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

16" is barely heavier than the 14"

patent10021

patent10021

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Apr 23, 2004
3,537
813
So much was the hype about the heaviness of the 16" M1 that I decided to get the 14" even before I began shopping.

The size difference is definitely huge; actually even more than I imagined it would be in person. However, I had to pick up both MacBooks in both hands and then swap hands to actually feel any difference in weight. It was actually only until I did the quick hand swapping trick that I could notice any significant difference.

I would say it's a difference of about a single 12" running shoe. It's obvious that the weight difference is primarily due to the battery and aluminum chassis. Given that aluminum is so light, it's not surprising that there isn't much difference in weight.

Hopefully that info helps some of you in your decision.
 
I think the issue is that the 3.5 lbs for the 14" is already more than what most people would like to carry for long distances, when added to all the other stuff that people carry.
If you don't have to carry it far, the increased weight is not a big deal. If you do need to carry it far or long, an extra 1.2 lbs can be a big deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anthonymoody
Going by numbers it seems like it would be a lot. That's why I also planned to get the 14". I really wanted to get the 14". After picking them up in person, it really isn't much. There's a difference between numbers on paper and how something actually feels real-world. I already have the 15" and that was another reason I planned on getting the 14". But after trying both of them in person, I could not feel enough of a weight difference to make it a part of my decision process.

I carry my MacBook around Osaka, Shenzhen and Seoul through airports, subways and train stations. Got snacks, water, clothes, hard drives etc so I was definitely keen on a lighter 14". To me, the difference didn't (feel) more than a large shoe or cup of water. I felt it was not enough to make a difference even in my commutes in Asia. Sure on paper it seems like it might be significant, but the reality is, there isn't much of a difference between 14" and 16". I think a lot of people on Youtube want to justify buying a 14" by convincing themselves it's a huge difference. If the size dimensions is a factor for someone then sure it might be worth it because there definitely is a huge size difference in chassis, but I think to decide getting a 14" because of the weight specs on paper is a mistake. People have numbers in their head so it's sort of like a placebo. If you just lift both of them or put them in your bag at the store, you'll find there is barely any weight difference.

Anyway, that's my take for real-world weight.
 
Personally, I switch between a ThinkPad X1 and a Dell Latitude 7400 for work (was given two machines). They happen to differ by exactly 1.2 lbs and I can immediately feel the difference in my shoulder bag whenever I swap.

If you look at the market, you'll notice that top PC manufacturers offer a variety of 14" models with different weights. To me, that suggests most consumers will notice a difference. For example, Lenovo offers (just for their business users): ThinkPad T14, T14s, and X1. They differ in weight: 3.3 lbs, 2.8 lbs, and 2.4 lbs. Dell offers a similar range: Latitude 3000, 5000, 7000, and 9000. They vary between 3.3 lbs to 2.7 lbs.

Everyone is different, but I suspect if your bag is already fully loaded, perhaps you might not notice a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alex00100
I was thinking the same thing as the OP: Go with the 14" because it's portable! I'm already coming from a mid-2011 13" MBA, so I'm dealing with a change in weight regardless, but I was worried about everyone who kept going off about how heavy the 16" is, and that it isn't portable....

... But when I look at the cost difference between the models I'm looking at (M1 Pro 10/16/16, 16GB, 2TB SSD), there is only a $180USD difference between the 14" and 16". So to sacrifice a 1.2lb difference to gain better speakers and heat dissipation, that is really tipping the scales to the 16".

BL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
patent10021 said:
Going by numbers it seems like it would be a lot. That's why I also planned to get the 14". I really wanted to get the 14". After picking them up in person, it really isn't much. There's a difference between numbers on paper and how something actually feels real-world. I already have the 15" and that was another reason I planned on getting the 14". But after trying both of them in person, I could not feel enough of a weight difference to make it a part of my decision process.

I carry my MacBook around Osaka, Shenzhen and Seoul through airports, subways and train stations. Got snacks, water, clothes, hard drives etc so I was definitely keen on a lighter 14". To me, the difference didn't (feel) more than a large shoe or cup of water. I felt it was not enough to make a difference even in my commutes in Asia. Sure on paper it seems like it might be significant, but the reality is, there isn't much of a difference between 14" and 16". I think a lot of people on Youtube want to justify buying a 14" by convincing themselves it's a huge difference. If the size dimensions is a factor for someone then sure it might be worth it because there definitely is a huge size difference in chassis, but I think to decide getting a 14" because of the weight specs on paper is a mistake. People have numbers in their head so it's sort of like a placebo. If you just lift both of them or put them in your bag at the store, you'll find there is barely any weight difference.

Anyway, that's my take for real-world weight.
Click to expand...

The important piece of info you have not mentioned is the normal total weight of your bag (including shoes, bottles, hard drives, snacks etc).

EG If your bag weighs 25 lbs with a 14" MBP it will be 26.2 lbs with a 16" MBP, ie less than 5% different. I accept that a 5% difference in weight might not be a big deal. I think that is all you are saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
There's also the perception of volume. The 16" being bigger may give you the illusion that it's not as heavy than it actually is because the density of both laptops may be similar. The more accurate test may be doing blind test of lifting both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
The big issue with a colleague of mine who recently travelled with me during December was that he couldn't fit his 16" in our flights. When I mean not being able to fit was being able to actually use the device during the flight, we caught some low cheap flights and we had no space to put the 16" in, I could open the table during my flight and use the 14" but it was impossible for him.

Again this depends very much on your workflow and if you are on the go a lot. for me portability is the most important aspect since I spend 90% of the time at home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eugr
patent10021 said:
...but I think to decide getting a 14" because of the weight specs on paper is a mistake.
Click to expand...

It's not. Lug a camera bag on a 3-hour walk and the 14" immediately feels like a godsend compared to the 16" even when it's not on paper.

In fact, the 16" by itself weighs as much as the 14" plus a 12.9" iPad Pro. Between having just a MacBook and having MacBook + iPad for the same weight class, I'd definitely pick having the iPad along as well because the iPad is the superior device for lighter use cases, especially on an airplane.

Also, they could have made the 16" thinner or as thin as the previous generation device that it replaced. That would make it less chunky and it would actually fit better in some of my smaller bags. But no, it just has to be thicker, and that extra thickness is just barely enough such that the 16" won't fit at all in some of my smaller bags that were made to fit previous gen 15.6" MacBooks. I mean... I can try to shove it in there but it's such a hassle. The 14" goes in and out of bags much easier.

Also, try lifting the new 16" from the bottom right or left corner of the device with one hand while the screen is open. Suddenly not so easy right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eugr, anthonymoody, mj_ and 1 other person
Thats precisely the reason I am sticking with MBA for as long as possible (possibly 13 MBP). I don't code or do anything of that kind, and the most demanding task on my plate is occasional 4K vids in FCP, or photos. There rest is writing and web, so - no need for a gazillion of cores for me. Bu having lugged around a 15inch MBP (which is right in between the 14 and the 16 weight wise) - I am done. I'll stick with the most powerful option of the lightest Mac available.
bill-p said:
It's not. Lug a camera bag on a 3-hour walk and the 14" immediately feels like a godsend compared to the 16" even when it's not on paper.

In fact, the 16" by itself weighs as much as the 14" plus a 12.9" iPad Pro. Between having just a MacBook and having MacBook + iPad for the same weight class, I'd definitely pick having the iPad along as well because the iPad is the superior device for lighter use cases, especially on an airplane.

Also, they could have made the 16" thinner or as thin as the previous generation device that it replaced. That would make it less chunky and it would actually fit better in some of my smaller bags. But no, it just has to be thicker, and that extra thickness is just barely enough such that the 16" won't fit at all in some of my smaller bags that were made to fit previous gen 15.6" MacBooks. I mean... I can try to shove it in there but it's such a hassle. The 14" goes in and out of bags much easier.

Also, try lifting the new 16" from the bottom right or left corner of the device with one hand while the screen is open. Suddenly not so easy right?
Click to expand...
 
Do 1.2 lbs make a difference when you travel like most people do lugging around way too much unneccessary stuff? Probably not.

Do 1.2 lbs make a difference when you travel light? Absolutely, especially considering that you will also have to carry a beefier and therefore heavier power supply and will most likely need a larger and therefore heavier bag.

I agree with @bill-p. Granted, I don't take my computers on hikes but I used to travel a lot for business before the entire planet went full retard over the last two years and over time mastered the art of traveling light (re: two week business trip abroad with nothing but a small carry-on and a laptop bag). And believe me, 1.2 lbs can make a huge difference depending on your individual situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DenisK and bill-p
patent10021 said:
So much was the hype about the heaviness of the 16" M1 that I decided to get the 14" even before I began shopping.

The size difference is definitely huge; actually even more than I imagined it would be in person. However, I had to pick up both MacBooks in both hands and then swap hands to actually feel any difference in weight. It was actually only until I did the quick hand swapping trick that I could notice any significant difference.

I would say it's a difference of about a single 12" running shoe. It's obvious that the weight difference is primarily due to the battery and aluminum chassis. Given that aluminum is so light, it's not surprising that there isn't much difference in weight.

Hopefully that info helps some of you in your decision.
Click to expand...
how do you like your 14??
 
I have a 16 and tak it everywhere, except airports/flights. seems to be great in coffee shots especially. Wondering with a 14 if I'd notice much of a difference?
 
I used to buy 15" and 16" systems for their power. Now, I can get similar or better computing power in a much smaller package. So these days I am happy with a 13" display on a portable system. It is much easier to use on planes and other transportation. Also, I move around my home during the workday to break up the monotony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1, macsplusmacs and kp98077
bill-p said:
Also, they could have made the 16" thinner or as thin as the previous generation device that it replaced. That would make it less chunky and it would actually fit better in some of my smaller bags. But no, it just has to be thicker, and that extra thickness is just barely enough such that the 16" won't fit at all in some of my smaller bags that were made to fit previous gen 15.6" MacBooks. I mean... I can try to shove it in there but it's such a hassle. The 14" goes in and out of bags much easier.
Click to expand...

It's only .02" thicker than the 16" IntelBook and only .03" thicker than the 15" IntelBook.

If you can afford a $3K+ computer, you can probably afford a new bag for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
darngooddesign said:
It's only .02" thicker than the 16" IntelBook and only .03" thicker than the 15" IntelBook.

If you can afford a $3K+ computer, you can probably afford a new bag for it.
Click to expand...

The 15.6" and 16" Intel MacBook tapers toward the edges, though. The new device that replaced them is significantly thicker toward the edges. That .02" is only smack dab in the middle. You wouldn't think so but that taper makes all of the difference in bags that barely fit the older MacBooks. These same bags and compartments do not fit the new 16". Trust me. I tried. I can probably stretch the bag and try to get the MacBook in there but... why bother?

And it's not the price of the bag that's the issue. It's the size and extra weight. A bigger bag is just heavier.

Also this is minor but I feel I need to mention: the 16" can only be fast charged via MagSafe. No exception. Lose that one MagSafe cable while you're traveling and it's a pain in the rear. The 14" can be fast charged via USB-C, with all of its ports, and only needs an appropriate USB-C cable and charger. So I don't have to use Apple's included charger and can just use any random, more compact 100W charger. That makes the 14" more convenient and even lighter to deal with.

It's clear to me which is the superior device for people like me who need to travel quite a lot.

Plus... again, try lifting the 16" from bottom right or left corner with one hand while the screen is open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DenisK
bill-p said:
The 15.6" and 16" Intel MacBook tapers toward the edges, though. The new device that replaced them is significantly thicker toward the edges. That .02" is only smack dab in the middle. ...
Click to expand...
You make it sound like the IntelBooks were dome shaped. The tapering was only an inch in so the new computers are barley thicker over most of their bodies. What the boxier design gives you is superior airflow and cooling which means you won't be annoying other people on the plane with your finely tapered hair dryer.

But of course a smaller laptop is better for travel and portability, the same was true with the 13" vs the 15".
 
Last edited:
I still fail to see the issue with the size of 16". Been traveling with it in my carry on now for a month and have literally had zero issues with it compared to my old 15" Pro. People do love to complain it seems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
wilberforce said:
I think the issue is that the 3.5 lbs for the 14" is already more than what most people would like to carry for long distances, when added to all the other stuff that people carry.
If you don't have to carry it far, the increased weight is not a big deal. If you do need to carry it far or long, an extra 1.2 lbs can be a big deal.
Click to expand...
The issue is that most people use bags designed as fashion accessories rather than for carrying stuff. If you have a decent backpack, you don't really feel the weight under most circumstances. There are some exceptions, such as when you are carrying a lot of other equipment or taking extended trips with carry-on baggage only. Most of the time, it doesn't matter whether a laptop weighs 3.5 lbs or 3.5 kg.
 
darngooddesign said:
You make it sound like the IntelBooks were dome shaped. The tapering was only an inch in so the new computers are barley thicker over most of their bodies. What the boxier design gives you is superior airflow and cooling which means you won't be annoying other people on the plane with your finely tapered hair dryer.

But of course a smaller laptop is better for travel and portability, the same was true with the 13" vs the 15".
Click to expand...

The tapering matters. Most bags have a laptop compartment that's tapered to the edges, not boxy. And again, it's not like I can't just squeeze the new 16" body in but it's just super tight so that makes it less than ideal.

There is no need for superior airflow and cooling with the 16". The old body was sufficient enough to cool up to 100W. If you have owned one, you would know. M1 Pro gets nowhere near that. Not even the M1 Max gets to 100W. The new body is completely overkill, all in the name of silence. And even then, it's not really silent once you start pushing the M1 Max. I know... because I had the 16" M1 Max before trading down to 14" M1 Pro.

Have you tried using your MacBook on a plane? No matter how hard you push it, plane noise will drown it out. You need headphones to even hear things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back