M1 Max / M1 Ultra will still stand over these incremental updates. It’s all about making the money now.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces New Mac Studio With M4 Max and M3 Ultra Chips, Thunderbolt 5, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow. You say that you "certainly don’t get the good faith impressions that the Mac Studio and/or Mac Pro are going to remain." I opine the opposite, and I too am in the Studio market segment even though I bought an MBP because Studio release dates were late. Also, the Ultra versions exceed my needs. IMO I certainly do get the good faith impressions that the Mac Studio and/or Mac Pro are going to remain.
Those wanting to immediately buy M4 Studio Ultras may not like the M3 Ultra choice, but that is a very small market segment. IMO the M3 Ultra may suggest that we will see an M5 Ultra in a Mac Studio and/or in a Mac Pro. My guess would be Q4 2025.
?? Seems great to me, except that we are still waiting on Mac Pros. What makes it "a mess of a lineup" ??
Then why didn’t Apple update the Mac Pro? They ALWAYS do the bare minimum with their desktop line. Ever since the 2010 or even 2012 Mac Pro Apple has been fumbling the ball on any headless Mac system. They barely put up the effort.
The real question is, how much faster is M3 Ultra compared to M4 Max
Um, no. but I agree one of us is rambling. And continuing to be condescending.
My statement was and is, I see no real greatness or usefulness of Gurman being right a day before announcement. You asked for some sort of apology. The only thing I apologize is for wasting the time of all the other readers with what is now a completely stupid conversation.
No it means more. Ethosik is giving real-world example that M3 chips provide specific hardware benefits for apps like Blender - - as expected.
And Ethosik's comment raises next question of whether or not M4 provides specific hardware benefits over M3 for apps like Blender, and if so how much? I.e., is M4 Max better than M3 Ultra for a Blender-type workflow, similar to Ethosik's real-world M2Ultra v. M3Max example? A very real-world question for buyers considering M3 Ultra versus M4 Max.
Also this release is just weird. M3 Max doesn’t have Thunderbolt 5. M4 is what introduced it. M* ultra is two M* Max connected. So M3 Ultra is not REALLY two M3 Max, since the ultra has Thunderbolt 5. So what other changes are included?
With Blender it is likely ray tracing is involved, so the M2 Ultra not having the RT cores vs the M3 Max that does, is the reason of the above.
The M3 Ultra vs M4 Max differences lie somewhere else though, in neural engine being one gen apart, ARM instruction set also is one gen off, N3B vs N3E fan efficiency, and probably in memory bandwidth as well.
Considering the Mac mini is out there and redesigned, and they've since launched a new headless Mac with the Mac Studio, I'm not sure that blanket statement makes much sense.
Thought it was implied as I was discussing a pro desktop. But I’m talking about the high end. Not the mini. And the mini also was HORRIBLE until recently too.
That "going back to one annual Mac update" would be absurd from production, engineering and business standpoints.
Interesting question. Apple’s website does not provide any direct performance comparisons between the two models.
I don’t see any reason why the world’s richest company couldn’t handle the release of several Macs at once.
Folks who are buying competence can get over any apparent messaging weirdness.
Think more thoroughly and you will realize "...why the world’s richest company couldn’t handle the release of several Macs at once."
It would be very resource-inefficient, a very bad thing.
It's very bad marketing on Apple's side, but ultimately unavoidable. They were probably working on the M3 Ultra chip for a while, before the M4 was even available. Or maybe something about the M4 architecture isn't conducive to an Ultra chip.
That's fair. Predictions on rumors tend to follow the Cone of Uncertainty where accuracy at its lowest early on and grows as the launch approaches. The areas where he is most often wrong are dates, prices, and names as those are all in flux until very late in the process. Sometimes his rumors seem to end up evaporating and it is unclear if he got bad information or if there was a change in strategy and the project was killed. Other times, his information is surprisingly on the mark.
My comment was more aimed at those who post broad statements like "Gurman is always wrong. Why does anyone listen to him." That kind of cynical take misses the number of times when he is more right than wrong.
We agree that the Mac Pros have been a mess; some good and some bad. And essentially nothing in the last few years.
But low to medium-high desktops have been excellent since Apple SoC, Mac minis and Mac Studios. The Studios in particular are very good, as you are no doubt aware.
All the gate-keeping of BTO options behind specific chips and core configurations.
You used to be able to get the base Studio and upgrade to 64GB RAM with that standard processor. Now it's 36GB, and the 48GB or 64GB options require a different M4 Max with two extra cores, effectively increasing the price significantly. Locking certain SSD sizes to specific chips doesn't even have a technical reason to it, it's just a margin move by Tim.
Personally I have never fely upgrading in a couple of years and making do with less RAM made sense. I far prefer more years and more RAM for the entire life cycle. I do not want to upend my workflow upgrading every couple of years.
Also note M3 Ultra allows 512 GB RAM. That is huge for many folks in this market segment.
Yes, if you are planning on doing some tasks, like AI, that RAM and GPU from the M3 Ultra will do more than having the moderately faster CPU of the M4.