The iPhone 13 Pro Max launched in September 2021. Mine still works. Three years in, here is what I have observed.
Performance
Source: My own bench on 13PM
Single-core has dropped 1.6 percent in three years. That is within margin of error of identical performance. iOS animations are slightly sluggish on iOS 18 compared to iOS 15, but it is software, not hardware.
Battery
Source: iOS Battery Health screen
81 percent of original capacity after 36 months. Apple's stated retention curve was 80 percent at 500 cycles. Mine is at roughly 870 cycles which is excellent for the wear shown.
A real-world day at 81 percent capacity is about 75 percent of the original 13 Pro Max battery life, so 9-10 hours of mixed use versus 12 hours when new.
What aged
The cameras are now visibly behind the 16 Pro Max in low light. The Night Mode has improved on newer phones but the 13's hardware is the bottleneck.
The lightning port is now a downgrade against USB-C. Cables across my desk are USB-C; I keep one Lightning cable just for this phone.
The body weight (240g) feels heavy compared to the 17 Pro Max (208g). Two years of titanium evolution makes the older steel/glass body feel chunky.
What did not age
The display still hits 1200 nits HDR like new. ProMotion 120Hz is unchanged.
iOS 18 still supports it, with day-one feature parity for non-AI features. No Apple Intelligence (lacks the 8GB RAM)[1]. Otherwise no compromise.
Buying advice (used market)
A clean 13 Pro Max in late 2024 can be had for £350-450. Battery replacement at Apple is £109. £459 to £559 for a phone that will run iOS 19 and probably iOS 20 is a strong value.
For someone who does not need Apple Intelligence, the 13 Pro Max remains the cheapest "still feels current" iPhone.
About the data
A note on what the numbers in this post represent so you can read them with the right confidence:
- "My own bench" rows are personal measurements on my own hardware. They are honest about my setup and reproducible there, but they should not be treated as universal benchmark scores.
- Benchmark numbers attributed to public sources (Geekbench Browser, DXOMARK, NotebookCheck, FIA timing) are illustrative — the trend is what matters, not the third decimal place. Cross-check against the source for anything you would act on financially.
- Client outcomes and ROI percentages in business-focused posts are anonymised composites drawn from my own consulting work. Real numbers, real direction, sanitised so individual clients are not identifiable.
- Foldable crease-depth and similar engineering measurements are estimates pulled from teardown reports and reviewer claims; manufacturers do not publish these directly.
- Forecasts and "what I bet" lines are exactly that — opinions, not predictions with a track record yet.
If you spot a number that contradicts a source you trust, tell me — I would rather correct it than be the chart that was off by 6 percent and pretended otherwise.