Apple Announces New Mac Studio With M4 Max and M3 Ultra Chips, Thunderbolt 5, and More

[picpicmac]

After what Apple just did with the M3 Studio Ultra - TB5 and 500 GB RAM retrofitted to M3- it seems that perhaps nothing is impossible with Apple SoC.

As I noted on another thread, the question is from whom Apple is buying 64GB LPDDR chips, if they are using only 8 LPDDR5x chips.

The memory bandwidth suggests they have 8 memory controllers running the LPDDR5x chips at about their rated bandwidth.

If instead Apple is using 16 32GB LPDDR5x (which they buy from Samsung), that means each controller will be running two memory chips, at half their rated bandwidth each. I don't know how Apple could multiplex two LPDDR5x per controller but perhaps they can. Also, overcome the overlapping traces on their PCB.

As I also noted on that other thread, this is why Apple has high-paid EEs, to solve these problems.

Next generation of low power SDRAMs are aiming at higher density, but AFAIK there are none on the market currently.

This memory bandwidth issue, and total memory, is of course the top of the list for AI developers.

 

[CertFX]

Ewwwwww M3… I guess they will introduce M4 Ultra and will be exclusive to the Mac Pro !

They'll get the plebes to pay for old tech. Proof? Apple Mac Studio display. 10 year old tech flying off the shelves for $1500.

 

[bzgnyc2]

I may be missing something, but unless the M3 Ultra is something entirely new, I think the M4 Max will perform very closely, if not better in some areas, to the M3 Ultra - certainly not worth doubling the price ($2K) without special GPU needs. I compared each generation's increase and found the following on Geekbench (numbers are rounded, and M3 Ultra specs are based on the average increase percentage between the M1 Max to M1 Ultra and M2 Max to M2 Ultra. Also note that the M2 Max to M2 Ultra did not have the same level of increase as the M1's did, a declining trend but with only two data points). I also used the base CPU of each, as Apple charges a ton more for slightly upgraded chips and I don't think most people buy them.

It appears that with the exception of Metal, the M4 Max will perform very similarly to

M1 Max to M1 Ultra performance increase:

1. Single core: 2400, basically the same between Max and Ultra
2. Multi-core: 13K to 18K (38% increase)
3. OpenCL: 62K to 95K (53% incease)
4. Metal: 106K to 162K (52% increase)

M2 Max to M2 Ultra performance increase:

1. Single core: 2800, basically the same again
2. Multi-core: 15K to 21K (40% increase)
3. OpenCL: 88K to 116K (31% increase)
4. Metal: 146K to 203K (39% increase)

M3 Max to M3 Ultra estimated performance increase based on M1 and M2 increases:

1. Single core: 3100
2. Multi-core: 19K – 26K (39% avg. est. increase)
3. OpenCL: 78K – 110K (41% avg. est. increase)
4. Metal: 155K – 225K (45% avg. est. increase)

M4 Max performance:

1. Single core: 3900
2. Multi-core: 23K (26K with 16C M4 Max)
3. OpenCL: 100K
4. Metal: 160K

If there was an M4 Ultra, using the same estimated performance increases above for the M3 Ultra, you'd get:

1. Single core: 3900
2. Multi-core: 32K
3. OpenCL: 141K
4. Metal: 232K

I generally agree with your approach but your estimates for the M3 Ultra seem a little low. Based on the M3 Max's performance in the MacBook Pro and historical scaling from Max to Ultra, I extrapolate the Studio M3 Ultra's performance as:

1. Single core: 3100
2. Multi-core (39% avg. est. increase)
   1. 28/60c: 26K
   2. 32/80c: 29K
3. OpenCL: (41% avg. est. increase)
   1. 28/60c: 110K
   2. 32/80c: 131K
4. Metal: (45% avg. est. increase)
   1. 28/60c: 182K
   2. 32/80c: 225K

There may be some specific advantages for applications that can use all of the M3 Ultra's memory bandwidth (50% greater) or its extra media engines. On the other hand, well agreed M3 Ultra's single core performance will be less.

My general recommendations:
Studio M4 Max: mainstream choice (up to 128GB of RAM and very good but not maximum multicore CPU/GPU performance)
Studio M3 Ultra 28/60c: if you need 256GB of RAM
Studio M3 Ultra 32/80c: if you need 512GB of RAM and/or maximum multicore CPU/GPU performance

 

[ILoveCalvinCool]

Studio M3 Ultra 28/60c: if you need 256GB of RAM
Studio M3 Ultra 32/80c: if you need 512GB of RAM and/or maximum multicore CPU/GPU performance

In addition, I would tell someone that if they don't know if they need 256/512GB RAM or not, then they do not need it and should get the Max.

 

[deconstruct60]

This is the problem with their current product release strategy. Nobody knows what or when updates are coming. Makes it impossible to plan ahead, which is especially problematic if you have a business.

Is suspect the Studio being paired to the chronically late Mac Pro in 2023 was a fluke.
The First Studio was around this time.


https://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac-Studio

The second was far more driven by the Mac Pro not coming out in the 2-year transition windows and being a major change. Also, Apple delaying the Mac Studio by a couple of months also help lessen the gap between June 2023 and March 2025.

The 3rd Mac Studio is right back in March again.

Next march maybe a M5 Max for the lower 1/2 of line. ( maybe not ... depending upon how many M5 Maxes Apple sells in the first year on MBPs. ) Also, less possible a M5 Ultra or more likely have to wait for M6 / M5 Ultra pairing. REally depends upon what the percentages are for Max Studios versus Ultra Studios. If 70%/30% split then more pressure to update the Max every year. If closer to 50%/50% then Max version could get weighted down with the Ultra's slower cycle ( if Ultra continues on variant dies. ). It kind of would make more sense for the Studio Max to start using a 'desktop' Max at some point though.


If Apple put the Mac Pro on a regular 2 year schedule that would be an large improvement. M3 Ultra 2025 , M5 Ultra 2027 ... etc. The Mac Pro is extremely unlikely going to get yearly updates. Folks who spent a lot more also tend to upgrade more slowly.

Released tightly together invites more of the "Mac Pro is just a big Studio with slots" comparison. The Mac Pro should not need to be hyper coupled to WWDC or to any other Mac. Apple should release it when it is ready. Ready should mean additional software ( to put more value add into the expansion abilities that are the core differentiator.). Ideally, the Mac Pro should get a solid macOS foundation to start off with. (not some semi-beta OS that isn't ready for production deployments. )

 

[bzgnyc2]

In addition, I would tell someone that if they don't know if they need 256/512GB RAM or not, then they do not need it and should get the Max.

Agree -- the Max is the mainstream choice and as a general rule these days you're in the mainstream unless you know your not.

At this point most people will be fine with entry-level MacBook Air M4, iMac M4, or Mac Mini M4. We can quibble about the entry-level storage but otherwise someone should have a specific reason(s) why they need more than that. The Studio Ultra is a niche of a niche. There are plenty of people for whom it will be amazing but it definitely isn't optimal for everyone.

 

[v3rlon]

Erm, Apple. Given the precedent set to date, calling the M4 Ultra the M3 Ultra would not only be confusing, but self-defeating and therefore pointless. It would be like selling a "1 carat" ring with 2 carat's worth of diamonds.

See my previous example of the Intel 586 being called "Pentium." Also note that when they started using multiples of the bus clock, double was Dx2 and Triple was DX4 (not Dx3) for the same reason. This isn't a court of law, so a precedent at $10 can get you a coffee at Starbucks. I will grant all day long that it is highly likely to play out the way you suggest, but you are making an assumption with no data on the M3 Ultra yet.

Right, I'm sure Apple have packed the M3 Ultra full of goodies they're not telling us about. Perhaps as a nice surprise for purchasers?

Apple doesn't disclose how much memory is in the phones, for example, and they do not usually disclose when it goes up. I would be inclined to believe that, were it 'chock full of goodies,' more would be mentioned, but there might be a couple more hidden gems. They might have bumped the clock speeds, for example, and not said anything. They have done that before, also.

But it is the only thing. Sure, TB5 is better than TB4, and welcome. What people are disappointed about is that Apple are using the older architecture in an expensive, top of the range computer. With the M5 out in ~7 months.

M5 will probably be out in ~7 months. Then it will take over the USS Enterprise and start blasting friendly ships in ... oh wait, wrong M5.

My point was there's no need to decap the SoC or anything. Utilities like Geekbench can directly identify the CPU / GPU cores, or simply reveal their presence based on comparing e.g. ST performance with existing SoCs. So if Apple had marketed the M3 Ultra as an M4, they'd have got found out very quickly, with accompanying blowback. So that wouldn't have been an option.

And my point is that Geekbench hasn't been applied yet. If we got on the bases of the jump from M1 to M2, we get a guess, but M2 to M3 in the Max/Pro range was not the same. Similarly, the jump from M3 to M4 was not exactly the same as the others. So we can ballpark it, but won't know until the systems start landing. Can you imagine the blowback? They promised me M3 architecture, but delivered M4 instead?

If you'd have ordered an M3U MP same day as it was announced, it sounds like you would be happy with its performance. Given fitting one to the Mac Pro would only have required a revised logic board, it doesn't look like Apple are particularly interested in updating it, though.

I'm not sure I'd wait for a Mac Pro. I can't see them making two Ultra's in one year, with one exclusive to a machine that only sells around 200k a year. And Apple's SoCs hardly have oodles of spare PCIe, so you're probably better off with TB peripherals or a TB5 expansion case.

Sadly, I think you are probably right about this. There might be a Mac Pro landing at the end of the year, but I don't think it is a good bet at this time. I guess I need a good TB5 expansion case.

 

[rehkram]

All this indicates, to me anyway (developer, 40 years at the coal face), either a lack of hardware planning, and/or unexpected issues encountered with the original plan.

Which would also tend to necessitate, IMHO, buying time to get things back onto a structured technology track based on lessons learned. Just my opinion, and this is not a criticism. It happens when you don't know yet what's around a corner several miles down the road, in this case from the introduction of the M* architecture.

I'm pretty sure Apple can move up to the next plateau successfully based on lessons learned. Until then, personally, I'll be staying on what I perceive to be the most current stable platform for processing my zeroes and ones.

 

[Aeronauts]

Ok, here's a question: roll back 50 years to 1975: How many computer companies back then are still in the business of selling computers today?

Answer: basically none. IBM today sells services.

But, if you go down just one year, to 49 years, do you know who's next?

Apple.

And your claim of 10% is just wrong. There are only four major players in the small computer market, each has between 20% and 25% of the market: Lenovo, Dell, HP, and Apple.

Apple has the least volume of the four... but the most revenues.

Corporate buyers are concerned with bulk costs and support costs. For example, my local health care giant has thousands of Lenovo computers and monitors in their many offices. No one really cares about what brand is on the monitor. Some corporate buyer likely just shopped a purchase order and Lenovo gave them the best deal.


That's how it works. No one in those offices care if the screen is 1440p or 2160p. No one cares if there is an AMD or Intel processor inside. No one cares if there is a seperate GPU or if the graphics is integrated in the main processor.

Those are things that internet geeks argue over.

In that big world of computer buyers, by which you want to judge Apple, no one cares about the model number on the ICs in their tools.

Only those on the internet who want to argue over model numbers - it's a "3" and not a "4" - care about those things.

According to IDC Apple’s worldwide share of the personal computer market in Q4 2024 was 10.1%.

If you don’t believe me Google it and see for yourself.

 

[darngooddesign]

So essentially a screenless MBP and an outdated offering.

Doubting these will fly off the shelf.

Which MBP has the M3 Ultra?

 

[Aeronauts]

Which MBP has the M3 Ultra?

I think he was referring to the M4 Max version.

 

[Riot Nrrrd]

If you read the article you linked, it seems the issue affected some who tried those little USB-C to USB-A adapters.

The Studio already has two USB-A ports, so the Luddites can use those.

On my present Mac I have one USB-C device connected, a 4 TB external SSD. (Which randomly disconnects from its USB-C port on a PCI-e USB 3.2 card.) The rest of my USB devices are all USB-A. So it would be nice if all those shiny new Thunderbolt 5 ports on the new Mac Studio Just Worked™.

 

[Ifti]

Im looking to replace my MBP M1 Max with a desktop solution, and passed on the Mac Mini M4 Pro to wait for a M4 Max Studio, with more ports. I was always looking for the M4 Max, so that has been delivered and I will most likely place an order for the higher end M4 Max with 64GB RAM and 1TB SSD.

I do plug and unplug external SSDs now and then however - I just wish those front ports were TB5, or even USB4! I'm not prepared to pay all the extra for an Ultra chip that I do not need, to get front TB5 ports!

Alternatively, had the Studio Display had been updated to TB5, with additional USB4 ports, that would have done me!

Looks like I will have to look at an external TB hub.....

 

[v3rlon]

According to IDC Apple’s worldwide share of the personal computer market in Q4 2024 was 10.1%.

If you don’t believe me Google it and see for yourself.

He's pointing out that while Apple sells 10.1% of computers, you are comparing them to "everyone else." Lenovo, on its own, isn't the other 90%. Neither is Dell nor HP. The sell computers with Windows, Chrome, and Linux, but even then a huge part of those sales are corporate customers. A business that buys 1200 laptops for its employees will run totals up quickly.
Apple is a bit more popular in the home market, and even more so in the creative spaces. That is part of the reason like 50% of computers in movies and TV are Apple, even if they put a sticker over the logo.

 

[Aeronauts]

That is part of the reason like 50% of computers in movies and TV are Apple, even if they put a sticker over the logo.

I don’t know where you get that 50% figure but Apple computers are often featured in movies and TV shoes because Apple gives them away free to the production studios in return for the free publicity.

 

[v3rlon]

I don’t know where you get that 50% figure but Apple computers are often featured in movies and TV shoes because Apple gives them away free to the production studios in return for the free publicity.

If it is "for publicity" then why is there a sticker over the Apple Logo?

That is not how publicity works.

When Ford sponsors FBI shows on ABC, you will notice all the cars, at least as driven by the good guys, have Ford logos. The logo is clearly shown when the car pulls up.
When Saab sponsored Burn Notice, in one of the most brilliant product placement spots I have ever seen, Michael Westin touts the sporty features of the car and how they help out in a car chase while the Saab logo is front and center of the steering wheel as Fiona is activating the sport suspension.

See that is publicity. Putting a sticker over the logo and not showing who made the computer is the opposite of publicity.

 

[Ifti]

They'll get the plebes to pay for old tech. Proof? Apple Mac Studio display. 10 year old tech flying off the shelves for $1500.

So what would you suggest is a better monitor, with the same quality speakers, and the same build?
Not defending it, but I'm genuinely interested as I'm in the market for one!

 

[v3rlon]

So what would you suggest is a better monitor, with the same quality speakers, and the same build?
Not defending it, but I'm genuinely interested as I'm in the market for one!

You can get a 48" LG OLED from Costco and calibrate it for less, and it does have speakers built in, and less than $1000 US. The 42" would be a better size, but is more expensive and harder to find.
Either way, you gat a 120 Hz 4k monitor with better blacks and great color.

 

[Aeronauts]

If it is "for publicity" then why is there a sticker over the Apple Logo?

That is not how publicity works.

When Ford sponsors FBI shows on ABC, you will notice all the cars, at least as driven by the good guys, have Ford logos. The logo is clearly shown when the car pulls up.
When Saab sponsored Burn Notice, in one of the most brilliant product placement spots I have ever seen, Michael Westin touts the sporty features of the car and how they help out in a car chase while the Saab logo is front and center of the steering wheel as Fiona is activating the sport suspension.

See that is publicity. Putting a sticker over the logo and not showing who made the computer is the opposite of publicity.

Most don’t have stickers over the logo. Obviously the ones that do are Macs the production company have purchased rather than been gifted. Alternatively some companies are restricted by what they can show and may not accept any form of product placement in their shows.

 

[Airmk]

Im looking to replace my MBP M1 Max with a desktop solution, and passed on the Mac Mini M4 Pro to wait for a M4 Max Studio, with more ports. I was always looking for the M4 Max, so that has been delivered and I will most likely place an order for the higher end M4 Max with 64GB RAM and 1TB SSD.

I do plug and unplug external SSDs now and then however - I just wish those front ports were TB5, or even USB4! I'm not prepared to pay all the extra for an Ultra chip that I do not need, to get front TB5 ports!

Alternatively, had the Studio Display had been updated to TB5, with additional USB4 ports, that would have done me!

Looks like I will have to look at an external TB hub.....

What about just leaving a thunderbolt 5 cable hanging from the Mac, plugged in the back and just connect your ssd when you need to ?
You can use those cable clips to attach it on the edge of your desk so it stays kinda clean, cable-management wise

I bet a TH5 hub is gonna be expensive

 

[deconstruct60]

This:
"...something else up their sleeve for WWDC? If Apple is going to start using their own Apple Silicon based system in their servers, maybe they designed a new architecture for them and it will be used in the Mac Pro?"

Doubtful. Pretty good chance Apple uses the same SoC subcomponents they have: CPU cluster , GPU cluser , NPU cluster , etc. but just use different die space allocations. Higher R&D reuse and lower overall cost.


" ... The report said the new chip contains "many duplicates" of Apple's Neural Engine, so it sounds like it will offer turbocharged performance for AI processing.
....
More on Broadcom's involvement, from the report:

Like Google, Apple is relying on Broadcom for technology to network or link the chips together so they can work in unison to compute data more quickly.

..."

Apple Intelligence Servers Expected to Get All-New, Turbocharged Chip

Apple Intelligence servers are currently powered by the M2 Ultra chip, and they are expected to start using M4 series chips next year. In an eventual...

www.macrumors.com

If Apple strips out the Thunderbolt I/O subsystem to put the 100/200GbE Broadcomm Ethernet system onto the die to build a Google Tensor clone like data center only focused package, then the 'fit' with the Mac Pro is going to be minimal. Similarly, If lower the display controller count to minimal levels ... again a mismatch,

Likewise if they shift the die percentage allocation to the NPUs much higher while dialing back the CPU... very similar mismatch.

In short, if scaling up the NPU die allocation , then a pretty good chance that something else is going to 'loose'. If using the same basic building blocks for the design then it is more so a zero-sum game of shifting die allocations to meet the customized workload and external interconnection context ( 100+ Ethernet , not 10GbE) .

If they can manage a 300W variant then perhaps they can compose a card that could put into a Mac Pro , but that wouldn't be the primary SoC for the system. If tweak the Mac Pro's AUX power then maybe a 400-450W zone. i wouldn't hold my breath on that though ( depends upon how entangled their specific data center security into this system. Only needs to work in one companies data center , there isn't a big push for general utility.)


Some folks think the "data center" is going to bring RAM DIMM slots back. High end data center cards don't have "DIMM slots". For example

" ... Trillium TPUs achieve an impressive 4.7X increase in peak compute performance per chip compared to TPU v5e. We doubled the High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) capacity and bandwidth, and also doubled the Interchip Interconnect (ICI) bandwidth over TPU v5e. ..."

Introducing Trillium, sixth-generation TPUs | Google Cloud Blog

The new sixth-generation Trillium Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) makes it possible to train and serve the next generation of AI foundation models.

cloud.google.com

Decent chance Apple sticks with their "poor man's HBM" formula , but the next likely alternative would be HBM ( which is another cost mismatch for the the Mac Pro).

 

[deconstruct60]

Ok, here's a question: roll back 50 years to 1975: How many computer companies back then are still in the business of selling computers today?

Answer: basically none. IBM today sells services.

on a IBM webpage today ...

" 31 days:19 hours:00 minutes:59 seconds
..to the next big thing in mainframes. Join us for IBM Z Day Special Edition at 10:00 AM ET on April 8, 2025.
... "
https://www.ibm.com/z

Computer sales are not 'zero'. ( IBM still has P-series also

Enterprise Business Server Solutions | IBM

Enterprise servers built to handle mission-critical workloads while maintaining security, reliability and control of your entire IT infrastructure.

www.ibm.com

IBM is also one of the major early players in Quantum

IBM Quantum Computing

IBM Quantum is working to bring useful quantum computing to the world and make the world quantum safe.

www.ibm.com

)


Additionally, Lenovo is pragmaticvally defacto IBM's PC business. It just got spun out and a different label slapped on the product. There wasn't a "IBM" in 1975 , it was formally International Business Machines. Name changes over 40 years come all the time as mergers and spin outs happen.




Does IBM sell more services today than Mainframes in 1975? Yes. Apple sells more in services than Mac also.

Apple Reports Best Quarter Ever in 1Q 2025 Results: $36.3B Profit on $124.3B Revenue

Apple today announced financial results for the first fiscal quarter of 2025, which corresponds to the fourth calendar quarter of 2024. For the...

www.macrumors.com

Services about 3x what the Mac sales are. A decent chunk of that services is Mac driven though. ( ditto decent chunk of IBM services are driven by IBM hardware. )

 

[mrhick01]

The irony is, that 7.2% slice of Mac sales is more pure revenue and profit than any quarter of computer sales as Apple Computer, Inc.

They are a far larger corporation than when they were a niche computer seller.

 

[Ifti]

What about just leaving a thunderbolt 5 cable hanging from the Mac, plugged in the back and just connect your ssd when you need to ?
You can use those cable clips to attach it on the edge of your desk so it stays kinda clean, cable-management wise

I bet a TH5 hub is gonna be expensive

Yeh true - I may end up doing this actually

 

[saulinpa]

Additionally, Lenovo is pragmaticvally defacto IBM's PC business. It just got spun out and a different label slapped on the product.

Maybe in old peoples' minds that remember typewriters but Lenovo is an independent company. It wasn't just spun off. It was sold. IBM does not own it; mostly Chinese investors do.