Being honest the upgrades are so expensive, the best 'future proofing' is to buy the minimum spec you can get away with and put the money you save over maxing out the machine towards getting the next one sooner!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best year to buy a high end 15" macbook pro? Future proofing question.
- Thread starter KensaiMage
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am sorry, but I literally LOL'd at this post. This is the most ridiculous, silliest post I have ever read, OP! You cannot future proof ANY purchase. It is the year 2018 and there will ALWAYS be technological advancements or else ALL companies would stall and sputter and go out of business. LOL LOL LOL!
No way... I hear the 2050 model will smoke whatever’s out in 2021.
I have a 2014 Macbook pro 15 inch 2.5ghz the main reason why I do not choose to buy a new mactop is cause my current MacBook is well fast enough to handle my stuff (you know Youtube and silly documents that need to be written)
don't get me wrong the 700mb SSD speed on it is still dope to me
and the quad core processor is pretty much still running
well any who the best advice that I can tell you is to get an 15 inch
as those have more power for your buck
don't get me wrong the 700mb SSD speed on it is still dope to me
and the quad core processor is pretty much still running
well any who the best advice that I can tell you is to get an 15 inch
as those have more power for your buck
Yeah, this. In all likelihood the base model in 2022 is going to be better than the top of the line model now. It's probably more cost effective to upgrade at 4 years and just buy base models (as long as it fits your needs now of course) than keeping it 8ish.
While I agree with the general consensus that future proofing is mostly an illusion, I think OP's question is not without merit. There are long periods in time where the tech only gets minor evolutionary gains, but then there are transition points where the technology makes large jumps. If one gets a new computer at one of those points, the machine will certainly stay "relevant" for longer. Take the 2012 MBP for instance. Even compared to current CPUs/SSDs etc., its still a very capable machine.
I think that next year release would be good time to get a MBP if one wants to keep it for a long time. In 2019, the MBP will use AVX-512 CPUs (which is going to be a BIG thing, dramatically speeding up many pro-level workflows) as well as HBM GPUs (which will be significantly more power-efficient), not to mention LPDDR4 and other goodies.
I think that next year release would be good time to get a MBP if one wants to keep it for a long time. In 2019, the MBP will use AVX-512 CPUs (which is going to be a BIG thing, dramatically speeding up many pro-level workflows) as well as HBM GPUs (which will be significantly more power-efficient), not to mention LPDDR4 and other goodies.
Save for a possible transition to ARM, there are no evolutionary gains left for computers. The technology has matured to the point where we see minor updates.
Exactly, the point I'm making, 2012 is really the last year we saw a major update and since then for intents and purposes we've only had a refinement. I still have a 2012 rMBP and it is very capable. This tells me that anything newer will be more then capable for the near future.
I disagree. As I mentioned before, AVX-512 is one big game-changer — it dramatically improves performance for dense numerical code. With it, a dual-core Cannonlake might approach the performance of a quad core Kaby Lake for some professional workflows — at a much lower power consumption. This is literally like getting a whole new CPU with a different instruction set. Then you have new memory technology. Stacked RAM is already making big impact in the GPU world (and when these GPUs get into laptops this or next year, we will see a big jump in performance). At some point it will also arrive in the CPU world as well. AI accelerators will further improve efficiency and overall performance.
Compared to all these things, a possible transition to ARM doesn't mean that much. The only benefit it might have is giving Apple more control over the schedules. The big question is still whether they'd be able to catch up with decades of practical experience that Intel brings to the table.
I used to say that, then came SSD's. I agree that increase in CPU speed certainly has diminishing returns. The software and the hardware can't be pushed any faster from a CPU perspective, but it seems there is always something on the horizon, whether it be memory, graphics, WiFi standards, Bluetooth standards, USB or other peripheral standards, etc. Retina is a great example. What about the next retina. Guess, I am saying, I used to say what you are saying and I was wrong over and over again. I do get it though, it is hard to imagine what we possibly could need.
@leman provides some great advice if you can wait until 2019.
If you can't, this year it is rumored that there will be an option to have 6-cores vice 4-cores in your MBP. We’ve been at 4-cores for 8 years, and people on this board are still using their 2010 MBPs, so there’s that with regard to future proofing.
USB-C/Thunderbolt-3 is standard in all modern MBPs. This means even if you buy the base model 15”, you’ll have access to external GPUs (eGPU) if you need more graphics power.
USB-/TB-3 also gives you access to extremely fast external storage options, so you’re good there.
The high end model will probably still have 16GBs RAM, and while this may annoy those of us that crave 32GBs, well within the 7-9 year time frame you set as a requirement, it’ll be even cheaper and easier to offload VMs to the cloud (if 32GBs is something you might need in the future). And again, eGPUs via USB-C can help handle number crunching and apps like Photoshop if that's why you might need 32GBs in the future.
In short, there is potential for the 2018 MBP to be a workhorse of the Mac. If you can, I’d wait for 2019, but if you go for the 2018 model, wait until there are multiple reviews and people have pounded on it for a while. Both the 2017 and especially the 2016 MBPs have had keyboard issues.
If you can't, this year it is rumored that there will be an option to have 6-cores vice 4-cores in your MBP. We’ve been at 4-cores for 8 years, and people on this board are still using their 2010 MBPs, so there’s that with regard to future proofing.
USB-C/Thunderbolt-3 is standard in all modern MBPs. This means even if you buy the base model 15”, you’ll have access to external GPUs (eGPU) if you need more graphics power.
USB-/TB-3 also gives you access to extremely fast external storage options, so you’re good there.
The high end model will probably still have 16GBs RAM, and while this may annoy those of us that crave 32GBs, well within the 7-9 year time frame you set as a requirement, it’ll be even cheaper and easier to offload VMs to the cloud (if 32GBs is something you might need in the future). And again, eGPUs via USB-C can help handle number crunching and apps like Photoshop if that's why you might need 32GBs in the future.
In short, there is potential for the 2018 MBP to be a workhorse of the Mac. If you can, I’d wait for 2019, but if you go for the 2018 model, wait until there are multiple reviews and people have pounded on it for a while. Both the 2017 and especially the 2016 MBPs have had keyboard issues.
I'm not seeing how that will be a game changer for the majority of owners of the MBP. I think overall we are beyond seeing major updates that have a major impact. Again we're talking about seeing major updates that can be game changes, not little steps and while the prospect for some usages is better then others overall I don't think it will be for the majority of users.
Apple tends to give GPUs the short shrift and so I don't see anything major coming from them on putting a top level GPU into the MBP.
I agree, but not because of the points you make but in general, I think the X86 platform is better suited for desktop computing, but that's just my $.02
Yeah, I sort of see your point, but even so we're beyond seeing major jumps in that technology of SSDs, which again is my point
Again, I don't see Apple rolling out anything major, and given where we are in the lifecycle of computers (mature), there's just less changes occuring in the desktop/laptop arena. The fact that my 6 year old laptop performs nearly as quickly as a current model is evidense enough. In real world usage (for most tasks), does the blazingly fast SSD translate into something people notice? I mean a few tenths of a second are hardly noticable.
With the TouchBar Apple tried to introduce new technology into the laptop to revive the excitment and add a new component to differentiate their machines, but it fell flat. They did that imo, because there was not much else you could have done with the 2016 MBP that would differentiate it between the 2015 model.
How would you define major impact then? We are talking about almost doubling performance in parallel data processing without increasing power consumption. It probably won't enable us to create principally new types of software or new algorithms (maybe this is what you mean with major?), but its a foundation technology that will define much of the CPU performance in x86 world from 2018 on.
Here I have to disagree again. Sure, you are perfectly correct when you talk about pure performance. Apple's game is more subtle here however. They attempt to balance performance and power consumption. The latest AMD chips are a great example. They are custom-postprocessed chips that have particularly low power consumption while still delivering mid-range performance. They are not fast by any means, but from the efficiency standpoint, they rival any other GPU and they are not cheap — as they are actually much more expensive to make then your desktop gaming GPUs.
I would be surprised if the 2018 15" MBP didn't have a GPU with HBM. From theoretical perspective, it would be a dream for Apple — less memory consumption, smaller overall area footprint. It would probably allow them to double the GPU performance while still staying within the same 35-40W bracket. From practical perspective, we know that AMD already has the technology (as evident from their and Intel work on Kaby lake G). At the same time, there is a surprising lack of mobile Vega on the market — even though we know that AMD has the tech for it. This is very similar tot he Polaris situation in 2016, where Apple was buying out the entire supply...
I am already getting a full work day from my battery, but of course this will depend on what you do exactly
If you look at Apple's design for the last few years, you'd see that they tend to design the battery capacity to last exactly 8-9 hours. In my opinion, this makes a lot of sense. This is essentially a full work day. And at the end of the work day one usually has an outlet. In practice, increase from 6 to 8 hours is more useful then from 8 to 10 hours or 10 to 12 hours, since what are the chances that you'd regularly need to go 12 hours without a change to charge? It seems that Apple decided that it makes more sense to have a lighter and more portable machine with 8 hour battery than a heavier one with same performance and 10 hour battery — and I completely agree with their decision. I haven's yet been in a situation where my new MBP's battery would be not enough — and I am spending a lot of time on conferences and in transit (train/plane), but the form factor reduction from pre-2016 is significant and very noticeable. A really major game changer would be batteries that last multiple work days — but for that we need either some new battery tech that would allow one to safely(!) store hundreds of watt-hours worth of power, or to reduce the idle laptop power consumption to under 4Watt... which is not going to happen any time soon.
Yeah, I didn't want to get greedy, but yes, something like this for sure. I don't get 6-8 hours, I get 4-5, but that's because my machine is old and the battery technology is old. This is on my list of reasons to get the 2018 when they announce it. So in my case, 7 years later, there is something I don't get now that is meaningful to me.
I agree, from this point on it will only be features such as LTE, battery life, software expansion, and performance to size ratio. If the future MacBook Pros decide to drop the Intel-AMD combo CPU-GPU chips in there, the 13" and below sized models will see a major improvement as Apple heads towards convergence, regretfully and slowly.
If you consider future proofing to mean the best bang for your buck long term, then a slightly older refurbished model is often a way to go. You'd be able to save enough money that more frequent upgrades become affordable, which means you'll be using an overall newer computer during longer periods of time. I've been amazed how good of a resale value I was getting out of 5 year old MBPs when it comes time to update.
Because the OP is even considering using the same computer for more than 5 years, I suspect the use case is pretty light, i.e. no intensive computational needs due to photo, video editing, game development or scientific number crunching. Just get the cheapest laptop off the refurbished list that would make you happy today, and don't overthink it.
Because the OP is even considering using the same computer for more than 5 years, I suspect the use case is pretty light, i.e. no intensive computational needs due to photo, video editing, game development or scientific number crunching. Just get the cheapest laptop off the refurbished list that would make you happy today, and don't overthink it.
I am shocked how many think that technological advancements have ended in the realm of personal computing. In 1950, nobody ever dreamed of a personal computer at all. In 1990, nobody dreamed of a personal computer you could carry with you in your pocked everyday.
I agree that year-over-year speed improvements have slowed over the last decade, but we have no idea what new technology is on the horizon. If we stop believing in our ability to create new things, then we really will stagnate.
I agree that year-over-year speed improvements have slowed over the last decade, but we have no idea what new technology is on the horizon. If we stop believing in our ability to create new things, then we really will stagnate.
Late 2009 Macbooks can still run High Sierra which will be supported through the end of 2020. Macs might not run all software well for a decade after purchase but its perfectly reasonable to expect 5-7+ years of service (with possible repairs along the way). The problem with the last handful of years is not the processors/graphics, which should suffice for years to come, but basic/critical hardware like keyboards. I would bet that there will be more 2015 and earlier Macbook Pros in regular use in 5+ years than 2016/2017 (maybe even 2018) models due mostly to keyboard failures in the latter.
I would opine that the issue isn't with keyboard reliability specifically, but the all-in-one lack of repairability that would have the more recent models not having as long of a run as some of the older models. I still have a 2009 and a 2012, but those have both had problems that I had to repair. My options to repair my 2018 is going to be limited once they're unsupported, but lack of repairability will also affect the 2015's. They're more repairable than the tb models, but still pretty inmutable.
There is a silver lining to the keyboard issues though. Lots of people who have minor keyboard issues are probably going to hold off on getting theirs fixed until they get close to their 4 year warranty period and receive a new keyboard and new battery. With a brand new battery and fresh keyboard, some of those units may end up having a surprisingly long run if their logic boards don't fry first.