Why does Linus think that a 9 - 8 year old laptop is bad compared to a similar desktop?

[Ashleyyyy]

I'm talking about the latest WAN show. 

 

(link with timestamp)

 

 

there Linus says that Laptops die faster than Desktops and that using one from the sandy bridge era (2011 - 2012) is a bad experience. 

 

now, in some ways he's right. if you want to game on a laptop from that era the only games you are gonna be able to play are Minecraft and older titles. 

 

however, for most people that's fine. I have a Toshiba laptop from 2010, it has a first gen i5 and some sort of AMD graphics. the battery is dead, but other than that it's still reasonably quick if you're just web browsing and it runs Minecraft or old games totally fine. 

 

if you are like me and do not play games (ok I do play some, but childhood games so from like 2005 that run on a PlayStation 2) using an older device is totally ok. i have a 2012 13" MacBook Pro (ok it's ivy bridge but it's the same era as the laptops Linus is talking about) and I can edit 1080p footage on that for my YouTube channel, it has a nice ssd in it, 16gb of ram (obviously upgraded myself).. web browsing is fine, video exports take a while but editing is fine, watching YouTube or twitch is fine, like it's a good experience. 

 

now about the bit that laptops die faster, yes and no. if you buy one without a gpu it will last forever. all laptops I've had with dGPU's have either died or had driver issues. however, all laptops I've owned without dGPU's (my 2012 13" MacBook Pro, I have an elitebook from 2012 without a gpu too that's totally fine) have lasted forever and been very stable. 

 

it feels to me that Linus has used gaming laptops (particularly from razer) for too long. not all laptops have crappy quality control and run at 100c and sound like jet engines when you launch a program. that's only gaming laptops. 

 

regardless, I've seen plenty of desktop hardware from that era die, particularly gpu's (my 780Ti died) and motherboards. a desktop isn't magically more reliable than a well designed laptop. 

[lewdicrous]

Still haven't watched the VOD, but I'm guessing it has to do with upgradability, better cooling (less likely to get clogged, so thermals won't be affected that much), etc.

[Letgomyleghoe.]

I think his point was that a lot of laptops aren't designed well.

[TheBahrbarian]

I agree with you about the gaming laptop theory. Before I built my first desktop I always bought gaming branded laptops (or in some cases, laptops not marketed for "gaming" but that had the hardware necessary to do so). And I swear I tried every brand under the sun, they all sucked. I had 2 Dells, an HP, a Lenovo, and at least one more, they all failed inside of 2-3 years maximum (the second dell I had simply never worked out of the box, the charger wasn't working, which is apparently a very common issue for Dell). Usually they all suffered from crippling software/driver issues that were impossible to track down.

 

My favorite "gaming" laptop was a Dell Insprion 15 that I got on a whim as my first laptop, and it was a beast when it came to running games, however the thing ran hot as hell. And one day the screen started flickering white, I turned it off, and it never turned back on again. I was really young at the time but to the best of my knowledge, solder on the board started to flow so it was pretty much toast. And believe it or not that was probably the most reliable gaming laptop I've ever owned. Now I own an HP probook for school and it's been great, I don't think I will ever buy another gaming laptop (although these new Ryzen 4000 laptops are quite intriguing.)

[Aimi]

4 minutes ago, Twilight said:

if you buy one without a gpu it will last forever

It really won't, it just has one less part that could potentially fail.

 

4 minutes ago, Twilight said:

not all laptops have crappy quality control and run at 100c and sound like jet engines when you launch a program. that's only gaming laptops. 

You'd be surprised how many laptops can suffer from this issue, regardless of what they are meant to be used for.

 

5 minutes ago, Twilight said:

a desktop isn't magically more reliable than a well designed laptop. 

But a well designed/built desktop is far superior to even the high end laptops available.

[mariushm]

laptops are harder to clean (remove dust and hair and crap from heatsink fins)

the thermal paste is harder to replace

you have fewer upgrade options (ex just two so-dimm slots usually so good luck upgrading ram)

fewer cpu upgrade options (if any, if the cpu isn't soldered)

internally laptops also run at higher temperatures, like constant 70-90 degrees so other components around the cpu and gpu get hot and degrade ... luckily these days we have polymer capacitors which have long life even when abused but nevertheless a laptop will degrade over time.

don't even want to go into battery and let's not talk about power budgets and thermal limits and cpu being capped after some time due to thermals etc etc

 

 

[Ashleyyyy]

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

It really won't, it just has one less part that could potentially fail.

it depends though. in my experience laptops without gpu's last much longer. 

 

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

You'd be surprised how many laptops can suffer from this issue, regardless of what they are meant to be used for.

well, yeah, I had a Pro laptop from Asus that ramped the fans up if you launched chrome. that was not marketed towards gaming. i've had an msi gaming laptop and that one was even worse. I've seen that thing ramp up the fans from just moving the mouse. 

 

4 minutes ago, Aimi said:

But a well designed/built desktop is far superior to even the high end laptops available.

in terms of reliability I have doubts there... I mean, I've seen plenty of 8 - 9 year old mobo's die, even server boards which are meant to be legendarily reliable. 

[Aimi]

1 minute ago, Twilight said:

it depends though. in my experience laptops without gpu's last much longer. 

Confirmation bias

2 minutes ago, Twilight said:

in terms of reliability I have doubts there... I mean, I've seen plenty of 8 - 9 year old mobo's die, even server boards which are meant to be legendarily reliable. 

See above

[Guest]

This whole thread can be boiled down to: Your Mileage May Vary.

There are all kinds of outliers with all kinds of hardware.

At their core his statements are the general experience with older laptop hardware.

[Kilrah]

Of course you're going to find desktop parts that fail and laptops that don't, but in general if you look globally then laptops will on average either fail or become obsolete significantly sooner. 

 

 

[Ashleyyyy]

3 minutes ago, mariushm said:

laptops are harder to clean (remove dust and hair and crap from heatsink fins)

umm no, take bottom cover off and you have access to the fans. 

 

3 minutes ago, mariushm said:

the thermal paste is harder to replace

agreed. that was a bitch to do on my MacBook, I had to take the whole board out... 

 

4 minutes ago, mariushm said:

you have fewer upgrade options (ex just two so-dimm slots usually so good luck upgrading ram)

my 2012 MBP has 2 sodimm slots, and I upgraded it from the stock 4gb to 16gb of ram. but, with modern laptops you lose that convenience so I agree there. 

 

4 minutes ago, mariushm said:

fewer cpu upgrade options (if any, if the cpu isn't soldered)

well, cpu's require different sockets. a 7th gen desktop and a laptop with a 7th gen intel cpu are limited to the same generation unless you replace parts. 

 

5 minutes ago, mariushm said:

internally laptops also run at higher temperatures, like constant 70-90 degrees so other components around the cpu and gpu get hot and degrade ...

not that much higher (if it's not a gaming laptop)... my 2012 MBP will sit quite happily at 80 degrees under full load (exporting a 1080p video while watching YouTube) and it tildes around 40 to 60 degrees depending on what I'm doing. granted, I have a custom fan curve applied but that's easy to do. 

 

7 minutes ago, mariushm said:

cpu being capped after some time due to thermals etc etc

my 2012 MacBook Pro runs at the full boost clock still. so that's not always the case. 

 

1 minute ago, Den-Fi said:

This whole thread can be boiled down to: Your Mileage May Vary.

There are all kinds of outliers with all kinds of hardware.

I know. that's why I mentioned laptops I have experience with. in my experience the claims Linus made are false, but for others already in this thread it was true...  

[Sauron]

I think you're reading too much into it - all he was saying is that in his experience laptops from about 10 years ago don't feel to him as fast as they used to. My x220 has a sandy chip and came out in 2011, its performance is still just fine in my opinion - but then again I rarely needed it to do anything particularly heavy and it was a fairly high end machine for its time (in relation to its size). The 8850h laptop I just got from work is significantly faster (duh) and Linus routinely uses laptops that are significantly faster than even that so I can see why he'd feel this way.

[Danimacl]

Thing is with a desktop it’s way easier to replace parts with quality parts inexpensively. Finding a new replacement motherboard from apple for a MBP will probably be like $900. Desktops are easier to work on easier to troubleshoot and almost always run cooler. Heat = death. Also laptops get tossed around constantly. When was the last time you ever aggressively moved a desktop or tossed it down on a bed.

[Aimi]

Just now, Twilight said:

in my experience the claims Linus made are false

What, are his experiences false because they aren't yours?

[Ashleyyyy]

Just now, Aimi said:

What, are his experiences false because they aren't yours?

maybe a bad choice of words on my part. what I meant was that I have had very different experiences than what he's claiming. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Twilight said:

I know. that's why I mentioned laptops I have experience with. in my experience the claims Linus made are false, but for others already in this thread it was true...  

Yes, but you're finding a needle in a haystack and calling it the rule, not the exception.

This is a forum filled with people that know how to deal with the limitations of older hardware, so of course it's going to be a different picture painted than if you polled the average laptop user. So, as I said... Linus' views fit the experience of laptop users as a whole vs. just tech enthusiasts.

[Ashleyyyy]

1 minute ago, Danimacl said:

Thing is with a desktop it’s way easier to replace parts with quality parts inexpensively. Finding a new replacement motherboard from apple for a MBP will probably be like $900.

not $900, but considerably more than a desktop mobo, I agree there. 

 

2 minutes ago, Danimacl said:

Also laptops get tossed around constantly. When was the last time you ever aggressively moved a desktop or tossed it down on a bed.

not everyone does that lol, but you have a point. 

[Ashleyyyy]

1 minute ago, Den-Fi said:

This is a forum filled with people that know how to deal with the limitations of older hardware, so of course it's going to be a different picture painted than if you polled the average laptop user. 

good point... 

[Damascus]

If we're talking about long term usability, laptops always lose.  A 1.7ghz dual core i7 is basically useless for any modern tasks beyond browsing, but an equivalent cost desktop processor is still useable even at higher requirement workloads

[Ashleyyyy]

6 minutes ago, Damascus said:

A 1.7ghz dual core i7 is basically useless for any modern tasks beyond browsing

1.7ghz? my 2012 MBP runs at 3.1ghz... it depends what you mean by modern tasks too. I can edit 1080p video on that MacBook without issues. it stutters a little bit when I add effects but like, it's fine. 

[Damascus]

4 minutes ago, Twilight said:

1.7ghz? my 2012 MBP runs at 3.1ghz... it depends what you mean by modern tasks too. I can edit 1080p video on that MacBook without issues. it stutters a little bit when I add effects but like, it's fine. 

Depending on the model, that laptop also cost $2,000.  More than enough to get a 6 core, overclockable processor and high end GPU at the time which would still be a reasonably powerful rig by todays standards.  

 

I was making what I viewed as a fair mainstream vs. mainstream comparison, if we want to go high end things only get worse

[Ashleyyyy]

8 minutes ago, Damascus said:

Depending on the model, that laptop also cost $2,000.  More than enough to get a 6 core, overclockable processor and high end GPU at the time which would still be a reasonably powerful rig by todays standards.  

 

I was making what I viewed as a fair mainstream vs. mainstream comparison, if we want to go high end things only get worse

the 2012 13" MBP was a cheap model at the time, since it doesn't have a Retina display and the other models did. 

 

this is a snapshot from the apple site from 2013... the 13" 2.5ghz is the one that I'm talking about, without the Retina display. 

[Ashleyyyy]

2 minutes ago, Hakemon said:

To his defense I've had a couple Sandy Bridge laptops, and every single one of them has died within 4 years of owning it.

well yeah, some poorly designed laptops die. the 2011 15" MacBook Pro is a good example of a badly designed sandy bridge laptop. it suffered from crippling GPU failure. again coming back to my point that laptops with gpu's are unreliable. 

[lewdicrous]

Quote

Why does Linus think that a 9 - 8 year old laptop is bad compared to a similar desktop?

"...they seem to die faster, that's been my experience with them in general...." - Linus

[Damascus]

35 minutes ago, Twilight said:

the 2012 13" MBP was a cheap model at the time, since it doesn't have a Retina display and the other models did. 

 

this is a snapshot from the apple site from 2013... the 13" 2.5ghz is the one that I'm talking about, without the Retina display. 

Alright, so it doesn't :run at 3.1ghz"  it boosts to that.  And again, a 4c/8t i7 could be had at that pricepoint, and will continue to be useful long after the core and thread limits are breached