Yep I agree, it’s unfortunate MacRumors regularly makes mistakesYes, I was correcting a mistake in the original post and forgot to add ‘M2 Pro’ part.
Yep I agree, it’s unfortunate MacRumors regularly makes mistakesYes, I was correcting a mistake in the original post and forgot to add ‘M2 Pro’ part.
Yeah, maybe you're right. It's just a bummer, I really loved the old design 🙁I can understand your view, but there was also complaints that it was too slim to be able to handle the heat generated by the components. It seems Apple has been thinking about this in the current design of the 14 and 16 inch MacBook Pro.
I can understand your view, but there was also complaints that it was too slim to be able to handle the heat generated by the components. It seems Apple has been thinking about this in the current design of the 14 and 16 inch MacBook Pro.
It's not an issue in real use with iPhone / iPads, why would it be an issue for a laptop ?
If the software is properly built around the feature it should be good.
I've been confused about their Thunderbolt 4 devices not supporting 8k from the beginning. My understanding is that Thunderbolt 4 has to be fully compliant with USB4 and that USB4 has to be able to do 8k60 because it has to have DP alt mode 2.0 support. I guess not. Very weird that Apple's Thunderbolt 4 ports can't do it even with display stream compression. In the past they've always maxed out the capabilities of their ports even when it wasn't required. Why use Thunderbolt 4 in 2023 with 2016 display capabilities?The expanded display support throws up an interesting conundrum - it seems that the 8k60 (or 4k240) is only supported by the HDMI port and that the Thunderbolt interface is limited to 6k60. This means that to get the highest performance video output you can't have a one-cable solution (USB-C) and none of Apple's displays accept HDMI in (and don't seem to support >60 Hz)... Even a new Apple XDR display that supported 120 Hz would still need an HDMI cable. Does this imply that the ports are still DisplayPort 1.4? (the PC market is moving to DisplayPort 2.1 and plant of GPUs and monitors with support were announced at CES)
On battery life, does this mean maxing out the CPU will give less battery life than M1 Pro/Max as it seems that the increased battery life advertised arises from the low power cores being able to do a bigger proportion of low-mid level tasks?
I would say earliest redesign based on the latest rumors is more likely 2025. 2024 is supposed to be an upgrade to the M3 chip on faster process which could be a big deal for performance and battery but will be largely just another chip swap.Can we expect a MacBook Pro redesign in 2024? I'm really not a fan of the bulky design and the all black keyboard. 😕
TSMC's 4P process is not 4nm, it's third generation 5nm.Too bad Apple cheapened out on TSMC 5nm while Nvidia 4000 series GPU and AMD Ryzen 7040 series CPU are on TSMC 4nm.
TSMC's 4P process is not 4nm, it's third generation 5nm.
Re: support for monitors and high refresh rates, even the M1 Macs can support higher refresh rates than 60Hz. You just have to use things like Thunderbolt to HDMI 2.1 adapters. Search this forum for more information.
In other words, MacRumors journalists and indeed readers should be careful about reading the specs and believing it's the end of the story. It just Apple spinning things a certain way to encourage buying decisions.
Nvidia's 4000 series and AMD's Ryzen 7000 series are using N4, not N4P, and there's negligible benefit between N4 and N5P. Calling it a "lesser node" is a stretch. N4P is a further 5nm refinement that will allow 5nm designs to be further extended for added performance/efficiency benefits without the high cost TSMC is currently charging for N3 wafers. Apple is jumping straight to N3 with the A17 and (likely) M3 generations later this year.Key point is Apple's choice of TSMC N5P is a lesser node than N4P.
![]()
Yeah but the 32GB max is pretty weak.Very pleased about the extra RAM and 6E
Kinda resembles the shell of the display if the luxo lamp iMac design.Can we expect a MacBook Pro redesign in 2024? I'm really not a fan of the bulky design and the all black keyboard. 😕
I think it follows that they will upgrade the Studio to M2 Max and M2 "ultra" or something similar sometime in the year, probably at a much higher price difference from the mini, and perhaps this is what kills the Mac "pro" for good.I'm interested in seeing benchmarks between the Mac mini with M1 vs M2 vs M2 Pro. I have a feeling that besides the improvement in GPU performance with the M2 Pro there won't be much of a difference in real-world usage.
I also find it strange for Apple to continue on with the Mac mini. The Mac Studio felt like an evolution on the Mac mini offering mostly the same form factor with better cooling. Now we have this strange scenario where the Mac mini suddenly offers M2, M2 Pro, and M2 Max, while the Mac Studio is stuck with M1 Max and M1 Ultra.
Unless you need so much ram daily 24/7, paying for a VM with that RAM only when you need it is better.When I see stuff like 96GB of RAM, part of me yearns for such a machine.
And then I remember that I'm a dirty pleb who has zero use case for anything more than 16GB currently, and even that is a bit of a stretch.
Yes, I feel the same way, bought the MBP 16" M1Pro just over a year ago. It's currently outperforming most anything I do with it. Battery life is outstanding as well. Very happy owner. Maybe in later 2024 or early 2025, but they'll have to throw something more revolutionary in there to get me to buy another before then.While benchmarks will be interesting to see compared to the M1 Pro & M1 Max, I've still got no regrets buying my 14" MBP with the M1 Pro back in July and not waiting for the M2-series.
Battery life already lasts longer than I need it to and I don't use high-refresh rate displays. And the machine is currently faster than I need anyway. So the M2 Pro isn't bringing anything else to the table.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy they're out, but Apple hardware is so good currently, I no longer need to upgrade constantly.