Performance Per Watt & Design Implications

[nylon]

So I've been testing both the new base model 14" and 16" machines for the last 10 days. They are both fantastic machines. I started with the 14" machine followed by the 16" machine. The 14" was great but I missed the real estate from my existing 2016 Intel 15.4" TB MBP. So I moved to the 16" machine. Having used both machines I have decided to go with the 14". I am utterly surprised at the design direction they have gone with the 16" machine. The 14" design makes sense. The 16" feels like a tremendous regression in terms of portability and is cumbersome in day to day use even for casual usage such as couch surfing etc. I feel the 16" (more than ever) is really designed more as a desktop replacement that stays put most of the time rather than a portable laptop.

Apple has emphasized performance per watt as the primary metric to judge these machines by. Based on this metric I assumed the design implications would have led to machines that were more powerful and energy efficient without having to sacrifice on weight and physical dimensions. So why has the 16" significantly regressed in terms of weight and size? I never owned the 16" Intel MBP so my frame of reference is the last 15.4" MBP. Am I missing something in this equation? I feel like Apple gave up on design with respect to the 16" machine. Was there a better middle ground?

Thoughts?

 

[bousozoku]

The machines are right where they need to be. They previously messed up while trying to make them too thin and they have a number of problems. My mid-2012 15.4 inch MacBook Pro with 3rd generation quad-core i7 with GeForce 650M goes to 100 degrees C while processing video.

It looks as though Apple is correcting their mistakes with these new machines.

 

[winterny]

I own a 2021 16” M1 MAX 32 GPU, 64GB … and also a 2019 16” i9 with 64GB and the 5500M.

While, sure, id prefer if the new one was thinner if all else was equal … but the fans basically never become audible, and the laptop never gets uncomfortably hot. I’m able to encode video into h.265 with the laptop sitting on my lap now. I would not trade 1mm of thickness for audible fan noise and cooking my lap again.

 

[nylon]

My question here is not the performance of the new machines. Everyone knows the intel machines ran hot. They always ran hot even prior to the TouchBar models. My question is that now then have the chips that are significantly more powerful and energy efficient I would assume the design implication would mean the chips actually matched the design they were always aiming for.

 

[AFK]

theory-crafting --

14" is probably that middle ground. and it comes at the cost of worse thermals and battery life compared to its 16" brethren.

the 16" screen needs a lot of juice. so if you make the frame slimmer, then it's a smaller battery translating into worse battery life than it is already with the max.

maybe if apple axed the max out of the lineup, then perhaps they could have slimmed down the frame of the 16" so that it only has a slightly improved battery life over the 14".

so i think it's just the best they could do given that they wanted to fit the max allowed watt hour battery allowable on planes (100 watt hour) with the screen that they wanted to fit in.

 

[bill-p]

the 16" screen needs a lot of juice. so if you make the frame slimmer, then it's a smaller battery translating into worse battery life than it is already with the max.

I think this theory would hold very well... if the 2019 16" MacBook Pro does not exist.

The 2019 16" MacBook Pro also has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.3lbs.
The 2021 16" MacBook Pro has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.7lbs (or 4.8 for the M1 Max model).

So... honestly, I agree with the OP. While I was not expecting Apple to make the new MacBooks any thinner, and I was expecting some slight increase in weight, I didn't expect a whopping 0.5lbs increase. And... for what? Battery capacity didn't get bigger. The speakers are maybe slightly better, but is that worth 0.5lbs increase? The machine is now indeed quieter, but... is that worth 0.5lbs increase? And actually, if the M1 Pro was put into the same chassis as the 2019 16" machine, why would that make it suddenly... worse, in any way?

There is no excuse for this. Apple simply dropped the ball when it came to the design of the 16". I got it in for about a week as well, then gave up and got the 14" before I even got to see what the 14" looked like. Honestly, to me, the 16" is worse because aside from the chip and maybe the display, it didn't really do anything else better than the 2019 16" version.

 

[nylon]

theory-crafting --

14" is probably that middle ground. and it comes at the cost of worse thermals and battery life compared to its 16" brethren.

the 16" screen needs a lot of juice. so if you make the frame slimmer, then it's a smaller battery translating into worse battery life than it is already with the max.

maybe if apple axed the max out of the lineup, then perhaps they could have slimmed down the frame of the 16" so that it only has a slightly improved battery life over the 14".

so i think it's just the best they could do given that they wanted to fit the max allowed watt hour battery allowable on planes (100 watt hour) with the screen that they wanted to fit in.

Yeah, I think this is really a good point. Even though both machines can have both processors the 16" is really designed with the thermal headroom and battery for the Max CPU configuration in mind.

 

[nylon]

I think this theory would hold very well... if the 2019 16" MacBook Pro does not exist.

The 2019 16" MacBook Pro also has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.3lbs.
The 2021 16" MacBook Pro has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.7lbs (or 4.8 for the M1 Max model).

So... honestly, I agree with the OP. While I was not expecting Apple to make the new MacBooks any thinner, and I was expecting some slight increase in weight, I didn't expect a whopping 0.5lbs increase. And... for what? Battery capacity didn't get bigger. The speakers are maybe slightly better, but is that worth 0.5lbs increase? The machine is now indeed quieter, but... is that worth 0.5lbs increase? And actually, if the M1 Pro was put into the same chassis as the 2019 16" machine, why would that make it suddenly... worse, in any way?

There is no excuse for this. Apple simply dropped the ball when it came to the design of the 16". I got it in for about a week as well, then gave up and got the 14" before I even got to see what the 14" looked like. Honestly, to me, the 16" is worse because aside from the chip and maybe the display, it didn't really do anything else better than the 2019 16" version.

I think his theory is sound if one assumes the 16" is designed for the Max CPU config in mind first and foremost. But I definitely believe the ball was dropped and there is a happier middle ground to be found. I never owned the 16" Intel so coming from the 15" TouchBar Intel the physical change feels quite drastic.

 

[AFK]

I think this theory would hold very well... if the 2019 16" MacBook Pro does not exist.

The 2019 16" MacBook Pro also has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.3lbs.
The 2021 16" MacBook Pro has a 100WHr battery, and it weighs 4.7lbs (or 4.8 for the M1 Max model).

good pt

then perhaps it's the new xdr mini led display. maybe it's hungrier than the 16" screen on the 2019

edit -- nevermind. im not making sense. that would only decrease the battery life but shouldn't affect the size if its the same whr battery.

 

[smirking]

So why has the 16" significantly regressed in terms of weight and size?

Just out of curiosity, have you ever owned one of the pre-Retina Unibody MBPs?

I'll also be making my move from a 15.4" MBP to a 16" soon. I've gotten used to the convenience of a fairly light laptop and am slightly uneasy about how I'll find the extra weight of the new 16" M1's.

These are still going to be lighter and less voluminous than the 15" Unibodies that I hauled around without a complaint for years so I know I'll get used to it.

On the surface the changes to the form factor aren't gigantic, but I think a lot of people are discovering that even modest changes can be jarring enough that it the experience loses some magic.

 

[smirking]

There is no excuse for this. Apple simply dropped the ball when it came to the design of the 16".

Well, I'd say it's highly likely that the design is intended to accommodate MBP designs for the next 4 years at least and they'd want to allow some room to play with.

Everyone is poo-pooing the possibility of a future "Pro" Air with a larger screen, but I wouldn't count out that possibility if there's a growing demand for a more portable 16". I seem to remember it also a certain company in Cupertino that said they would never get in the business of producing "phablets" and now their phones come in three sizes, all of them larger than what they considered to be the ideal form factor for a phone years ago.

 

[nylon]

Just out of curiosity, have you ever owned one of the pre-Retina Unibody MBPs?

I'll also be making my move from a 15.4" MBP to a 16" soon. I've gotten used to the convenience of a fairly light laptop and am slightly uneasy about how I'll find the extra weight of the new 16" M1's.

These are still going to be lighter and less voluminous than the 15" Unibodies that I hauled around without a complaint for years so I know I'll get used to it.

On the surface the changes to the form factor aren't gigantic, but I think a lot of people are discovering that even modest changes can be jarring enough that it the experience loses some magic.

I've owned every large screen Apple laptop since Apple shifted to Intel apart from the 17" and the 16" TouchBar. This 16" is heavier than the 15"/16" Touch Bar models. Heavier than the 15" Retina model that preceded the Touch Bar and heavier than the 15" (non-retina) machine that preceded the Retina model. So heaviest in 3 generations at least (excluding the 17" model). I think it might even be heavier than the 15" that had the front loading cd rom drive. So possibly 4 generations.

 

[smirking]

I've owned every large screen Apple laptop since Apple shifted to Intel apart from the 17". This 16" is heavier than the 15"/16" Touch Bar models. Heavier than the 15" Retina model that preceded the Touch Bar and heavier than the 15" (non-retina) machine that preceded the Retina model. So heaviest in 3 generations (excluding the 17" model).

Ah, my point of reference before the current 15" form factor was the 2012 Unibody model. That one weighed 5.6lbs. I still have hope that I'll find the weight of the M1 Max to be a mere negative, but not a serious issue.

 

[nylon]

"

Ah, my point of reference before the current 15" form factor was the 2012 Unibody model. That one weighed 5.6lbs. I still have hope that I'll find the weight of the M1 Max to be a mere negative, but not a serious issue.

I think it will depend on what you're moving from. If you're moving from the 2012 I think you will be ok. But still it boggles the mind that this new machine is heavier than that by 0.1 lbs on the Pro CPU config and 0.2 lbs on the Max Cpu config.

 

[macintoshmac]

I've owned every large screen Apple laptop since Apple shifted to Intel apart from the 17" and the 16" TouchBar. This 16" is heavier than the 15"/16" Touch Bar models. Heavier than the 15" Retina model that preceded the Touch Bar and heavier than the 15" (non-retina) machine that preceded the Retina model. So heaviest in 3 generations at least (excluding the 17" model). I think it might even be heavier than the 15" that had the front loading cd rom drive. So possibly 4 generations.

It’s the heaviest of them all.

2.54 kg on Late 2011 MBP is lesser than 2.1 and 2.2 kg on 2021 MBP now.

Mid 2012 was 2.02 kg.

I agree. This 0.08 and 0.12 kg against 2012 15 inch and 0.34 and 0.44 kg against 2011 15 inch can indeed be unbearable for knees/ shoulders/ backs with certain medical conditions.