The desktop user may be less happy if the lifetime of their processor is 1 year instead of >10. Thats the other downside of running hot: shorter time to failure.
In all these cases the CPU isn't going over its designed temperature limit, so unless Intel are messing with those numbers too now (AFAIK the expected lifetime is based on continuous running at the maximum temperature, like many other electronic components are rated at) the lifetime won't be shorter than the spec.
(I'm curious if these new CPUs based on smaller processes do have a measurably shorter lifetime in practice; a lot of people can probably tell stories of decade-old Prescotts and such which are still in active use.)
Longevity is, supposedly, also dependant on current, and hence voltage. Unfortunately processor reviews don't consider the lifetime of the product, as that is probably only known to the manufacturer
