Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
On the subject of buying base configuration Macs and replacing them more often vs. buying much more expensive Macs with upgraded spec.s (e.g.: processor, RAM and SSD) and replacing maybe half as often, the wisdom of one vs. the other is often argued but a lot depends on what you are looking for.

Apple seems very slow to raise base RAM and SSD offerings. It's true that in 3-years the new Mac (let's say an M6-based) will likely run substantially faster than the recently released M4-based, perhaps roughly at the level of a higher end M4 Pro or base M4 Max, and include Wifi 7.

So let's say we're talking about upgrading a base config. ever 3-years vs. an upturned config. every 6.

From now till year 3, the up-gunned BTO is substantially more powerful, though for many general users it doesn't make a lot of difference. From year 3 - year 6, the M6 base as powerful or maybe more so, plus it has Wifi 7.

But...it's very possible Apple will release base M6 configs. still with 16-gig RAM. Surely by then they'll bump the minimum SSD to 512-gig. (I'm cynical and we're talking about Apple but come...on...).

If the expensive BTO Mac has 32-gig RAM, it'll have that the whole 6-years. The base config. has 16-gig RAM for 3-years, and likely for the next 3! If we're lucky the SSD will bump up by 256GB.

My point is that replacing your system more often has some potential benefits, but upgrading from that base and keeping your system longer can also make sense for many people. For some, the truth is a little nuanced - upgrading to 24-gig RAM and a 512-gig SSD while working mainly with an external Thunderbolt 4 SSD might be a very nice sweet spot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pag46
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.