Better wait and see what the Mac Pro looks like. Also, I don’t expect a 4-die version, and the M2-series is pretty lame in performance.
I’m betting all for the M3, though I was concerned that Apple might give up the performance on Macs. I hope not.
The M2 has 20% CPU and 30% GPU performance gains over the M1... That by any standard is not "lame".
Let's not forget that these designs are still new and may take a couple of generations to work all the kinks out. We could see much better gains in the M3 if they jump to A17 cores (skipping A16) and use TSMC's N3 process.
"However, the prospect of two Macs using M2 Ultra may be a problem for Apple, as one could cannibalize the sales of the other."
When the iPad was released, causing ignorant magazine writers to voice their opinion that it could cannibalize iPod/iPhone sales, Steve Jobs himself famously said "If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.”
Turns out he knew what he was talking about.
It is dumb simply for the reason these are two different form factor systems that serve different purposes. Apple isn't worried about their other product lines, they're more worried about making sure professionals who need expandability don't jump ship and go to Windows as they did after the trash can Mac Pro was released.
The Studio is for those that need the performance without the need for expandability - it (plus Studio Display) is literally a replacement for the iMac Pro.
When they update the current iMac to M2, this Spring, I'd be willing to bet they also release a larger iMac with M2 and M2 Pro. Then next release, we'll get larger iMac with M3 Pro and M3 Max.
assuming the Mac Pro has all of the Studio functionality, and then some, the only reason to keep the Mac Studio is to fill in a price gap… unless the new Mac Pro has a (bare bones) starting price closer to $1999-$2499 (similar to MacBook Air and MacBook Pro price differential)
I doubt they'd offer the same SoC on the mini and the Studio. Instead, I think it'll be more like...
Mac mini - Mx, Mx Pro Mac Studio - Mx Max, Mx Ultra Mac Pro - Mx Ultra, Mx Extreme*
1. The mini and the Studio are basically the same system, so there's nothing to differentiate a mini w/Pro from a Studio w/Pro... the boards are the same footprint. Only difference is cooling capacity, which would be a waste of space for the Mx Pro.
2. The differences in GPUs between the Pro and Max aren't quite as clear cut now, but I believe with newer generations cores, that difference will become very obvious between the two systems. And so the jump from a mini w/Pro to a Studio w/Max will be fairly significant with regards to graphics/video processing.
3. If rumors are correct that there were issues with current gen Extreme, then it may miss the first Mac Pro model, and it'll eventually show up in a later model. Possibly this summer we get the Mac Pro w/Ultra and then by next summer get a Mac Pro with both options, Ultra and Extreme.
Form factor is King most people who invested in a 27 inch iMac (since 2010?) over the years want a larger screen iMac, that Max headroom Mac Studio is unacceptable. I know I certainly will not buy it, certainly not without at least seeing what the new silicon Mac Pro looks like, I would take any Apple Silicon SOC as long as I can get a bigger screen iMac and it doesn’t involve that abomination called the Mac Studio, I also would consider a tower which Apple seems to have problems making, I believe most of Apple’s hangups is just marketing it isn’t technical. You can’t sell what you do not make and right now Apple is flunking that test in not offering a full range of computers.
A full Mac range available for sale probably would’ve closed that $4 billion gap in the last quarter. The Mac being offered in a full range of form factors (which Apple didn’t do) is more important than absolute speed, people over the years have bought Mac’s for the performance (don’t confuse that with GPU’s), reliability, OS and its ability to work with other Apple devices, if I wanted to play a game I would buy a PC, PlayStation or an Xbox. Apple’s market is different (always has been) than the PC market.
I wonder if Apple was just surprised at how little cooling their chips required, which could explain the overbuilt heat sink and cooling fans for the Mac Studio. It seems likely that the M3 Max will run just fine in a Mac mini form factor, and if so the Mac Studio hardware would be relevant only for the M3 Ultra. The M3 Ultra itself might just not have a large enough market to support two form factors, and if they are going to do a Mac Pro with a base price of $5000 and configurations going up to $20K, that might just make the most sense as the platform to keep, particularly if the M3 Ultra Mac Pro is a decent amount smaller than the current Mac Pro.
But who knows, given that this is the post Steve Jobs Apple we are talking about, we can be assured that some of the decisions Apple will continue to make in support of their pro users really won't make much sense.
I wonder if Apple was just surprised at how little cooling their chips required, which could explain the overbuilt heat sink and cooling fans for the Mac Studio. It seems likely that the M3 Max will run just fine in a Mac mini form factor, and if so the Mac Studio hardware would be relevant only for the M3 Ultra. The M3 Ultra itself might just not have a large enough market to support two form factors, and if they are going to do a Mac Pro with a base price of $5000 and configurations going up to $20K, that might just make the most sense as the platform to keep, particularly if the M3 Ultra Mac Pro is a decent amount smaller than the current Mac Pro.
But who knows, given that this is the post Steve Jobs Apple we are talking about, we can be assured that some of the decisions Apple will continue to make in support of their pro users really won't make much sense.
The amount of heat generated is easy to calculate especially with the design software that is used.
Complete nonsense. The Mac Studio is a product line. It's not going anywhere. Or is Apple only planning a Mac Studio only with a bigger case? what would be the point?
Form factor is King most people who invested in a 27 inch iMac (since 2010?) over the years want a larger screen iMac, that Max headroom Mac Studio is unacceptable. I know I certainly will not buy it, certainly not without at least seeing what the new silicon Mac Pro looks like, I would take any Apple Silicon SOC as long as I can get a bigger screen iMac and it doesn’t involve that abomination called the Mac Studio
I'm not sure what you mean by saying the Mac Studio is an abomination. I already have the monitor I'd want for it, a 32" Asus ProArt, and external photo storage. AFAICT an M1 Max Mac Studio will make a great photo processing station, and available direct from Apple under $1800, tho I'll buy used for much less barring some major price-break on new. What am I missing?
I wonder if Apple was just surprised at how little cooling their chips required, which could explain the overbuilt heat sink and cooling fans for the Mac Studio. It seems likely that the M3 Max will run just fine in a Mac mini form factor, and if so the Mac Studio hardware would be relevant only for the M3 Ultra. The M3 Ultra itself might just not have a large enough market to support two form factors, and if they are going to do a Mac Pro with a base price of $5000 and configurations going up to $20K, that might just make the most sense as the platform to keep, particularly if the M3 Ultra Mac Pro is a decent amount smaller than the current Mac Pro.
But who knows, given that this is the post Steve Jobs Apple we are talking about, we can be assured that some of the decisions Apple will continue to make in support of their pro users really won't make much sense.
The amount of heat generated is easy to calculate especially with the design software that is used.
They weren't surprised, but I'm curious how they got to the cooling system they got to. Apple designs from the outside in. So the product marketing people said, "Here is the shape of the Mac Studio, like a tall Mac mini. We want to put in a 110 W and 220 W SoC in it, and it can't be anymore that 25 dB in a quiet room." I am surprised that had to resort to copper for the Ultra. Almost thinking the air inlets going into the box are not big enough to feed the fans, so they needed to use copper to have it run at low RPMs.
The M1 Max, M2 Max and M3 Max can all run in the Mac mini form factor. The 2018 6-core Intel Mac mini was 122 W max. The 2022 M1 Max Mac Studio is 115 W. So, the Mac mini can have a Max chip inside, but it will likely run loud and hot like an Intel processor. It likely will never be in the Mac mini.
The M3 Max version, presumably on TSMC N3, will not run much cooler than the M2 Max version. Apple is going to use all the additional power efficiency headroom for more transistors and more performance. There's this belief going around that the TSMC 3nm chips will run cooler. They might, but it will be at a level indistinguishable for the user, and they need to use more transistors to increase performance. They will consume about the same power as M2 and M1 versions.
When they update the current iMac to M2, this Spring, I'd be willing to bet they also release a larger iMac with M2 and M2 Pro. Then next release, we'll get larger iMac with M3 Pro and M3 Max.
The larger iMac is more likely to get the pro, max and ultra. The iMac 5k was a beast. The new one will be too. Not just some Mac mini tier machine.
I doubt that Apple's product planning is that stupid and shortsighted. It's not as if when they decided to green light the Mac Studio, the Apple Silicon Mac Pro wasn't already in the planning pipeline.
Why do so many people tech pundits think that Apple, arguably the most successful company ever, is run by a bunch of dimwits?
Apple could just release the Mac Studio alongside the Pro, but cripple it with only one external monitor, like it did to make sure MacBook Airs don’t cannibalize the MacBook Pros.
I have a feeling the Mac Pro will not even be close to the pricing of the Mac Studio. If done right, it shouldn't be. So the Mac Studio would be well positioned for the 'normal pro' users who don't need 256GB of RAM, or are prepared to pay 10K+ for a machine.
Comments
The M2 has 20% CPU and 30% GPU performance gains over the M1... That by any standard is not "lame".
Let's not forget that these designs are still new and may take a couple of generations to work all the kinks out. We could see much better gains in the M3 if they jump to A17 cores (skipping A16) and use TSMC's N3 process.
It is dumb simply for the reason these are two different form factor systems that serve different purposes. Apple isn't worried about their other product lines, they're more worried about making sure professionals who need expandability don't jump ship and go to Windows as they did after the trash can Mac Pro was released.
The Studio is for those that need the performance without the need for expandability - it (plus Studio Display) is literally a replacement for the iMac Pro.
When they update the current iMac to M2, this Spring, I'd be willing to bet they also release a larger iMac with M2 and M2 Pro. Then next release, we'll get larger iMac with M3 Pro and M3 Max.
I doubt they'd offer the same SoC on the mini and the Studio. Instead, I think it'll be more like...
Mac mini - Mx, Mx Pro
Mac Studio - Mx Max, Mx Ultra
Mac Pro - Mx Ultra, Mx Extreme*
1. The mini and the Studio are basically the same system, so there's nothing to differentiate a mini w/Pro from a Studio w/Pro... the boards are the same footprint. Only difference is cooling capacity, which would be a waste of space for the Mx Pro.
2. The differences in GPUs between the Pro and Max aren't quite as clear cut now, but I believe with newer generations cores, that difference will become very obvious between the two systems. And so the jump from a mini w/Pro to a Studio w/Max will be fairly significant with regards to graphics/video processing.
3. If rumors are correct that there were issues with current gen Extreme, then it may miss the first Mac Pro model, and it'll eventually show up in a later model. Possibly this summer we get the Mac Pro w/Ultra and then by next summer get a Mac Pro with both options, Ultra and Extreme.
A full Mac range available for sale probably would’ve closed that $4 billion gap in the last quarter. The Mac being offered in a full range of form factors (which Apple didn’t do) is more important than absolute speed, people over the years have bought Mac’s for the performance (don’t confuse that with GPU’s), reliability, OS and its ability to work with other Apple devices, if I wanted to play a game I would buy a PC, PlayStation or an Xbox. Apple’s market is different (always has been) than the PC market.
But who knows, given that this is the post Steve Jobs Apple we are talking about, we can be assured that some of the decisions Apple will continue to make in support of their pro users really won't make much sense.
Something that seems preposterous, regurgitated from an unassociated pundit, as fact?
Maybe instead of:
Mac Studio may never get updated, because new Mac Pro is coming
This would be better?Mac Studio may never get updated, because new Mac Pro is coming, says Gurman
The M1 Max, M2 Max and M3 Max can all run in the Mac mini form factor. The 2018 6-core Intel Mac mini was 122 W max. The 2022 M1 Max Mac Studio is 115 W. So, the Mac mini can have a Max chip inside, but it will likely run loud and hot like an Intel processor. It likely will never be in the Mac mini.
The M3 Max version, presumably on TSMC N3, will not run much cooler than the M2 Max version. Apple is going to use all the additional power efficiency headroom for more transistors and more performance. There's this belief going around that the TSMC 3nm chips will run cooler. They might, but it will be at a level indistinguishable for the user, and they need to use more transistors to increase performance. They will consume about the same power as M2 and M1 versions.
Mac Studio Ultra may never get updated, because new Mac Pro is coming, says Gurman
Why do so many people tech pundits think that Apple, arguably the most successful company ever, is run by a bunch of dimwits?