Judging by what Intel does with Quicksync.
Judging by published computer reviews, compressing videos would seem to be a compelling use case for getting a new computer.
And judging by benchmarks-- well, perhaps we should forget all about that sort of fiction--
Now, you seem to imply that this sort of this is so esoteric that it necessitates a three thousand dollar Mac Pro, and mere mortals risk the health of their computer when they even try.
Huh? Have you been reading what I've said?
I compress video on my ~$1000 iMac all the time. What I'm saying is that a Mac Pro (in Apple's lineup) is the only machine *designed* to run 100% 24/7. Their MacBook Pro *should be* as well, but that hasn't been my experience. And, that I actually understand what is going on to cause the problems, at least possibly up until recently.
Intel's chips have had thermal protection for a LONG time, but the point was that such thermal protection didn't protect the whole machine. Environmental regulations changed the formulation of solder, making it much more brittle. Do you remember all the Xbox and PS3 failures? That was due to the solder and heat... expansion and contraction of the boards. And, as was mentioned earlier in the tread, heat in MacBook Pros is hard on the battery, and triggered some of the GPU issues. And, those are the known issues. As I said, excessive heat (and cooling) is hard overall on modern electronics.
The good news, is that all these chips now run at lower power than in the past. BUT, manufacturers are also lowering the cooling capabilities, or even depending on no extra cooling (i.e.: MacBooks). And, since we've seen that in the past, they sold machines without adequate cooling to stand up to 100% utilization, it might be wise to keep that in mind, even with new lower-power systems.
Is there something you're not understanding in there?