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

ARJR84

macrumors member
Original poster
Apr 16, 2020
32
29
I bought a MBP 2020 (intel), which I have absolutely put through its paces. After 1 year of use it's at 100TBW (250gb) and the computer is recommending a battery change. Scrubbing timelines, hell even scrubbing through youtube heats it up to levels that would prevent fertility if on a lap. The heat has destroyed its own battery and now it gets 3 hours of portable use. I'm using 10GB of swap at any given time at work with 16GB of RAM. At this point I'm happy for the $800 resell from Apple.

Will the new macs (14/16) put up with this abuse associated with a professional use as a primary computer over 3+ years? I don't want to lose 4 figures each year on a laptop reselling it to apple because memory leaks and excessive heat destroy it.
 

ian87w

macrumors G3
Feb 22, 2020
8,704
12,638
Indonesia
The more efficient chip and cooler running will certainly help in reliability. And since these Apple silicon have much better battery life, it will also give better battery longevity. It's definitely a much better solution all around.

Couple things to note will probably be for you to get a machine with more RAM and higher storage to help the SSD longevity. If this is a productive machine, then aim for 32GB of RAM and 1TB SSD, then depreciate the value over 5 years.

Oh and don't forget to add Apple care. Right now, the Achilles heel's of Apple stuff seem to be Apple's own QA and design flaws that put higher risk on issues (eg. cables that are too short, putting high power line just beside data line on their logic board, etc).
 

zarathu

macrumors 6502a
May 14, 2003
652
362
My M1pro is very cool. Yesterday was the first time I ran the fans. I used Handbrake 1.4 native for Apple silicon and for 15 minutes did 13 video conversions. I could not hear the fans except by putting my ear to the vents. And the mac never even got warm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

tmoerel

Suspended
Jan 24, 2008
1,005
1,570
As the M1 macs run cooler it has some advantages in the long run:
- Batteries will have a longer lifespan as heat kills batteries
- As the fans are running a lot less they will last longer
- The system will not clog as fast with dust because of lower airflow
- Space Gray macs will not discolour as fast from heat
- Internal components will last longer because of lower heat
- Lower risk off port damage when using magsafe power

So yes, potentially these machines will last longer.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,679
Under heavy load, Apple Silicon runs just as hot as Intel chips. But unless you are literally pushing the GPU 24/7, it’s average heat output is going to be substantially lower than that of the Intel Macs.

That said, these models are simply too new, there is not enough long term experience to make clear predictions. But they make very solid initial impression.
 

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,474
California
Under heavy load, Apple Silicon runs just as hot as Intel chips. But unless you are literally pushing the GPU 24/7, it’s average heat output is going to be substantially lower than that of the Intel Macs.

That said, these models are simply too new, there is not enough long term experience to make clear predictions. But they make very solid initial impression.

“Runs just as hot” might give a misleading impression to a non-engineer (re: heat transfer, heat generation, etc.) :)
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,679
“Runs just as hot” might give a misleading impression to a non-engineer (re: heat transfer, heat generation, etc.) :)

Unfortunately, non-engineers tend to have an unhealthy fixation with temperature. We have to deal with an entire generation of PC users that religiously believe that their computer will turn into dust once the CPU goes over 90C. Go figure.
 

pmiles

macrumors 6502a
Dec 12, 2013
812
678
I figure anyone considering replacing a 2020 computer in 2021, is likely to replace whatever they get in 2022, et al.

New computers don't have the shelf life they used to because they are designed to be replaced. My 2010 is still running strong. It's been abused. And yet I don't feel like I need to replace it every year.

So if you think an ARM Mac is going to be any different than an INTEL in that department, you are wrong. If anything you will be replacing them at a faster pace... by design. Apple has trained you well. A new phone every year. A new iPad. Now a new computer. They're not in the business to get you to hold on to your purchase, they're in the business to get you to replace it.
 

Kpjoslee

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2007
417
269
That probably has nothing to do with ARM vs Intel but rather depends on how the laptop is designed to withstand the constant load for years. I would assume 2021 model having a better cooling system with bigger body than 2020, it may handle the pressure better? ?
 

LinkRS

macrumors 6502
Oct 16, 2014
402
331
Texas, USA
That's what AppleCare is for :). I consider the cost of AppleCare as part of the overall purchase price of any Apple product I purchase. If your use of the device wears it out over a year, then if you had AppleCare, it would be fixed under the program. If the device heat is what caused damage to your battery, I would think it should be a covered warranty issue, despite having AppleCare or not. However, you should look at the battery stats and see how many cycles you have. If it high (most newer Macs go to 1000), then it is just from use and not caused by heat. Regardless, you shouldn't need a new battery after only a year, so something is not normal. See here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201585

Rich S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jerryk

JMacHack

Suspended
Mar 16, 2017
1,965
2,424
In theory they should last longer.

If I had to bet, I don’t think they should last any longer or shorter than Apple computers typically do.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,679
New computers don't have the shelf life they used to because they are designed to be replaced. My 2010 is still running strong. It's been abused. And yet I don't feel like I need to replace it every year.

This is a typical case of survivorship bias. Just because your 2010 machine still runs strong you are ignoring all the 2010 machines that have failed. It is entirely possible that the 2016-2019 Macs won’t be as reliable, but it’s not because they are designed to be replaced, but because that particular model happens to have systemic flaws. It’s not a new thing. I remember the G4 PowerBooks, beautiful machines that would literally delaminate into metal pieces, or the plastic MacBook - still coldly remembered, that suffered from discoloration and plastic be moving brittle over time.

The problem is, you only know whether a particular model is particularly reliable after a decade, and even then it’s more about „good old times“ rather than real reliability.

Regardless, these new machines seem to be built to last, so I‘m hopeful.
 

JMacHack

Suspended
Mar 16, 2017
1,965
2,424
New computers don't have the shelf life they used to because they are designed to be replaced. My 2010 is still running strong. It's been abused. And yet I don't feel like I need to replace it every year.
I feel like this is too broad a statement, personally I’ve had a wide variety of life from my computers. A 2011 inspiron 15 took a lot of abuse (the plastic was so dinged up most of it was gone) and it kept chugging along. I eventually replaced it with an Inspiron 17 that crapped out in under 3 years.

My first desktop was a Gateway with Windows 98 that lasted me until 2007, which was replaced by a latitude that crapped out in 4 years.

Since switching to Mac, my MacBook Air has lasted me 6 years now, and my 2016 mbp (a known lemon) is still kicking too.

None of these had any hardware upgrades or replacements (other than the keyboard on the mbp). Maybe I could’ve kept the pcs going for longer but by the time I would have technology moved on.

I find that people who talk about “upgradeability” do so more theoretically than they actually upgrade.
 

theorist9

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2015
3,881
3,060
New computers don't have the shelf life they used to because they are designed to be replaced. My 2010 is still running strong. It's been abused. And yet I don't feel like I need to replace it every year.
This is anecdotal, but every MBP I've owned (2008, 2011, and 2014) had to have its logic board (CPU + GPU) replaced by AppleCare at least once, and in some cases two or three times. Fortunately they had the grace to fail under warranty (3 years). [Those are the only laptops I've owned.] By contrast, the two desktops I've owned (including a PowerMac G5 and a home-build PC) ran for at least a decade without issue. [I've been using computers for far longer, but those were all work machines.] So I view the reliability issue as more about laptop vs desktop, rather than new vs. old.
 

metapunk2077fail

macrumors 6502a
Oct 31, 2021
634
845
This is anecdotal, but every MBP I've owned (2008, 2011, and 2014) had to have its logic board (CPU + GPU) replaced by AppleCare at least once, and in some cases two or three times. Fortunately they had the grace to fail under warranty (3 years). [Those are the only laptops I've owned.] By contrast, the two desktops I've owned (including a PowerMac G5 and a home-build PC) ran for at least a decade without issue. [I've been using computers for far longer, but those were all work machines.] So I view the reliability issue as more about laptop vs desktop, rather than new vs. old.

You are seriously unlucky and a rare case. Out of about 30 Macs I owned only the one with the famous faulty Nvidia GPU needed a logic board replacement.
 

theorist9

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2015
3,881
3,060
You are seriously unlucky and a rare case. Out of about 30 Macs I owned only the one with the famous faulty Nvidia GPU needed a logic board replacement.
Yes, I would have to be a rare case, otherwise Apple would go out of business. [Though I'm not sure if it was purely bad luck*.]

Nevertheless, the point of sharing my anecdotal experience was to suggest that computers aren't necessarily less reliable now than in the past, and that to the extent one can find a reliability differential, laptop vs desktop may be more likely than new vs. old.

Of course, what we really need to addres this is data, not my anecdotes.

*It always puzzled me why this repeatedly befell me, since I thought I babied my laptops--they spend 90% of the time in the apartment, propped up on an Rain Design M-Stand which provides good air circulation and puts them above any spills.

Then I realized that, precisely because I was using them mostly in desktop mode, I ironically was probably actually being harder on them than the average user because: (A) I was always driving an external monitor, which meant the dGPU was running continuously; and (B) while well within Apple's operating specs, my apartment was typically on the warm side (low-mid 80's) about 9 months out of the year, because for many years I used window fans rather than A/C (and I'm on the top floor). Consistent with this, other than the faulty NVIDIA GPU issue, and one swollen battery, the failures I got were that my laptop would begin to thermally throttle (i.e., after a few years of use, I lost my ability to run them in the low-mid 80's with an external monitor attached) (kernel task >~400%). In sum, while I was using the laptops well within Apple's specifications, I was probably thermally stressing them more than the average user.

N.B.: The thermal failures were for the 2011 and 2014 models, not the 2008. And I recall one of them had to have its logic board replaced twice for this reason.
Unfortunately, non-engineers tend to have an unhealthy fixation with temperature. We have to deal with an entire generation of PC users that religiously believe that their computer will turn into dust once the CPU goes over 90C. Go figure.
While I don't think my computer will turn to dust (in spite of its unhealthy fixation on human blood, and seeming aversion to sunlight), I hope the above anecdotes explain why I have a less sanguine view of Apple's thermal design decisions than you do.

[Also, you never responded to the TDP numbers I posted about the current large iMac, showing that its original processors (those in the introductory model) would have created high fan noise with their designed thermal solution which, again, I find unacceptable in a desktop given there is a relatively easy fix: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...or.2307038/page-6?post=30436381#post-30436381]
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.