I think it should be called the “Mac Pro Go”. Mac Pro power in a travel-sized package.
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 Developing 'Mac Studio,' Described as a Mac Mini and Mac Pro Hybrid
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would estimate a quad ASi SoC model, with 1TB LPDDR5X RAM & 8TB SSD to max out at US$25K...?
Maybe mod some old-school claw foot bathtub feet on there...? ;^p
The ever elusive xMac...!
Next workstation-class mac will be called Mac Studio
I got some info about next workstation class mac, list below. - It will be called Mac Studio - Powered by M1 max 2x - 20 CPU cores and 48 GPU cores - Low-end mac display (but the prices not seem to be low) will be call Apple 5K display - As i have seen only front of display, it closely resemble...
forums.macrumors.com
I wonder if it is a durability / longevity issue with anodizing Aluminum to "true black".
Jason Shirer at Bloomberg did claim that Apple was developing a "Jade4C-Die" SoC with 40 CPU cores and 128 GPU cores, which equals four M1 Max. And William Ma at The Information said Apple was developing an M3-series SoC with 40 CPU cores (not sure if he mentioned how many GPU cores).
Independent analysis claims that the M1 Max SoC has unused connectors/registers along the "bottom" edge that is believed to allow two M1 Max SoCs to be physically joined. So latest speculation is that "Jade4C-Die" / "M1 Max Quadro" might use these connectors/registers to connect to a central hub to allow all four SoCs to communicate together.
A perfect opportunity to bring back the Quadra name. Or, even Centris?
All but guarantees that they won’t do that, of course.
Sounds like you've seen it?No, this isn’t the minitower everyone’s been waiting for.Many have been waiting for something affordable with slots. I’m fairly certain this will be priced higher than those folks would be willing to pay and will have little, if any, internal expansion. It may not require $700 wheels or $300 feet, BUT it could very well start at $7K and go up from there.
We are talking about the M1 Max SoCs here, so any future M3 plans not really relevant at this point...?
There was some Twitter posts from an engineer dude, something about the "extra bits" on the M1 Max SoC only being able to do a dual SoC config, but not a quad...? So maybe the initial Mac Pro (Cubue/Studio/whatever) is limited to dual SoCs, with quad SoC configs to follow with the M2/M3 series of SoCs...?
The problem with small yet powerful technology is justifying the price. And Apple has a tendency to overcharge for miniaturization. But people find it hard to justify form over function. If its smaller than less expensive but just as fast larger units, this will fail. If this is a less expensive alternative to buying a much more expensive computer if you don't need portability or expandability, then this will succeed. If they hobble it by taking away ports or making you spend $500 in upgrades just to have a pro system, then it wont be the success it should be.
Well, they would certainly add more I/O as the MBP only has 3 USB-C type ports and if they only cater to memory options not available in the MBP (start at 64 and go to 128?) and higher end storage options, then that’d be surely more expensive.
As a pro that work in my own studio...what should I choose?
Expansion performance is one of my main interests. I have the current Intel MP with 5x SSDs mounted on 3x PCI cards. If this Mac Pro Mini doesn’t have enough pci slots (if it has any at all) then will I be able to get the full bandwidth using Thunderbolt 4 that I enjoy now using PCI?
True, M3 is not relevant to this first generation of products, but it does imply that Apple does intend to offer multi-SoC options for future generations of Apple Silicon.
And yes, the "extra bits" are believed to allow two M1 Max SoCs to be directly connected together into a larger package - what we have been referring to as the "M1 Max Duo".
However, I see no reason why Apple could not design a square "hub" using the same connector on each of the four sides to allow four M1 Max to be directly connected together (via said "hub") into a larger package, as well.
No. I suspect you don't understand that companies, even those as large as Apple, do not have infinite resources. They march to a roadmap that was set up long ago based upon a set of criteria/goals and goals being met. It was stated that new M1-based computers would be released over a two year time span. Also...it appears you you are not aware the Mac Pro was targeted towards creative professionals with large budgets, rather than typical Apple consumers.
What enterprise is buying Macs instead of cheap Dell products in bulk? Anyone that needs one is likely using a MacBook of some variety, and they're not buying them in remotely close to the same numbers.
I love how people are already whining about specs and pricing as if this thing is already out.
I’m amused at the notion that these folks are basically getting the xMac tower that they’ve always wanted and are still griping about it.
A $2000-$2500 starting price pro desktop would be awesome, like the old Power Macs. I don’t need to edit 4 streams of 8K, but a speedy machine that I could, in a fantasy scenario, add memory and storage to would be perfect. I don’t necessarily expect to get all this, but it would be super nice. Either way I think this will fill a nice gap between Mac Mini and New Mac Pro.
No it isn't.
Expandability for internal cards, storage slots, upgradability depending on the workflow etc do not fit in with a ARM Minitower where everything is bolted down like a Motel 6 remote.
They won't include the power cable in the interests of protecting Mother Earth...
It will definitely need more I/O, but that is reletively cheap to include compared to a screen. The $1k Intel Mac Mini has 4 usb-c and 2 usb-a for example.
I guess they could make the base model start with 64 GB RAM so it comes in with a base price of $3.5k and would be the same as the MBP M1 Max. There might be some logic there.
At the same time though, Apple seems to like to have a low advertised base prices, even if the device isn’t particularly useable with those specs, so wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to get the cube in at $3k.
I didn’t discount that there is a need, I even mentioned a use case that a mobile system or iMac could never reasonably fill. There’s absolutely a need. The issue is that it appears Apple doesn’t feel that the need is large enough to provide systems that meet that need at the price that Apple’s willing to sell it for.
And, a return to a having a broad selection of products in a marketplace that is ever shrinking (desktop) is not likely in the cards for Apple.
That will just be paper release, lack of components, war in Europe etc will hit us consumers hard
Considering that the “low advertised base price” of the Mac Pro is $6,000, I wouldn’t doubt any painfully high price for these upcoming desktop systems. Remember, in Apple’s eyes, they currently offer a known set of devices at varying price/performance levels with Apple Silicon systems. They very likely see those as a settled matter. Anything coming out from now going forward will be devices outside of those price/performance levels. AND, as they are not likely to go any lower than the Mini, the only prices left are higher.
AH, the endless desire for the headless iMac