs and to upgrade more often if we're talking about maxxing out performance per $ spent.

I actually balked at getting a maxxed out 16 i9. Now we've floated the idea of possibly upgrading to the new 16" and the director of our department pushed back because they just spent $5k each on a bunch of < 2 year old machines.

It does make sense for company perspective though. Over in bay area tech companies are paying 2-500k a year per software engineer. Even if it's a 5% productivity increase it's 10-25k a year. A 5k machine over 2 years is totally worth it, especially when it can even be written off as business expense for tax purpose.

 

[Beau10]

It does make sense for company perspective though. Over in bay area tech companies are paying 2-500k a year per software engineer. Even if it's a 5% productivity increase it's 10-25k a year. A 5k machine over 2 years is totally worth it, especially when it can even be written off as business expense for tax purpose.

Fully aware of what SV engineers cost, our senior and upward staff are toward the bottom of this bracket... it's just the day to day for our engineering team wouldn't be improved to such a degree as we don't have such intense compile issues here. It *would* be nice for other things such as having longer battery life/running cooler and other design improvements. If we purchased closer to needed spec we could get that replenishment on a 2-3 year scale instead of more like 4-5.

 

[Jack Neill]

I stopped by Best Buy today to see the new offerings, I was very impressed with both machines, the notch doesn't seem like a big deal the menu bar doesn't look huge like in photos. personally I would choose the 14, the size seems perfect. I thought the screen looked magnificent. would be kinda overkill for me tho I don't need that much power I just want a macOS powered machine with more storage and the port selection. I'm considering selling my 512 M1 and going for a 1TB M1 Air.

 

[Appltsla]

Fully aware of what SV engineers cost, our senior and upward staff are toward the bottom of this bracket... it's just the day to day for our engineering team wouldn't be improved to such a degree as we don't have such intense compile issues here. It *would* be nice for other things such as having longer battery life/running cooler and other design improvements. If we purchased closer to needed spec we could get that replenishment on a 2-3 year scale instead of more like 4-5.

I guess if the base model is like 1.3k and top end model is 3.5k like previous gen mbps I might be less inclined to spec out a top end model. But given that a base 14" is already 2k, and a specced out 14" is 3.5k, it just doesn't feel nearly that much more percentage wise to get a specced out model.

 

[Beau10]

I guess if the base model is like 1.3k and top end model is 3.5k like previous gen mbps I might be less inclined to spec out a top end model. But given that a base 14" is already 2k, and a specced out 14" is 3.5k, it just doesn't feel nearly that much more percentage wise to get a specced out model.

If it's not really being put to use more than occasionally it's extremely expensive - that's 75% more, one computer for nearly the price of 2. And the options do not factor nearly as well on the resale market. I'd much prefer to just resale and purchase a new machine in 2 rev cycles when we go to the 3nm process than hold onto it for another year or two.

 

[nquinn]

If it's not really being put to use more than occasionally it's extremely expensive - that's 75% more, one computer for nearly the price of 2. And the options do not factor nearly as well on the resale market. I'd much prefer to just resale and purchase a new machine in 2 rev cycles when we go to the 3nm process than hold onto it for another year or two.

Generally buying base models is the correct approach. I will say though I highly doubt that 3nm or any machine in the next 5 years is going to be wildly different. Maybe at best we see 20% gains year over year?

For most people we're getting to a point where the performance doesn't make too much difference. Less heat and fan noise is always welcome of course, though.